A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/index.htm[7/11/2012 10:12:17 AM]

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find

Them:" The Origins of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land:

The Early Management

of Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

Appendix One,

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore - By Theodore J. Karamanski

National Park Service

Department of the Interior

2000
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/index.htm[7/11/2012 10:12:17 AM]

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and

Present Employees of

Sleeping Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_toc.htm[7/11/2012 10:12:21 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Table of Contents

 Cover

 Introduction

 Chapter One "National Parks Are Where You Find Them:"

 The Origins of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

The First Tourists

Lake Passage: The Settlement of the Sleeping Bear Area

Tourism: A New Way in the Woods

A Sleeping Bear State Park

The Great Lakes Shoreline Survey

 Chapter Two "We're Going For The Right Thing:"

 The Legislative Struggle to Create Sleeping Bear Dunes

 National Lakeshore, 1971-1977

SOS The First Sleeping Bear Bill

The National Park Service Proposal: Sleeping Bear

Seashore

S.2153 Senator Hart's Sleeping Bear Bill

New Approches, Old Problems

To Promote or to Preserve?

From Economic Necessity to Environmental Amenities

The Birth of a National Lakeshore

 Chapter Three Changes on the Land:

 The Early Management of Sleeping Bear Dunes

 National Lakeshore, 1971-1977

Starting From Scratch

Land Acquisition

A Sense of Place: The Beginning of Historic Site

Management

Interpreting and Managing the Lakeshore

The Platte River Controversy

Planning a Wilderness

Master Plan Revisions

Taking Charge

The Advisory Commission

Martinek Retires
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_toc.htm[7/11/2012 10:12:21 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

At Long Last: The Dedication of Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore

 Chapter Four Plans, Programs, and Controversy:

 The Reassessment of Sleeping Bear Dunes

 National Lakeshore, 1977-1983

The New Superintendent: Part Ranger, Part Academic

The General Management Plan Process

New Bosses, In Frankfort and in Washington, D.C.

Land Acquisition

Relegislating the Lakeshore

Managing More With Less; Lakeshore Operations, 1979-

1983

A New Harbor: To Build or Not to Build?

Conclusion

 Chapter Five "A Local and National Treasure:"

 Managing the Sleeping Bear Dunes Park, 1984-1995

Road Wars

Fort Empire: A New Headquarters For Sleeping Bear

Plovers, Swans, and Deer: Resource Management, 1984-

1995

Historic Resource Management

The Art of the Possible; Managing in an Era of Austerity

The Homestead Golf Course Saga

 Appendix One:

 Budgetary Progress of Sleeping Bear Dunes

 National Lakeshore

 Appendix Two:

 Selected Past and Present Personnel of Sleeping Bear

 Dunes National Lakeshore

 Appendix Three:

 Selected Visitation Statistics

 Appendix Four:

 Founding Legislation: Public Law 91-479

 Notes

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_toc.htm[7/11/2012 10:12:21 AM]

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

 Figures

Figures 1 - 4

Figures 5 - 8

Figures 9 - 11

 Images

Images 0-10

Images 11-20

Images 21-30

Images 31-40

Images 41-46

 Bibliography

NEXT> Chapter One "National Parks Are Where You Find Them:" The

Origins of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_intro.htm[7/11/2012 10:12:25 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Introduction

Introduction

Located on the northwestern shore of Michigan's Lower Peninsula

Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore is one of the most beautiful

places in the American heartland. Named after a series of towering

coastal sand dunes, the national park features rugged four hundred-foot

bluffs, splendid sugar sand Lake Michigan beaches, and cool, dark

forests. The lakeshore's mainland beaches and dunes are often crowded

with summer vacationers, while two islands, North Manitou and South

Manitou, offer backpackers and day-trippers a more secluded natural

experience. The lakeshore's splendid natural setting is enhanced by an

array of cultural resources. As befitting a park located astride one of

the busiest ship channels on the inland seas, the lakeshore boasts a

wide variety of maritime cultural resources including shipwreck sites, a

lakeshore ghost town, three Coast Guard Stations, a lighthouse, and an

impressive collection of small boats and nautical artifacts. Behind the

beaches and dunes the lakeshore embraces a landscape marked by

former farmsteads, offering the National Park Service the opportunity

to interpret the vernacular expression of a vanishing American

lifestyle. This rich mixture of historic and natural assets, together with

the lakeshore's location amid rapidly developing resort communities,

makes Sleeping Bear Dunes an immensely complex park unit to

administer.

Beginning in 1919 a small portion of what is now the national

lakeshore was set aside as a state park. The idea of a national park in

northwestern Michigan did not surface until the National Park

Service's Great Lakes Shoreline Survey visited the area in 1958.

Between 1959 and 1970 there was a continuous and controversial effort

in Congress to create a park unit around the Sleeping Bear Dune. The

legislative leader of the Sleeping Bear park proposal was United States

Senator Philip A. Hart. The senator's persistence and patience in the

end led to the creation of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore on

October 21, 1970.
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_intro.htm[7/11/2012 10:12:25 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

Opposition to the creation of the lakeshore was very strong among

local summer homeowners. More than 1,400 tracts of private land had

to be acquired to create the lakeshore. A heavy-handed, poorly planned

land acquisition program reinforced the bitterness that surfaced during

the decade of struggle that preceded authorization. The legacy of those

actions has been two fold. On one hand the National Park Service has

been vilified by many local property owners and the park staff have

had to work in an environment that is unnecessarily confrontational.

On the other hand, the presence of an organized local populace wary of

National Park Service policy has influenced for the better the

development of the national lakeshore. Local sentiments played an

important role toning-down the agency's initial plans to intensively

develop the area's recreational assets. More recently local sentiment

has influenced the agency's approach to the lakeshore's rural cultural

landscapes. Unfortunately, resistance to the National Park Service in

the region has also hindered opportunities to bring more land under

protection and to develop scenic drives for park visitors.

The National Park Service conceived the Sleeping Bear Dunes

lakeshore at a time when the shores of Lake Michigan were rapidly

undergoing privatization. Subdivisions of vacation and year round

homes threatened to keep ordinary citizens from enjoying Michigan's

broad, sandy shoreline. A nationalized lakeshore along the beaches and

bluffs of the Sleeping Bear made available for all what might have

been enjoyed only by a select few. The cost was millions of dollars of

federal funds and the hopes and dreams of hundreds of small property

owners. Sleeping Bear Dunes was a tragedy for the latter and a wise

investment of the former.

In addition to trying to reconcile its national mandate with an

aggrieved local community, the National Park Service, within its own

ranks has often been challenged and divided over policy toward the

shifting sand dunes. Congress conceived the national lakeshore parks

of the Great Lakes region as experiments in public recreation

management. The requirements of managing small, often noncontiguous parks carved out of private holdings required adjustments

by administrators whose primary experience had been earned in large,

isolated western national parks. The managers of Sleeping Bear have

been further challenged by the dynamic evolution of the environmental

movement during the 1970s and 1980s. The requirements of

wilderness, environmental protection, endangered species, and historic

preservation have meant that even within the lakeshore staff decision

making can be contentious and time consuming, with a variety of

resource management issues in direct competition with values of public

recreation and visitor safety.

The administrative history of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

is the story of one park unit's attempt to meet its congressional mandate

in an era of expanding responsibilities and often uncertain financial

means, in a beautiful but often hostile place.
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_intro.htm[7/11/2012 10:12:25 AM]

Acknowledgements

The beauty of the landscape of Sleeping Bear Dunes and the charm of

towns and farms of northwestern Michigan made researching this

history a genuine pleasure. Part of the joy of working in the region was

the friendship and cooperation of the people who live and work in the

area. Their assistance made this study possible. Oral history informants

made the most important contribution. I thank them for their patience

and their willingness, in many cases, to go back over complicated and

painful memories. Of particular help to me in locating documentary

sources at the lakeshore headquarters were William Herd and Neal

Bullington. Jacqueline Fine was particularly gracious during my

research trips to the park. Superintendent Ivan Miller was very

generous with his time and facilitated my work at Sleeping Bear

Dunes. In the Regional Office Donald L. Stevens, Jr., Senior Historian,

Cultural Resources, Midwest Region, was particularly helpful. I am

especially indebted to the many people who reviewed the draft report.

Their comments and corrections greatly strengthened the final text.

Historians and archivists at the Bentley Historical Library, University

of Michigan and the Clark Historical Library at Central Michigan

University were very helpful with my research and photocopy requests.

Laura Quakenbush of the Leelanau County Historical Society was

particularly gracious directing me to manuscript collections and oral

sources in Leelanau County. I wish to thank the Traverse City RecordEagle and the Grand Rapids Press for their gracious permission to

reprint political cartoons from their newspapers. At Loyola University I

wish to thank Lorna Newman for her help with inter-library loan

requests. The history department chairpersons, Dr. Cheryl JohnsonOdim and Dr. Anthony Cardoza, helped to facilitate my work through

conscientious scheduling. Graduate public history student Jennifer

Bridge helped with bibliographic research and Melanie Wood provided

very efficient assistance with the bibliography and the index.

This history is dedicated to the people who devoted their careers to

making the national lakeshore and to those who sacrificed their private

property for an enduring public benefit. Because of them the broad

beaches and sandy bluffs are open to all.

NEXT> Chapter One "National Parks Are Where You Find Them:" The

Origins of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_1.htm[7/11/2012 10:12:29 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Chapter One

Chapter One "National Parks Are Where You Find Them:" The

Origins of the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

The First Tourists

 "Its lake front was very steep," recalled fur trader Gurdon S.

Hubbard, "and it was with great difficulty and exertion that it could be

ascended; the loose sand into which one sank several inches at each

step, slid downward carrying one with it, so that progress was slow and

tedious." Hubbard, at the head of an American Fur Company fur

brigade, visited Sleeping Bear Dunes in the summer of 1823. Although

he was charged with escorting down the lake shore the supplies

required for the maintenance of a score of trading posts, the young fur

trader could not resist the impulse to play tourist. After climbing the

face of Sleeping Bear and enjoying the lake vistas afforded by the great

perched dune, Hubbard and a companion started down the sandy slope

to their boats. "I went down by quick jumps, but before reaching the

bottom heard the shouts of the voyageurs, and though I could not look

back, I knew full well the cause. When I had arrived at the bottom, I

looked back and saw my companion struggling and rolling, while the

sand flew in every direction. He landed close to my feet pale and

frightened, but otherwise unharmed... .the men screamed with

laughter."[1]

 Hubbard's companion, an unnamed gentleman sarcastically

nicknamed "La Beaute'" by the voyageurs, was not a fur trader, but

instead a mere traveler. As such he likely qualifies as the first tourist to

visit Sleeping Bear Dunes. Like so many visitors since, he yielded to

the impulse to both climb and descend the giant sand dune. And like so

many others, he enjoyed the view, but perhaps regretted the effort.

 Sleeping Bear Dunes is one of the most imposing natural landmarks

on the shore of Lake Michigan. From the space shuttle Columbia,

orbiting the earth some 250 miles above, the dunes stand out against

the blue border of the lake. Yet, strange to say, Sleeping Bear failed to

elicit a sense of wonder from most of the early travelers along the east

shore of the lake. As early as 1688 the dunes appeared on French maps

of the region, but neither the French explorers nor the pioneer Jesuit

missionaries lavished much attention on Sleeping Bear. Even Hubbard's

contemporaries, American explorers Henry Rowe Schoolcratt and

David Bates Douglas, were more taken with the Indian legend behind

the place name of the dunes than with the majesty of the massive sand

bluffs. This is unusual for an area destined to become a national park.

Yellowstone and Zion, the Shenandoah and the Great Smokies all were

early esteemed for their visual grandeur. The Pictured Rocks and Isle

Royale, two Michigan landscapes on Lake Superior destined to become
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_1.htm[7/11/2012 10:12:29 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

national parks inspired effusive outpourings from the pens of

Schoolcraft and early government explorers. Although the scale of

Sleeping Bear Dunes makes it exceptional, its uniqueness is a matter of

relative degree. Virtually the entire east coast of Lake Michigan, more

than three hundred miles, is given over to a landscape of lake, dune,

and forest. Indiana Dune, Warren Dune, Grand Mere Dune, Saugatuck

Dune, and Nordhouse Dune form a magnificent string of silica strands

which left travelers and explorers jaded to sand dunes by the time they

reached Sleeping Bear. Appreciation for the landscape that would

become the national lakeshore developed slowly, only as the Lake

Michigan frontier was gradually bent and reshaped to fit the needs of

the national economy were its scenic values appreciated as an asset as

tangible as furs, lumber, or grain.[2]

NEXT> Chapter One Part B: Lake Passage: The Settlement of the

Sleeping Bear Area

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_2.htm[7/11/2012 10:12:33 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Chapter Two

 It was both an end and a beginning. For Allen T. Edmunds, the

Michigan man near the end of a long career in the National Park

Service, being invited to address a joint session of the Michigan State

legislature on the findings of the Great Lakes Shoreline Survey was a

culminating honor. For the National Park Service the evening session

in 1960 was the beginning of the political fight to ensure that the

recommendations of the survey would become public policy. A few

legislators, in studied disregard of Edmunds, read newspapers at their

desks as he began his presentation. But the breathtaking pictures of

Michigan’s shoreline beauty soon riveted the entire legislature. The

presentation went on for nearly an hour and introduced many of the

politicians to the splendors of the Huron Mountains, the Pictured

Rocks, and Sleeping Bear Dunes. Afterward, at an evening reception,

park advocates and politicians shared their enthusiasms for what they

had seen. Ronald Lee, representing the Northeast Regional Office,

gushed to the other park service staff that the evening would be

something to “write down in their history book” because he “didn’t

think it would ever happen in any other state.” If the effort to create a

national park can be likened to a courtship ritual between park

advocates and politicians, the first date had gone very well. Yet it

certainly would have taken the edge of triumph off the evening if Allen

Edmunds and Ronald Lee had known that it would take ten difficult

years to finally tie-the-knot on a Sleeping Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore. The presentation to the Michigan legislators was only the

start of a long and divisive political fight.[1]

 A quarter century after the creation of Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore pockets of deep resentment to the lakeshore

continue in Benzie and Leelanau counties. Some of this is the fault of

National Park Service planners, such as Allen T. Edmunds, who in the

rush to present five Great Lakes areas as shoreline national parks, did

not thoroughly examine the assets required to make an effective

Sleeping Bear park. The frequent fluctuation in the size and boundaries

of the proposed park during the initial stages of the legislative process

weakened the public creditability of the National Park Service. The

agency was also guilty of failing to anticipate and bring into the

planning process local stake-holders, so that the polarization that

occurred during the struggle to create the park was more bitter and

lasting than need have been. The early 1960s were an era of “topdown” federal leadership, an era when in both domestic and

international affairs bureaucrats had considerable freedom of action.

The later 1960s were a period of growing distrust of government and

federal initiatives. The attempt to create Sleeping Bear Dunes took

place in the midst of these contradictory political currents and the clash

over the lakeshore was in part shaped by this tension. In the end,

however, the vision of a publicly owned and accessible Sleeping Bear
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_2.htm[7/11/2012 10:12:33 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

was at odds with the pattern of private recreation, which had taken root

in northwestern Michigan since 1900. Property owners with deep

personal attachments to their holdings were never going to yield

without a fight.

NEXT> SOS The First Sleeping Bear Bill

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3.htm[7/11/2012 10:12:37 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Chapter Three

Changes on the Land: The Early Management of Sleeping Bear

Dunes National Lakeshore, 1971 to 1977

 On a blustery March night in 1971 the Sleeping Bear Dunes were

remade—not by congressional mandate or according to a developer’s

scheme—but by natural action. Twenty-acres at the northern end of

the bluff tumbled without warning into Lake Michigan. It was only the

second time in the century that such a major shift occurred in the face

of the great sand plateau. Environmentalists tried to use the incident to

make the point that the dunes were a mysterious and fragile resources

that required careful management and protection. Those who had

opposed the creation of the lakeshore, with equal validity, drew an

opposite lesson: no amount of federal regulation can control nature.

Yet the remarkable thing about the incident was that on the eve of a

controversial change in the way land was owned and managed in the

Sleeping Bear country, nature gave its own object lesson. The sands

which had been piled on the east shore of Lake Michigan since the

Pleistocenewere no more permanent than the hunting grounds of the

Ottawa, a Homesteader’s certificate, a summer home owner’s deed, or

a congressional mandate. In time the sands will shift and the dune will

consult no management plan or seek no easement. In human affairs

and in nature’s order change is the only constant.[1]

 The National Park Service came to the Sleeping Bear not to stop

change but to try and manage it. In itself that was an audacious

assignment. It was made manageable only to the extent Public Law

91-479, which created the national lakeshore, and the established

procedures and traditions of the National Park Service provided

guidance for the women and men who would take up the challenge.

The administrative history of Sleeping Bear National Lakeshore is the

story of the actions and decisions those people undertook, within the

perameters of public law, bureaucratic procedure, and in interaction

with a dynamic natural environment. It is a story of a remorseless yet

farsighted policy, of foibles familiar and human, of creativity under

constraint, and failures balanced by successes. It is a story that will

continue as long as there is a will to manage environmental interactions

in the Sleeping Bear country. It is a story that begins in 1971 with

Julius Martinek.

NEXT> Starting From Scratch
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3.htm[7/11/2012 10:12:37 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_4.htm[7/11/2012 10:12:41 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs, and Controversy: The Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore, 1977 to 1983

“Many of our lakes are already overly-developed,” complained a

Michigan DNR spokesman in 1973. “There are just too many people

now threatening this beautiful resource of our state, and we can no

longer ignore it.” It was fear of just such a scenario that triggered the

long and bitter fight to create Sleeping Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore. Even before the dedication of the lakeshore in 1977 the

need for the lakeshore was becoming increasingly clear to all but the

staunchest opponents of federal management. At hundreds of resort

communities in the Upper Great Lakes region increasingly intensive

development and the eutrophication of lake waters threatened treasured

scenic areas. While the national lakeshore helped to spare Sleeping

Bear Dunes from those concerns, those same development forces

helped to ensure that the park continued to be the focus of a conflict

over how to make federal environmental management work. [1]

 The period of the late 1970s and early 1980s was one in which the

National Park Service, the Congress, and the people of northwestern

Michigan reassessed the lakeshore. The preparation of a general

management plan for Sleeping Bear was the occasion for old battles to

be fought anew between property owners and the lakeshore. But it was

also an opportunity for the residents and summer users of the dune

country to finally accept the presence of the National Park Service as

an established part of the regional landscape. “The park is here,”

commented Arthur Huey, a prominent Leelanau County landowner,

“Now I want to see this become the best national park in the country.”

While not all of the opponents shared Huey’s sense of good will, the

late 1970s and early 1980s was a period when the promise of

cooperation began to emerge from the clatter of land acquisition

conflict. It was also a time when the growing size of the lakeshore’s

budget and staff allowed it to begin to meet the promise of the 1970

congressional act which established the lakeshore.

NEXT> The New Superintendent: Part Ranger, Part Academic
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_4.htm[7/11/2012 10:12:41 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5.htm[7/11/2012 10:12:45 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Chapter Five

"A Local and National Treasure": Managing the Dunes Park,

1984-1995

 "Time has helped to calm the anger," observed the Northern

Michigan Environmental Action Council in 1996, "and the National

Lakeshore is now widely regarded as a local and national treasure." By

the late 1990s the lakeshore was annually visited by more than a

million people. Sleeping Bear Dunes had emerged as the premier

recreational attraction in the popular northwest Michigan tourist area.

The broad expanse of publicly owned beaches, the roadside agricultural

landscapes, and the sparkling hills of wind-blown sand were a striking

reminder "of what the region once was, and of the beauty lost." A

broad consensus emerged by the 1990s that had the lakeshore not been

established when it was, that this most beautiful portion of the Great

Lakes region might well have been subdivided and condoized beyond

recognition. In the twenty-five years since coming to northwest

Michigan the National Park Service had succeeded in meeting the

Congressional mandate to protect the Sleeping Bear from

"developments and uses which would destroy the scenic beauty and

natural character of the area."[1]

 What most visitors to the lakeshore did not appreciate were the

conflicts, sacrifices, and choices thrust upon the park service and the

people of the dunes country to create the landscape so enjoyed each

summer. Sleeping Bear had not been a wilderness for nearly two

centuries. Between 1970 when the lakeshore was created and mid1980s the National Park Service gradually established direct control, or

indirect administration in the case of the several hundred lease holders,

over the roughly 71,000 acres of the park. In managing all of these

lands the Congressional mandate to "preserve" the land had to be

balanced with the right of the public to "enjoy" the dune country.

During the 1980s and 1990s park managers at Sleeping Bear were

continually faced with the nagging question of preservation: what time

is this place? Is there a particular moment in vegetation succession, the

mythic "climax," that is the goal of preservation? Will the public visit

and appreciate a landscape defined strictly by geologic time, or will

historical experience be revealed through the land? Whose story will

emerge along the beaches, trails, and roadsides of the Sleeping Bear:

farmers, mariners, Ottawa Indians, vacation cottagers? For the park

service these landscape-shaping decisions have been, by necessitity, as

much political, economic, and legal as they are aesthetic, ecological, or

historical.

 For years the Traverse Bay area has promoted itself as "God's

Country." Anyone who has known the region's crisp clear mornings or

spectacular Lake Michigan sunsets would be inclined to agree. The
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5.htm[7/11/2012 10:12:45 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

dunes have been bathed red in the alpine glow of those sunsets for

thousands of years, but for the past generation a significant portion of

"God's Country" has been a landscape managed by the National Park

Service. The sometimes mundane, all too human process by which

federal officials and local people make decisions to shape the Sleeping

Bear area is the ongoing theme of the lakeshore's history.

NEXT> Road Wars

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_conc.htm[7/11/2012 10:12:48 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Conclusion

Conclusion: Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore At TwentyFive

 October of 1995 marked Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore's

twenty-fifth anniversary. A year earlier the National Parks and

Conservation Association, a private environmental advocacy group,

undertook a national survey of America's parks with a view of grading

each unit and the system as a whole. Sleeping Bear rated a "C," that

was consistent with the national average, although hardly flattering. "I

think these marks are fair considering our budget," remarked

Superintendent Ivan Miller. In 1995, as an anniversary present from the

property rights movement Sleeping Bear Dunes was included along

with 315 other parks in a Congressional bill that proposed a

commission that would be charged with reviewing and "delisting"

certain units. In an effort to build support for the bill, one of its cosponsors. Congressman Don Young (R-Alaska) wrote, he was

attempting "to return one of this country's greatest assets—its land—to

local control." In the end, however, even a Congress anxious to bring

about social and fiscal change rejected as too radical the idea of a

"delisting" commission. The two initiatives, each emanating from

opposite sides of the political spectrum, revealed two of the most

persistent challenges that faced the lakeshore: budget shortfalls and

private property rights. At twenty-five Sleeping Bear Dunes was at best

a work-in-progress.[1]

 Private property rights have always been and will always be one the

most important management issues at Sleeping Bear. Not only was the

park created out of more than 1,600 parcels of private land, ninety

tracts will likely remain in private hands in perpetuity. In 1995, the

issue flared again when a large group of leasees, whose right to occupy

tracts within the park was due to expire in a few years, pressed

Congress for an extension. Congressman Bart Stupak (D-Menominee)

and Congressman Joe Knollenberg (R-Bloomfield) agreed to sponsor a

bill that would grant the 143 leaseholders and their heirs an extension

of property rights for ninety-nine years. The lakeshore advisory board

strongly endorsed the plan. In testimony before a House hearing on the

bill the leaseholders argued for extending their rights by attacking the

lakeshore's management of the properties that were already under its

control. "Many other homes already vacated have not been cared for or

removed by the Park Service and have become serious hazards,"

complained Margaret Thoms. The Stupak-Knollenberg bill proposed

that those granted lease extensions make additional payments which

would stay in the park to fund some of the lakeshore's $10 million

deferred maintenance costs. The conspicuous failure of the National

Park Service to maintain its inventory of buildings has long been a

stick with which private rights advocates could hit the lakeshore.[2]
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_conc.htm[7/11/2012 10:12:48 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Figures

Images

Bibliography

 Lease extension bill did not win congressional approval. One of the

property owners who lost his Good Harbor Bay summer home on New

Year's Day 1998 asked the question, "What does it mean when the

common good takes precedence over individual existence? Can the two

not exist side by side?" That dilemma has been at the heart of the

twenty-five year history of the lakeshore and it is the central question

the National Park Service will face in northwest Michigan during the

twenty-first century. Greater cooperation between the private and

public sectors could be the key to resolve the tension between the park

that was envisioned by the Great Lakes Shoreline Survey in 1958 and

the kind of park into which Sleeping Bear has evolved since 1970. [3]

 Sleeping Bear Dunes was envisioned as a lakefront recreation area

and as a depository of glacial history. Yet, due to the rise in popular

historical consciousness following the bicentennial of the United States

and the passage of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966,

Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore evolved into a park in which

historical resources play an important part in the visitor experience.

"Hiking, History, and Heart-Stopping Vistas" was the headline on a

1993 Washington Post article describing a visit to Michigan's national

lakeshores. Viewing abandoned farms and cottages, climbing the long

spiral staircase of a lighthouse, and witnessing a Lyle gun firing at the

restored Glen Haven Coast Guard Station rank high among the

memories visitor's bring away from Sleeping Bear. The ghost town of

Glen Haven, the Port Oneida Rural Historic District, perhaps even a

handful of the recreational cottages can all contribute to a visitor's

sense of traveling through time as well as nature. The lakeshore has

moved deliberately towards developing a policy by which such

properties can be evaluated and managed. But considering the scores of

historic structures within the lakeshore and the regular maintenance

required for their preservation the National Park Service will require

private partnerships to help shoulder the load. The experience of the

national lakeshore in its first twenty-five years demonstrates that to

rely solely on public funding will be to defer to demolition by neglect.

The original development plan for Glen Haven called for preservation

through private leases. Local residents shouted down that plan for

reasons that were both thoughtful and venal. Is it possible for private

use and public purposes to coexist within the structure of a fragile

natural national park?[4]

 The answer to that question lies, in equal parts with the National

Park Service and the people of Leelanau and Benzie counties. There is

reason for optimism that a climate open to experimentation can

develop at Sleeping Bear. Although old wounds can still be opened

unexpectedly, as in the case of the Homestead land swap, appreciation

for what the national lakeshore has accomplished has grown each year

and should serve as a bridge to further collaborative achievement. "In

terms of living here, in many ways the park is an asset," reflected

George Schilling in 1983. The former president of the Citizens' Council

of the Sleeping Bear Dunes Area admitted that the park service

achieved its primary goal. "It has slowed irrational development. Areas

of land that were undeveloped will remain that way as part of our

national resource." In 1988, when Ellsworth Esch, a cherry grower
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_conc.htm[7/11/2012 10:12:48 AM]

within the lakeshore, became a willing seller to the agency, he said, "It

[the park] has proven to be very good for the area." Even a writer for

the Leelanau Enterprise-Tribune expressed the sentiment, "I am glad

they put together the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore."

Although he quickly qualified the comment by adding, 'I'm not saying

that the way they did it was right—but I'm glad it's been done." Such

goodwill is critical to the future of the lakeshore because cooperation

with the community is critical to solving problems within the lakeshore

and essential to addressing threats from outside its boundaries. By

itself the National Park Service cannot counter air and water pollution

dangers such as an asphalt plant proposed for Kasson Township in

1995. By itself the lakeshore cannot mitigate the visual intrusion

caused by cellular transmission towers. The people who are lucky

enough to live in Leelanau and Benzie county would do well to

remember Henry David Thoreau's admonishment: "A town is saved,

not more by the righteous men in it than by the woods and swamps that

surround it....Such a town is fitted to raise not only corn and potatoes

but, poets and philosophers for the coming ages." [5]

 The success of the national lakeshore is best seen by looking at the

fate of dune lands outside the park. The encroachment of development

on Lake Michigan dune lands was so great during the 1970s and 1980s

that a 1988 University of Michigan study predicted half of all privately

owned dune land would be developed by 1996. That prospect led to the

passage of the Critical Dunes Act by the Michigan State legislature in

1989. The law did not create dune preserves, such as Sleeping Bear,

but it did at least provide for controls on dune development. In spite of

this law the majestic Elberta dune, originally studied for inclusion in

the national lakeshore, was slated in the late 1990s for a one hundred

home residential development. The Sleeping Bear park ensured that at

least a portion of northwest Michigan remained undeveloped. "They

love The County as it is," a Chicago Tribune travel writer wrote of the

attraction Chicagoan's feel toward Leelanau. "They love it even better

as it used to be." The national lakeshore has ensured that at least

71,000 acres of the old Leelanau and Benzie Counties has survived

intact.[6]

 The National Park Service has achieved this goal without, as was so

direly predicted, destroying the local economy or crippling local

government. There is no doubt that the period of the 1980s was a time

of adjustment for county and township governments in the Sleeping

Bear area, but as was predicted by the park service revenues from

tourism and an increase in property values provided an adequate tax

base to maintain roads and schools. In Glen Arbor Township the

property valuation rose 311% from 1973 to 1985, for the rest of

Leelanau County the increase was a robust 282% over twelve years.

The Sleeping Bear area was never deluged with the 3 million tourists

that the National Park Service predicted. The planners did not

anticipate that population growth in the Midwest region would slow

from its 1950s pace and that the boom in air travel would offer a wider

range of recreational options to people in mid-America. Nonetheless,

with more than 1 million annual visitors Sleeping Bear contributes

substantially to the golden stream of revenues that flows annually from

the "fudgies." In 1990, tourists pumped $34.4 million into the Leelanau
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_conc.htm[7/11/2012 10:12:48 AM]

County economy. The lakeshore has also added to Leelanau and

Benzie counties its $2 million operating budget and thirty-eight fulltime, and twenty-six seasonal employees. [8]

 A strict cost-benefit analysis is not possible for something as

subjectively laden as a beautiful national park. The federal government

spent $74 million to buy the lakeshore's land base. What is the value of

the recreation provided by the meeting of river and lake at the mouth of

the Platte? Without Senator Philip A. Hart's park families would not be

able to picnic on the dunes there or float on the river's current until

meeting Lake Michigan's breakers. Without the National Park Service

that site would be a marina today. Would Sleeping Bear Bay still be

one of the most perfect and unspoiled swimming beaches in Michigan

if it were not for the national lakeshore? Of course, $80 million was

not the whole cost of the lakeshore. David Hacker, a cottage owner

whose twenty-five year lease expired in 1998, asked visitors to the

lakeshore to "realize that this precious land may have been purchased

at a huge but unseen cost." While the public will now have access to

wonderful views of the Manitou Strait, the cost for Hacker was "a strip

of beach and a handful of acres that once gave a family identity." The

"emotional blood-bonding" that once linked his family and hundreds of

other families to the Sleeping Bear was severed to make the national

park. [9]

 The cost of Sleeping Bear was high in emotional capital, for the

property owners and for the park service staff who came to northwest

Michigan to make the park a reality. Many like Allen Edmunds,

"Marty" Martinek, and Donald Brown were Michigan natives with an

abiding love of the North Country. Others came from across the nation

to try and make a park and in the process came to love the forests and

dunes of the Sleeping Bear. Although often derided as bureaucrats, the

personnel of the National Park Service made their own emotional

investment in the land of the Sleeping Bear. In ways few visitors or

local residents would ever appreciate the lakeshore drew on that

account when all too frequently Congress's financial commitments fell

short. The payoff for the hundreds of park service personnel who on a

day to day basis worked to make the lakeshore a reality, the

consolation for those who sold their homes, the anticipated return on

the $80 million spent on land acquisition is a land rich in beauty and

history, unspoiled and open." I silently thanked Philip Hart and

Congress and everyone else involved for creating Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore," wrote journalist Matt Roush in 1985, after a

weekend stay at the Platte River Campground." Whatever excesses

there may have been 10 years ago, there is now mile after mile of

incredible lakefront that's ours, for good. You don't have to buy a sixfigure condo to use it. You don't have to spend $100 for a night in a

fancy hotel. You just have to go there. . . .So go, look, and enjoy." [10]

NEXT> Appendix One: Budgetary Progress of Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_conc.htm[7/11/2012 10:12:48 AM]

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_appendix1.htm[7/11/2012 10:12:52 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

APPENDIX 1

APPENDIX 1 BUDGETARY PROGRESS OF SLEEPING BEAR

DUNES NATIONAL LAKESHORE

1976 $364,700

1977 $692,600

1990 $1,814,300

1992 $2,063,000

1993 $2,084,500

1994 $2,157,000

1999 $2,784,000

NEXT> Appendix Two: Selected Past and Present Personnel of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_appendix1.htm[7/11/2012 10:12:52 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_appendix2.htm[7/11/2012 10:12:56 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Introduction

PAGE DESCRIPTION

APPENDIX 2

SELECTED PAST AND PRESENT PERSONNEL OF SLEEPING

BEAR DUNES NATIONAL LAKESHORE

Founding Staff

1971

Julius A. Martinek, Superintendent, opened Lakeshore office. May,

1971.

Robert C. Evans, Chief Appraiser, May, 1971.

Donald Campbell, Chief Land Acquisition Officer, May, 1971.

Patricia McCash, Secretary, June, 1971.

Carolyn D. Ross, June, 1971.

ElaineP. Howery, Secretary, July, 1971.

Dean Einwalter, Supervisory Park Ranger, December, 1971.

1972

James E. Williamson, Chief Land Acquistion Officer, April, 1972.

Charles R. Parkinson, Park Naturalist, May, 1972.

Judy Huerth, Clerk-Typist.

Marcia Stobie, Clerk-Typist.

Paul LaValley, Seasonal, May, 1972.

Hollis Hill, Seasonal, May, 1972.

Joseph 0. Jackson, Interpreter, July, 1972.

Gordon L. Stanley, Park Administrative Officer, October, 1972.

1973

Thomas L. Haywood, Maintenance Supervisor, July, 1973. John F.

Pattie, Land Acquisition Officer. William Herd, Interpreter.
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_appendix2.htm[7/11/2012 10:12:56 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

Selected Full-Time Staff: 1974-1999

Fred Denton, Park AdministrativeOfficer. Donald R. Brown,

Superintendent.

Richard R. Peterson, Superintendent.

John P. Abbett, Assistant Superintendent.

Neil Bullington, Chief of Interpretation.

Jacqueline Fine, Secretary.

Michele D'Arcy, Landscape Architect.

Raymond Kimpel, Chief Ranger.

Merline Schlange, Facility Manager.

David Herrera, Management Assistant.

Max Holden Resource Management Specialist.

Daniel Krieber, Chief of Maintenance.

Vander Tuin.

Chief of Maintenance.

Ivan D. Miller, Superintendent.

Nancy Arkin, Landscape Architect.

John Madden, Park Ranger.

Frank Smith, Maintenance.

James Del Sasso, Park Ranger.

Dale Holmgren, Maintenance.

Todd Morgan, Maintenance.

Tom Mountz, Maintenance.

John Paro, Administrative Officer.

Mary Chandler, Administrative Officer.

Gayle Kunkel-Shields, Administrative Clerk.

Karen Moon, Adminstrative Clerk.

Larry Hatch, District Ranger.

Michael Duwe, Environmental Protection Specialist.
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_appendix2.htm[7/11/2012 10:12:56 AM]

Chris Johnson, District Ranger.

David Nagel, Maintenance.

Duane Pearson, Assistant Superintendent.

Lany Parrotte, Maintenance.

Mark Presnell, Maintenance.

William Webber, Maintenance.

Rosemary Abbett, Budget Assistant.

Al Haeker, Chief Ranger.

Robert L. Saddler, Park Ranger.

Roger Moder, Park Ranger.

Dawn Webster, Interpreter.

K. Jo Ann Evans, Personnel Assistant.

Leigh Evans, Maintenance.

Paul Collins, Maintenance.

Kimberly Mann, Landscape Architect.

Rick St. Pierre, Purchasing Agent.

Kay Wilcox, Budget Analyst.

Tom VanZoeren, Park Ranger.

Kim Mukavetz, Park Ranger.

Susan Harold, Secretary.

Steven Yancho, Resource Management Specialist.

Calvin Murphy, Maintenance.

George Henderson, Maintenance.

Dennis Schlabach, Telecommunications.

David Wilkins, Maintenance.

Larry Robotham, Maintenance.

Charles Sessoms, Maintenance.

Patrick Shad, Park Ranger.

Jefferey Monroe, Park Ranger.
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_appendix2.htm[7/11/2012 10:12:56 AM]

Agnes Esch, Clerk.

Gregory Mullin, Park Ranger.

Ken BIodick, Park Ranger.

Robert Evener, Park Ranger.

Rebecca Fleis, Dispatcher.

John Fekete, Resource Management Specialist.

Theo Chandler, Maintenance.

Leah Frankel, Park Naturalist

NEXT> Appendix Three: Selected Visitation Statistics

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_appendix3.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:00 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

APPENDIX 3

SELECTED VISITATION STATISTICS

1975 777,000

1976 790,615

1977 838,000

1983 605,760

1984 853.183

1985 897,512

1986 1,309,440

1987 1,320,000

1991 1,246,333

1992 1,237,181 1998 1,298,205

NEXT> Appendix Four: Founding Legislation: Public Law 91-479
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_appendix3.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:00 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_appendix4.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:03 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Appendix Four

Appendix Four: Founding Legislation: Public Law 91-479

Public Law 91-479 

91st Congress, H.R. 18776

October 21, 1970

An Act

To establish in the State of Michigan the Sleeping Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, and for other purposes.

84 STAT. 1075

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United

States of America in Congress assembled, That (a) the Congress finds

that certain outstanding natural features, including forests, Dunes

National beaches, dune formations, and ancient glacial phenomena,

exist along the mainland shore of Lake Michigan and on certain nearby

islands in Benzie and Leelanau Counties, Michigan, and that such

features ought to be preserved in their natural setting and protected

from developments and uses which would destroy the scenic beauty

and natural character of the area. In order to accomplish this purpose

for the benefit, inspiration, education, recreation, and enjoyment of the

public, the Secretary of the Interior (hereinafter referred to as the

"Secretary") is authorized to take appropriate action, as herein

provided, to establish in the State of Michigan the Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore. In carrying out the provisions of this Act, the

Secretary shall administer and protect the Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore in a manner which provides for recreational

opportunities consistent with the maximum protection of the natural

environment within the area.

(b) In preserving the lakeshore and stabilizing its development,

substantial reliance shall be placed on cooperation between Federal,

State, and local governments to apply sound principles of land use

planning and zoning. In developing the lakeshore. full recognition shall

be given to protecting the private properties lor the enjoyment of the

owners.

SEC. 2. (a)The Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore (hereinafter

referred to as the "lakeshore") shall comprise the land and water area

generally depicted on the map entitled "A Proposed Sleeping Bear

Dunes National Lakeshore Boundary Map" numbered NL-SBD-91,000

and dated May 1969, which shall be on file and available for public

inspection in the offices of the National Park Service of the

Department of the Interior.

(b) As soon as practicable after the date of enactment of this Act and
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_appendix4.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:03 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

following the acquisition by the Secretary of those lands owned by the

State of Michigan within the boundaries of the area designated for

inclusion in the lakeshore (excepting not to exceed three hundred acres

in the Platte Bay area) and of such additional lands, if any, as are

necessary to provide an area which in his opinion is efficiently

administrable for the purposes of this Act, he shall establish the

publication in Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore by publication

of notice thereof in the Federal Register.

SEC. 3. (a) Within thirty days, or as soon as possible thereafter, after

the effective date of this Act, the Secretary shall publish in the Federal

Register a map or other description of the lakeshore delineat-ing areas

constituting the following categories:

Category I. public use and development areas.

Category II, environmental conservation areas.

Category III, private use and development areas.

(b) Lands and interests therein designated as category I may be

acquired by the Secretary in accordance with section 8 of this Act.

(c) Within one hundred and fifty days after the effective date of this

Act, the Secretary shall publish in the Federal Register an additional

map or other description of those lands, if any, designated as within

categories II and III for acquisition by him in fee in accordance with

section 8 of this Act

(d) Except as provided in subsection (f) of this section, the Secretary

may, after the publication provided for in subsection (c), acquire only

such interests in lands designated as category II, other than those to be

acquired in fee simple, as he deems appropriate to insure the continued

conservation and preservation of the environmental quality of the

Lakeshore.

(e) Except as provided in subsection (f) of this section, the Secretary

may, after the publication provided for in subsection (c), acquire only

such interests in lands designated as category III, other than those lands

to be acquired in fee simple, as he deems appropriate to protect lands

designated for acquisition.

(f) Not later than one hundred and fifty days after the effective date of

this Act, the Secretary shall notify owners of real property in

categories II and III, other than property designated by him for fee

acquisition, of the minimum restrictions on use and development of

such property under which such property can be retained in a manner

compatible with the purpose for which the lakeshore was established.

If the owner of any real property in categories II and III agrees to the

use and development of his property in accordance with such

restrictions, the Secretary may not acquire, without the consent of such

owner, such property or interests therein for so long as the property

affected is used in accordance with such restrictions, unless he

determines that such property is needed for public use development.

The foregoing limitations on acquisition shall also apply to any owners

of real property to whom the Secretary did not, within the time set
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_appendix4.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:03 AM]

forth, give such a notice, except that if any property owner has not,

within ninety days of the notice agreed to use the property in

accordance with the notice, then the Secretary may acquire, without

limitation, fee or lesser interests in property by any of the methods set

forth in section 8 of this Act: Provided, That nothing contained in

subsections (d) and (e), and in this subsection, which limits the

acquisition of the fee simple title to property within the lakeshore, shall

prevent the Secretary from acquiring, without the consent of the owner,

the fee simple title whenever in the Secretary's judgment of the

estimated cost of acquiring the lesser interest would be & substantial

percentage of the estimated cost of acquiring the fee simple title.

SEC 4. (a) There is hereby established a Sleeping Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore Advisory Commission. The Commission shall cease to exist

ten years after the establishment of the lakeshore pursuant to section 2

of this Act.

(b) The Commission shall be composed of ten members, each

appointed for a term of two years by the Secretary, as follows:

(1) Four members to be appointed from recommendations

made by the counties in which the lakeshore is situated,

two members to. represent each such county;

(2) Four members to be appointed from recommendations

made by the Governor of the State of Michigan; and

(3) Two members to be designated by the Secretary.

(c) The Secretary shall designate one member to be Chairman. Any

vacancy in the Commission shall be filled in the same manner in which

the original appointment was made.

(d) A member of the Commission shall serve without compensation as

such. The Secretary is authorized to pay the expenses reasonably

incurred by the Commission in carrying out its responsibilities under

this Act on vouchers signed by the Chairman.

(e) The Secretary or his designee shall consult with the Commission

with respect to matters relating to the development of the lakeshore

and with respect to the provisions of sections 9,12, and 13 of this Act.

Sec 5. In administering the lakeshore the Secretary shall permit hunting

and fishing on lands and waters under his jurisdiction in accordance

with the laws of the State of Michigan and the United. States

applicable thereto. The Secretary, after consultation with the

appropriate agency of the State of Michigan, may designate zones and

establish periods where and when no hunting shall be permitted for

reasons of public safety, administration, or public use and enjoyment

and issue regulations, consistent with this section, as he may determine

necessary to carry out the purposes of this section,

SEC. 6. (a) The administration, protection, and development of tlie

lakeshore shall be exercised by the Secretary, subject to the provisions

of this Act and of the Act of August 25, 1916 (39 Stat. 535; 16 U.S.C.

1 et seq.), as amended and supplemented, relating to the areas

administered and supervised by the Secretary through the National
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_appendix4.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:03 AM]

Park Service; except Chat authority otherwise available to the

Secretary for the conservation and management of natural resources

may be utilized to the extent he finds such authority will further t'he

purposes of this Act.

(b) In the administration, protection, and development of the area, the

Secretary shall prepare and implement a land and water use

management plan, which shall include specific provisions for—

(1) development of facilities to provide the benefits of

public recreation 

(2) protection of scenic, scientific, and historic features

contributing to public enjoyment; and

(3) such protection, management, and utilization of

renewable natural resources as in the judgment of the

Secretary is consistent with, and will further the purpose

of, public recreation and protection of scenic, scientific,

and historic features contributing to public enjoyment. 

(c) Within four years from the date of enactment of this Act, the

Secretary of the Interior shall review the area within the Sleeping Bear

Dunes National Lakeshore and sliall report to the President, in

accordance with subsections 3 (c) and 3 (d) of the Wilderness Act (78

Stat. 890; 16 U.S.C. 1132 (c) and (d), his recommendation as to the

suitability or nonsuitability of any area within the lakeshore for

preservation as wilderness, and any designation of any such area. as a

wilderness shall be accomplished in accordance with said subsections

of the Wilderness Act.

(d) In developing the lakeshore the Secretary shall provide public use

areas in such places and manner as ha determines will not diminish the

value or enjoyment for the owner or occupant of any improved

property located thereon.

SEC. 7. Nothing in this Act shall be construed as prohibiting any

governmental jurisdiction in the State of Michigan from assessing taxes

upon any interest in real estate retained under the provisions of section

10 of this Act to the owner of such interest.

SEC. 8. (a) The Secretary is authorized to acquire by donation, purchase with donated or appropriated funds, transfer funds, transfer or

exchange. from any Federal agency, or exchange lands and interests

therein for the purposes of this Act. When an individual tract of land is

only partly within the area designated, the Secretary may acquire the

entire tract by any of the above methods to avoid the payment of

severance costs. Land so acquired outside the designated area may be

exchanged by the Secretary for non-Federal lands within such area, and

any portion of the land not utilized for such exchanges may be

disposed of in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Property

and Administrative Services Act of 1949 (63 Stat. 377), as amended

(40 U.S.C. 471 et seq.).

(b) In exercising his authority to acquire property under this Act, the

Secretary shall give immediate and careful consideration to any offer
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_appendix4.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:03 AM]

made by an individual owning property within the lakeshore to sell

such property to the Secretary. An individual owning property within

the lakesnore may notify the Secretary that the continued ownership by

such individual of that property would result in hardship to him, and

the Secretary shall immediately consider such evidence and shall

within one year following the submission of such notice, subject to the

availability of funds, purchase such property offered for a price which

does not exceed its fair market value.

(c) Any property or interests therein, owned by the State of Michigan

or any political subdivisions thereof, may be acquired only by

donation. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any property

owned by the United States on the date of enactment of this Act

located within such area may, with the concurrence of the agency

having custody thereof, be transferred without consideration to the

administrative jurisdiction of the Secretary for use by him in carrying

out the provisions of this Act.

(d) With respect to that property which the Secretary is authorized to

acquire by condemnation under the terms of this Act, the Secretary

shall initiate no condemnation proceedings until after he lias made

every reasonable effort to acquire such property by negotiation and

purchase. The certificate of the determination by the Secretary or his

designated representative that there has been compliance with the

provisions of this subsection and of subsection (b) of this section shall

be prima facie evidence of such compliance.

(e) Nothing in this Act shall be construed to prohibit the use of

condemnation as a means of acquiring a clear and marketable title, free

of any and all encumbrances.

SEC. 9. (a) The Secretary shall, at the request of any township or

county in or adjacent to the lakeshore affected by this Act, assist and

consult with the appropriate officers and employees of such township

or county in establishing zoning bylaws for the purpose of this Act.

Such assistance may include payments to the county or township for

technical aid.

(b) No improved property within the area designated for inclusion in

the lakeshore shall be acquired by the Secretary by condemnation so

long as the affected county or township has in force and applicable

thereto a duly adopted, valid zoning bylaw approved by the Secretary

in accordance with the provisions of subsection (d) of this section and

the use of unproved property is in compliance therewith. In the event

that the affected county or township does not have in effect and

applicable to any improved property a duly adopted, valid zoning

bylaw so approved, the Secretary shall be prohibited from acquiring

such property by condemnation, if the owner thereof notifies the

Secretary in writing of such owner's agreement to use his property in a

manner consistent with the applicable standard set forth in subsection

(d) of this section, and such prohibition against condemnation shall

remain in effect for so long as such property is so used.

(c) If the Secretary determines that any such property referred to in
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_appendix4.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:03 AM]

subsection (b) of this section covered by any such bylaw is being used

in a way which is not in substantial compliance with such bylaw, or

that any such property referred to in subsection (b) with respect to

which an agreement has been made is being used in a manner which is

not substantially consistent with such applicable standards, he shall so

notify the owner of any such property in writing. Such notice shall

contain a detailed statement as to why the Secretary believes that such

use is not in substantial compliance with such zoning bylaw or why

such use is not substantially consistent with such applicable standards,

as the case may be. Any such owner shall have sixty days following

the receipt by him of that written notification within which to

discontinue the use referred to in such notification. Discontinuance of

such use within such sixty-day period shall have the effect of

prohibiting the Secretary from acquiring such property by

condemnation by reason of such use. In any case in which such use is

not discontinued within such sixty-day period, the Secretary may, in

his discretion, acquire; such property by condemnation.

(d) Any zoning bylaw or amendment thereto submitted to the Secretary

for approval for the purposes of this Act shall be approved by him if

such bylaw or amendment contains provisions which—

(1) contribute to the effect of prohibiting the commercial

and industrial use (other than a use for a commercial

purpose as authorized under section 13 of this Act) of all

property within the boundaries of such area which is

situated within the county or township adopting such

bylaw or amendment;

(2) are consistent with the objectives and purposes of this

Act so that, to the extent possible under Michigan law, the

scenic and scientific values of the lakeshore area will be

protected;

(3) are designed to preserve the lakeshore character of the

area by appropriate restrictions upon the burning of cover,

cutting of timber (except tracts managed for sustained

yield), removal of sand or gravel, and dumping, storage, or

piling of refuse and other unsightly objects or other uses

which would detract from the natural or traditional

lakeshore scene;

(4) provide that no construction, reconstruction, moving,

alteration, or enlargement of any property, including

improved property as denned in this Act, within the

lakeshore area shall be permitted, if such construction,

reconstruction, moving, alteration, or enlargement would

afford less than a fifty-foot setback from all streets

measured at a right angle with the street line, and a

twenty-five-foot distance from all contiguous properties.

Any owner or zoning authority may request the Secretary

of the Interior to determine whether a proposed move,

alteration, construction, reconstruction, or enlargement of

any such property would subject such property to

acquisition by condemnation, and the Secretary, within

sixty days of the receipt of such request, shall advise the

owner or zoning authority in writing whether the intended
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_appendix4.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:03 AM]

use will subject the property to acquisition by

condemnation; and

(5) have the effect of providing that the Secretary shall

receive notice of any variance granted under, and of any

exception made to the application of, such bylaw or

amendment.

(e) The approval of any bylaw or amendment pursuant to subsection

(d) shall not be withdrawn or revoked by the Secretary for so long as

such bylaw or amendment remains in effect as approved. Any such

bylaw or amendment so approved shall not be retroactive in its

application.

SEC. 10. (a) Any owner or owners of improved property situated

within the area designated for inclusion in the lakeshore on the date of

its acquisition by the Secretary may, as a condition of such acquisition,

retain, for a term of not to exceed twenty-five years, or for a term

ending at the death of such owner or owners, the right of use and

occupancy of such property for any residential purpose which is not

incompatible with the purposes of this Act or which does not impair

the usefulness and attractiveness of the area designated for inclusion.

The Secretary shall pay to the owner the value of the property on the

date of such acquisition, less the value on such date of the right

retained by the owner. Where any such owner retains a right of use and

occupancy as herein provided, such right during its existence may be

conveyed or leased for noncommercial residential purposes in

accordance with the provisions of this section.

(b) Any deed or other instrument used to transfer title to property, with

respect to which a right of use and occupancy is retained under this

section, sliall provide that such property shall not be used for any

purpose which is incompatible with purposes of this Act, or which

impairs the usefulness and attractiveness of such area and if it should

be so used, the Secretary shall have authority to terminate such right.

In the event the Secretary exercises his power of termination under this

subsection he shall pay to the owner of the right terminated an amount

equal to the value of that portion of such right. which remained

unexpired on the date of such termination.

SEC. 11. As used in this Act, the term "improved property" means a

detached, one-family dwelling, construction of which was begun

before .December 31, 1964, together with so much of the land on

which the dwelling is situated, such land being in the same ownership

as the dwelling, as the Secretary shall designate to be reasonably

necessary for the enjoyment of the dwelling for the sole purpose of

noncommercial residential use, together with any structures accessory

to the dwelling which are situated on the lands so designated. The

amount of the land so designated shall in every case be at least three

acres in area, or all of such lesser acreage as may be held in the same

ownership as the dwelling, and in making such designation the

Secretary shall take into account the manner of noncommercial

residential use in which the dwelling and land have customarily been

enjoyed: Provided however. That the Secretary may exclude from the

land so designated any beach or waters on Lake Michigan, together
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_appendix4.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:03 AM]

with so much of the land adjoining any such beach or waters, as the

Secretary may deem necessary for public access thereto. If the

Secretary makes such exclusion, an appropriate buffer zone shall be

provided between any residence and the public access or beach.

SEC. 12. In order to facilitate visitor travel, provide scenic overlooks

for public enjoyment and interpretation of the national lakeshore and

related features, and in order to enhance recreational opportunities, the

Secretary is authorized to construct and administer as a part of the

national lakeshore scenic roads of parkway standards generally lying

within the parkway zone. designated on the map specified in section 2

(a) of this Act. Such scenic roads shall include necessary connections,

bridges, and other structural utilities. Notwithstanding any other

provision of this Act, the Secretary may procure for this purpose land,

or interest therein, by donation, purchase with appropriated or donated

funds, or otherwise: Provided. That land and interest so procured shall

not exceed one hundred and fifty acres per mile of scenic road, except

that tracts may be procured in their entirety in order to avoid

severances. Property so acquired in excess of the acreage limitation

provided in this section may be exchanged by the Secretary for any

land of approximately equal value authorized for acquisition by this

Act.

SEC. 13. In any case not otherwise provided for in this Act, the

Secretary shall be prohibited from condemning any commercial

property used for commercial purposes in existence on December 31,

1964, so long as, in his opinion, the use thereof would further the

purpose of this Act, and such use does not impair the usefulness and

attractiveness of the area designated for inclusion in the lakeshore. The

following uses, among others, shall be considered to be uses

compatible with the purposes of this Act: Commercial farms, orchards,

motels, rental cottages, camps, craft and art studios, marinas, medical,

legal, architectural, and other such professional offices, and tree farms.

SEC. 14. The Secretary shall furnish to any interested person

requesting the same a certificate indicating, with respect to any

property which the Secretary has been prohibited from acquiring by

condemnation in accordance with provisions of this Act, that such

authority is prohibited and the reasons therefor.

SEC. 15. There are authorized to be appropriated not more than

Appropriation. $19,800,000 for the acquisition of lands and interests in

lands and not more than $18,769,000 (June 1970 prices) for

development, plus or minus such amounts, if any, as may be justified

by reason of ordinary fluctuations in construction costs as indicated by

engineering cost indices applicable to the type of construction involved

herein.

Approved October 21, 1970.

NEXT> Chapter 1 Notes

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_appendix4.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:03 AM]

Top

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_notes1.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:08 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 1 Notes

[1]Gurdon S. Hubbard, The Autobiography of Gurdon Saltonstall

Hubbard, Introduction by Caroline M. McIlvaine, (New York: Citadel

Press, 1969), 135.

[2]Ibid, 133-4; George Weeks, Sleeping Bear, Yesterday and Today

(Franklin, Mich.: Attwerger and Mandel Publishing, 1990), xiii.

[3]Ibid, 38-80.

[4]Milo M. Quaife, Lake Michigan (New York: Bobbs-Memll, 1944),

280-8; John and Ann Mahan, Wild Lake Michigan (Stillwater, Minn.:

Voyageur Press, 1991), 21; Marla J. McEnaney, William H. Tishler,

Arnold R. Alanen, Farming at the Water's Edge: An Assessment of

Agricultural and Cultural Landscape Resources in the Proposed Port

Oneida Rural Historic District at Sleeping Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, Michigan (Omaha, Neb.: Midwest Region, National Park

Service, 1995), 24-31.

[5]Ron Cockrell, D.H. Day's Kingdom: A Special History Study of

Glen Haven Village Historic District (Omaha, Neb.: Midwest Region,

National Park Service, 1984), 4-14;

[6]Tom Ruchenberg, Reflections in a Tarnished Mirror: The Use and

Abuse of the Great Lakes (Sturgeon Bay, Wisc.: Golden Glow

Publishing, 1978), 36-7. 6 Norman John Schmaltz, Cutover Land

Crusade: The Michigan Forest Conservation Movement, 1899-1931,

Ph.D. dissertation University of Michigan, 1972, p.247; Raleigh

Barlowe, "Changing Land Use and Policies: The Lake States," The

Great Lakes Forests: An Environmental and Social History, edited by

Susan B. Flader, (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1983),

172-3.

[7] Christopher Parnall to Arthur S. Huey, March 28,1949, D.H. Day

State Park file, Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore, Allen T.

Edmunds Library, Administrative History Collection, Empire,

Michigan. Hereafter this collection will be referred to as SBDL

Records; Cockrell, D.H. Day's Kingdom, 11-24; Weeks, Sleeping

Bear: Yesterday and Today, 58-80; Leelanau Tribune (Leland, Mich.),

August 8,1958; J.W. Hannen, "David H. Day, Distinguished Citizen,

Passes," Michigan Roads and Pavements, April 19,1928, p.8.

[8] State Park Commission Minute Book, 1920-1921, State Park Files,
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_notes1.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:08 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

Box 35, Record Group 94-260, State Archives of Michigan, Lansing,

Michigan. Hereafter referred to as State Archives of Michigan.

[9] Russell Carpenter, "The Development of a Tourist Industry in the

Little Traverse Bay Region," unpublished M.A. Essay, Loyola

University, Public History Program, Chicago, 111., 1994; Russell

McKee, "It Was a Very Stylish Age," Mackinac: The Gathering Place,

edited by Russell McKee (Lansing: Michigan Natural Resources

Magazine, 1981), 19-23; Margaret Beattie Bouge, Around the Shores

of Lake Michigan: A Guide to Sites (Madison: University of Wisconsin

Press, 1985), 289-91.

[10] Weeks, Sleeping Bear: Yesterday and Today, 39-40, 46-9;

Margaret Beattie Bogue, Around the Shores of Lake Michigan, p.308-

9; James Gale Inglis, Northern Michigan Handbook for Travelers

(Petoskey, Mich.: Geo. Spring, 1898), 51; Leonard Case, Benzie

County: A Bicentennial Reader (Benzonia, Mich.: Benzie County BiCentennial Commission, 1976), 77-84.

[11] The Grand Traverse Region, Historical and Descriptive (Chicago:

H.R. Pace & Co., 1884), 249; Lawrence and Lucille Wakefield, Sail &

Rail: A Narrative History of Transportation in the Grand Traverse City

Region (Traverse City, Mich.: By the author, 1980), p.46-8; Edmund

M. Littell, 100 Years in Leelanau (Leland, Mich.: The Print Shop,

1965), 41-43; Golf and Yacht Clubs, Resort Directory of Leland and

Surrounding Region (Leland, Mich.: Leelanau Enterprise, 1937).

[12] Robert Dwight Rader, et al Beautiful Glen Arbor Township: Facts

Fantasy & Fotos (Leland, Mich.: The Glen Arbor History Group,

1977), 58-65; Leelanau County Association of Commerce, The

Captives: Being the Story of a Family's Vacation in Leelanau County

(Michigan), The Land of Delight (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Leelanau

County Association of Commerce, 1924).

[13] Christopher Parnall to Arthur Huey, March 28,1949, SBDL

Records; Cockrell, D.H. Day's Kingdom, 29-32.

[14] Eileen Patricia Walsh, The Last Resort: Northern Minnesota

Tourism and the Integration of Rural and Urban Worlds, 1900-1950.

Ph.D. dissertation. University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minn., 1994,

42-3, 136-7; Allan D. Wallis, Wheel Estate: The Rise and Decline of

Mobile Homes, (New York: Oxford University Press, 1991), 30-5;

[15] Herbert F. Larson, BE-WA-BIC Country: The Story of the

Menominee Iron Range in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan (New

York: Carton Press, 1963), 334-5. 15 Leelanau County Association of

Commerce, The Captives: Being the Story of a Family's Vacation in

Leelanau County (Michigan), the Land of Delight (Grand Rapids,

Mich.: Leelanau County Association of Commerce, 1924).

[16] Cockrell, D.H. Day's Kingdom, 34; Traverse City Record, April

17,1928; Glen Lake Country Club, Glen Lake, Leelanau Co. Michigan

(Traverse City, Mich.: L.R. Henderson, 1931); Mary Ellen Hadjsky,

Personal Communication, July 15,1998.
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_notes1.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:08 AM]

[17] Arthur C. Elmer, "Parks and Recreation Division," Department of

Conservation, Thirteenth Biennial Report, 1945-1946 (Lansing: State

of Michigan, 1946), p.l65-7; United States Department of the Interior,

A Study of the Park and Recreation Problem of the United States

(Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1941), 186-9.

[18] 18 John I. Rogers, Report on Field Inspection and Study of

Proposed State Park Areas: Benzie and Leelanau Counties, File 8, Box

19, Record Group 78-102, State Archives of Michigan; Arthur C.

Elmer to Director and Conservation Commission, May 14,1946, SLBD

Records.

[19] Ibid.

[20] Dr. C.G. Parnall, et al to Those Interested in the Day Forest

Estate, August 31,1949, SLBD Records.

[21]Ibid; Christopher Parnall to Ralph Mueller, May 4,1949, SLBD

Records.

[22] J.D. Stephansky, Chief, Lands Division to Messrs. MacMullan,

Walker, Harris, et al, March 2, 1966, SLBD Records.

[23] Department of Conservation, Fourteenth Biennial Report, 1947-

1948 (Lansing: State of Michigan, 1948), 229-3; Holland (Michigan)

Evening Sentinel, December 5,1953; Adrian (Michigan) Telegram,

December 4,1953; Marquette (Michigan) Mining Journal, September

12,1956; Neal R. Pierce and John Keefe, The Great Lakes States:

People, Politics and Power in the Five Great Lakes States (New York:

Norton, 1980), 186-7; Helen Washbum Berthelot, Win Some, Lose

Some: G. Mennen Williams and the New Democrats (Detroit: Wayne

State University Press, 1995), 199-201.

[24] Charles F. Boehler, Benzie State Park Potential Expansion, Benzie

and Leelanau Counties, June 17,1954; Paul W. Thompson, Platte River

Plains and Its Relation to Lake Michigan History, Michigan Natural

Areas Council, 1954, Legislative History Files, SLBD Records.

[25] Kathleen Stocking, Personal Communication, July 22,1998.

[26] Cockrell, D.H. Day's Kingdom, 35-6; Louis Warnes to Arthur

Elmer, Chief of the Parks Division, June 25, 1956; Pierce Stocking to

Directors, Michigan Department of Conservation, October 10,1956;

R.O. Dodge, Regional Supervisor, Parks & Recreation, to Arthur

Elmer, March 8,1957, Legislative History Files, SLBD Records.

[27] National Park Service, Our Fourth Shore: Great Lakes Recreation

Area Survey (Washington, D.C.: United States Department of the

Interior, 1959), 21; Norman F. Billings, "Exercise Caution When

Selecting Location On Lake," Michigan Conservation Magazine (April

1945) 2,10.

[28] Conrad L. Wirth, Parks, Politics and the People (Norman:

University of Oklahoma Press, 1980), 281-4.
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_notes1.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:08 AM]

[29] Ibid, 192-3; George B. Hartzog, Jr., Battling for the National

Parks (Mt. Kisco, NY: MoyerBell, 1988), 197-9.

[30] Allen T. Edmunds to Herb Evison, January 28,1978, Dick Russell

Papers, Archives and Graphic Research, Harpers Ferry Center, Harpers

Ferry, Virginia; Allen T. Edmunds Obituary, Courier (May 1985);

Ernest Brooks to Conrad L. Wirth, October 31,1956, Accounting Files,

Great Lakes Shoreline Survey Records, P-435575, National Archives,

Mid-Atlantic Regional Branch, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Hereafter

this source will be cited as NARA—Mid-Atlantic Region.

[31] E. Winton Perkins to Regional Director, July 8, 1957; Allen T.

Edmunds to Birt Darling, Lansing State Journal, April 24,1958; Great

Lakes Shoreline Survey Progress Report, September 30, 1957; E.

Winton Perkins to George Thompson, August 11,1957, Great Lakes

Shoreline Survey Records, NARA—Mid-Atlantic Region.

[32] E. Winton Perkins to Lewis D. Brown, U.S.G.S., September

19,1957; Daniel Tobin, Regional Director to Edmund B. Rogers, July

29, 1957; Prospectus: Great Lakes Region and Pacific Coast

Recreation Area Surveys, December 28, 1956, Allen T. Edmunds to

Thomas Owen, Utah State University, May 4,1960; NARA—MidAtlantic Region.

[33] Great Lakes Shoreline Survey Helicopter Flight Notes, March

28,1958 to May 9, 1958; Great Lakes Shoreline Survey

Reconnaissance Reports: Betsie Point, Platte River Plains, South

Manitou Island, Empire Dunes, Sleeping Bear Extension, North End of

Sleeping Bear, and Good Harbor Bay, July 9-14,1958, NARA—MidAtlantic Region.

[34] "Tawas Point Study Area," Michigan—Individual Areas file.

Great Lakes Shoreline Survey Records, NARA—Mid-Atlantic Region;

E. Genevieve Gillette, Oral History Transcripts, transcript 23A, p.2, E.

Genevieve Gillette Papers [hereafter referred to as the Gillette Papers],

Bentley Historical Library, Michigan Historical Collections, University

of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan. Hereafter this depository will be

referred to as the Bentley Library.

[35] Our Fourth Shore: Great Lakes Shoreline Recreation Area Survey

(Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, 1960), 7-9.

[36] Our Fourth Shore, 2, 6-9; Ron Cockrell, A Signature of Time and

Eternity: The Administrative History of the Indiana Dunes National

Lakeshore, Indiana (Omaha, Neb.: National Park Service, 1988), 48;

Great Lake Shoreline Survey, Remaining Shoreline Opportunities in

Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania,

New York (Washington, D.C.: United States Department of the Interior,

1959), 17,19, 55.

[37] Great Lakes Shoreline Survey, Preliminary Progress Report,

September 30, 1957, n.p.; Shirley DeLongchamp, "Henry Ford's Upper

Peninsula," A Most Superior Land: Life in the Upper Peninsula of

Michigan, edited by Russell McKee, (Lansing: Michigan Natural

Resources Magazine, 1983), 77-83.
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_notes1.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:08 AM]

[38] George A. Palmer, Assistant Regional Director to Regional

Director, July 28,1959, Great Lakes Shoreline Survey Records, NARA

—Mid-Atlantic Region; Outdoor America (April 1960), 10-12; Detroit

News, August 7,1960; Conrad Wirth, Director National Park Service to

Kent Chandler, April 12,1960, Great Lakes Shoreline Survey Records,

NARA—Mid-Atlantic Region.

[39] E. Winton Perkins, Great Lakes Survey Progress Report,

September 30,1957, Great Lakes Shoreline Survey Records, NARA—

Mid-Atlantic Region.

NEXT> Chapter 2 Notes

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_notes2.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:12 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

[1] E. Genevieve Gillette, Oral History Tape Transcripts, Tape 21B, pp.

12-15, Gillette Papers, Bentley Historical Library. This chapter will

make use of three unpublished studies of the controversy over making

a national park at Sleeping Bear Dunes: Brian Charles Kalt, “Sixties

Sandstorm: The Fight Over Establishment of a Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore, 1961-1970,” undergraduate seminar paper,

University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, 1994; Stephen J. Maddock, “An

Analysis Of Local Opposition To The Sleeping Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore,” Ph.D. dissertation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor,

1971; Jonathan P. Hawley, “The Politics of National Park System

Expansion: A Comparative Study of the Authorization of the Ozark

National Scenic Riverways in Missouri and The Proposed

Authorization of the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore in

Michigan,” Ph.D. dissertation, University of Missouri, Columbia,

1968. Of these the Kalt study has been particularly helpful because of

its extremely thorough research.

[2] Richard L. Neuberger, “Plan For Shoreline Parks: U.S. Senate Bills

Would Set Aside Recreation Areas On the Seacoast and in the Great

Lakes Region,” New York Times, August 30, 1959; Senate Bill 2460,

United States Senate, A Bill to Save and Preserve for the Public Use

and Benefit, Certain Portions of the Shoreline of the United States, and

for Other Purposes, 86th Congress, 1st Session, 1959; Stephen J.

Maddock, “An Analysis Of Local Opposition To The Sleeping Bear

Dune National Lakeshore,”Ph.D. dissertation, 1971, University of

Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 14-15.

[3] Grand Rapids Press, August 7, 1960; “Huron Mountains: Should

This Superb Region Be a Shoreline Recreation Area,” Outdoor

America (April 1960), 10-12; Senate Resolution 46, Michigan State

Senate, April 7, 1960.

[4] Remaining Shoreline Opportunities, 93; Kalt, Sixties Sandstorm,

12.

[5] Throughout the fight to create Sleeping Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore the proposal was supported by the National Park Service’s

Northeast Regional Office, in Philadelphia. In 1973-74 there was a

reorganization and Sleeping Bear was placed under the Midwest

Regional Office in Omaha, Nebraska.

[6] E. Genevieve Gillette, Oral History Transcripts, transcript 23A, p.7-
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_notes2.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:12 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

10, Gillette Papers.

[7] Ibid, transcript 31A, p.1-5.

[8] National Park Service, A Proposal: Sleeping Bear National

Seashore (Washington, D.C.: United States Department of the Interior,

1961).

[9] Pierce and Keefe, The Great Lakes States, 232; Berthelot, Win

Some, Lose Some, 141-3.

[10] Ibid.

[11] Berthelot, Win Some, Lose Some, 254-5; E. Genevieve Gillette

Oral History, Tape 23A, p.26, Gillette Papers.

[12] Senate Bill 2153, A Bill to Establish in the State of Michigan the

Sleeping Bear Dunes National Recreation Area and for Other

Purposes, 87th Congress, 1st Session.

[13] Genevieve Gillette, Oral History Tape, Tape 23A, p.12-17.

[14] Ibid.

[15] Questions Used At August 30, 1961 Meeting, an attachment to

William Welsh to Allen T. Edmunds, October 13, 1961, SLBD

Records; Record-Eagle (Traverse City, Mich.), August 31, 1961.

[16] Ibid; Grand Rapids Press, September 23, 1961; Ann Arbor

(Michigan) News, November 16, 1961; Detroit Free Press, September

13, 1961; Notes, Sleeping Bear Meeting, Glen Lake Community

School, Glen Arbor Michigan, August 30, 1961, SLBD Records.

[17] Detroit News, October 18, 1963; Kalt, Sixties Sandstorm, 28-9.

[18] To All Supporters from Ove Jensen, Chairman of the Citizens’

Council, September 18, 1963, Sleeping Bear Dunes Collection,

Leelanau County Historical Society, Leland, Michigan. Hereafter this

collection is referred to as LCHS; Record-Eagle (Traverse City,

Michigan), August 31, 1961.

[19] United States Senate, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs,

Hearing on S.2153, 1961, p.45-6, 72-81; Detroit Free Press,

November 14, 1961.

[20] Senate, Committee on Interior, Hearing on S.2153, p.193.

[21] Kalt, Sixties Sandstorm, 35-6.

[22] John M. Kaufman to Ben H. Thompson, Chief, Division of

Recreational Resource Planning, March 27, 1962, SLBD Records.

[23] Allen T. Edmunds to Ronald Lee, Regional Director, February 28,

1962, SLBD Records; New York Times, March 25, 1962.
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_notes2.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:12 AM]

[24] Ibid; Don Gordon, “Sleeping Bear, A Big Idea with Little Merit,”

Michigan Challenge (March,1962), 12-14.

[25] Maddock, Analysis of Local Opposition to the Sleeping Bear

Lakeshore, 141.

[26] Ronald F. Lee, Northeast Region Director to Conrad Wirth,

Director, National Park Service, July 24, 1961, SLBD Records.

[27] United States House of Representatives, A Bill to Establish in the

State of Michigan the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore, and

for other Purposes, House Resolution 4201, 88th Congress, 1st session,

1963.

[28] Leelanau Enterprise-Tribune, January 25, 1963; Detroit Free

Press, January 22, 1963; Kalt, Sixties Sandstorm, 25; Senate,

Committee on Interior, Hearing on S.2153, 47.

[29] Donald W. Humphrey to Allen Edmunds, April 24, 1963, SLBD

Papers; Rita Hadra Rusco, North Manitou Island: Between Sunrise and

Sunset (n.p.: BookCrafters, 1995), .9-15; Genevieve Gillette Oral

History, Tape 23, side B, p.15-19.

[30] United States Senate, A Bill to Establish in the State of Michigan

the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore and for Other Purposes,

S.792, 88th Congress, 1st Session, 1963; Berthelot, Win Some, Lose

Some, 242.

[31]James Rogers to Philip Hart, Hearings Before the Subcommittee on

Public Lands of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, United

States Senate, Eighty-eighth Congress, First Session, On S.792

(Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1963), 67.

[32] Ibid.

[33] Ibid, 369-435; Ann Arbor News, July 8, 1963.

[34] Hawley, The Politics of National Park Expansion, 96-8; Kalt,

Sixties Sandstorm, 43-5.

[35] E. Genevieve Gillette Oral History, Tape 23B, p.13, Gillette

Papers; John Daugherty,Oral History Interview, August 14, 1998.

[36] Maddock, An Analysis of Local Opposition to the Sleeping Bear

Lakeshore, 115-122; John Daugherty Oral History, August 14, 1998;

Detroit News, November 20, 1961.

[37] Land and People: Northern Great Lakes Regional Conference,

Springboard for Action: Brief of Proceedings, September 24-26, 1963,

Duluth, Minnesota (Washington, D.C.: United States Department of

Agriculture, 1963), 1,5.

[38] Duluth News Tribune, September 25, 1963.

[39] Genevieve Gillette, Oral History, Tape 27, side A, p.1-12.
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_notes2.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:12 AM]

[40] Institute for Community Development & Services, Economic

Feasibility of the Proposed Sleeping Bear Dunes National Seashore

(East Lansing: Michigan State University, 1961); Statement of Charles

Miller, Hearings on S.792, 223-230.

[41] John Daugerty, Oral History Interview, August 14, 1998;

Statement of C.N. Hooesteger, Hearings on S.792, 208-214.

[42] Maddock, Analysis of Local Opposition to Sleeping Bear, p.184-

196; Nan Helm, Footprints Where Once They Walked (n.p: privately

printed, n.d.), 46-49; Genevieve Gillette, Oral History, Tape 23, Side

A, p.29.

[43] John Daugherty, Oral History, August 14, 1998; Hawley, The

Politics of National Park Expansion, 100-101.

[44] Genevieve Gillette, Oral History Tape, 28, Side B, p.7; John

Daugherty, Oral History Interview, August 14, 1998; Hawley, The

Politics of National Park Expansion, 101.

[45] Ibid; Benzie County (Michigan) Patriot; October 20, 1966.

[46] Wirth, Parks, Politics and the People, 326.

[47] Samuel P. Hays, Beauty, Health, and Permanence: Environmental

Politics in the United States, 1955-1985 (New York: Cambridge

University Press, 1987), 171; William Ashworth, The Late Great

Lakes: An Environmental History (Detroit: Wayne State University

Press, 1987), 142; also see Terrence Kehoe, Cleaning Up the Great

Lakes: From Cooperation to Confrontation (DeKalb, Ill.: Northern

Illinois University Press, 1997).

[48] Hays, Beauty, Health, and Permanence, 459-460.

[49] Kalt, Sixties Sandstorm, 84-85; Korn, Yesterday Through

Tomorrow, 115.

[50] Kathleen Stocking, Letters From Leelanau: Essays of People and

Place (Ann Arbor, Mich.: University of Michigan Press, 1990), 159-

166; Kathleen Stocking, Personal Communication, July 9, 1998;

“Sleeping Bear Dunes Park” brochure, SLBD papers.

[51] John Daugherty, Oral History Interview, August 14, 1998.

[52] Statement of Guy Vander Jagt, Hearings Before the Subcommittee

on Interior and Insular Affairs, House of Representatives, Ninety-first

Congress, Second Session on H.R. 11829 and Related bills

(Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1970), 130-1;

Kehoe, Cleaning Up the Great Lakes, 106-7; John Daugherty, Oral

History Interview, August 14, 1998.

[53] Statement of Larry H. Olson, Hearings on H.R. 11829 and Related

bills, p.291-294; John Daugherty, Oral History Interview, August 14,

1998; Minutes of the U.S. 31 Corridor Association, November 12,
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_notes2.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:12 AM]

1968, SLBD Papers.

[54] Statement of Vander Jagt, Hearings on H.R. 11829 and Related

bills, 131-2.

[55] Muriel Ferris to Genevieve Gillette, May 27, 1970, Box 4, Gillette

Papers.

[56] Statement of Stanley Ball, Hearings on H.R. 11829 and Related

bills, 268-74.

[57] Statement of Dayton Willard, Hearings on H.R. 11829 and

Related bills, p.220; Statement of John B. Daugherty, Hearings on H.R.

11829 and Related bills, 288-9.

[58] Kalt, Sixties Sandstorm, 110-11.

[59] Joe (Small Potatoes) Taxpayer to Philip A. Hart, March 8, 1962,

Box 15, Hart Papers; Genevieve Gillette to Muriel Ferris, May 20,

1970, Box 4, Gillette Papers.

[60] Philip A. Hart to Genevieve Gillette, September 25, 1970, Box 4,

Gillette Papers.

NEXT> Chapter 3 Notes

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_notes3.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:16 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

[1] Benzie County Patriot, March 16, 1971.

[2] Grand Rapids Press, September 5, 1971.

[3] Julius Martinek, Oral History Interview, March 1, 1998; Benzie

County Patriot, May 6, 1971.

[4] Julius Martinek, Oral History Interview, March 1, 1998, Leelanau

Enterprise-Tribune, March 9, 1972.

[5] Ibid; Benzie County Patriot, July 15, 1971.

[6]John F. Pattie, Oral History Interview, November 2, 1998; Leelanau

Enterprise-Tribune, August 5, 1971.

[7] Ibid; John F. Pattie, Personal Communication, November 5, 1991;

Kathleen Stocking, Letters From The Leelanau: Essays of People and

Place (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1990) 102-5

[8] Minutes of the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore Advisory

Commission, July 24, 1972, SBDNL Records.

[9] Benzie County Patriot, August 26, 1971; Chester L. Brooks to

Julius Martinek, January 18, 1973, SBDNL Records.

[10] Grand Rapids Press, September 5, 1971; J.A. Martinek to

Congressman William S. Broomfield, November 11, 1972, “Pinks”

Files, SLBD Records.

[11] J.A. Martinek to Pam Dow, January 18, 1974, “Pinks”Files, SLBD

Records.

[12] J.A. Martinek to J.E. Williamson, May 10, 1973, “Pinks” Files,

SLBD Records; Julius Martinek, Oral History Interview, March 1,

1998; Hugh Beattie, Oral History Interview, September 28, 1994; John

F. Pattie, Oral History Interview, November 2, 1998.

[13] Minutes of the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore Advisory

Commission Meeting, April 21, 1972; Philip A. Hart to Rogers B.

Morton, May 30, 1972, 92nd Congress File, SLBD Records; Benzie

County Patriot, January 27, 1972.

[14] J.A. Martinek to Senator Philip Hart, April 12, 1973, “Pinks”
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_notes3.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:16 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

Files, SLBD Records; Leelanau County Enterprise-Tribune, April 13,

1972, February 1, 1973.

[15] Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore Clipping File 1970-

1973, undated newspaper clipping, c.1975; Jack Pattie, Oral History

Interview, November 2, 1998.

[16] J.A. Martinek to Regional Director, Midwest Region, July 10,

1974, “Pinks” Files, SLBD Records.

[17] Eugene Parisho to Deputy Director, December 18, 1973, Project

Correspondence File, SLBD Records; Record-Eagle (Traverse City),

October 30, 1973.

[18] Minutes of the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore Advisory

Commission, October 24, 1975; Leelanau Enterprise, November 21,

1974; Detroit Free Press March 31, 1975; Traverse City Record-Eagle

September 21, 1971, October 7, 1974, February 7, 1975, April 17,

1975.

[19] Dean C. Einwalter to Superintendent, May 10, 1973; J.A.

Martinek to Director, Northeast Region, May 2, 1973, “Pinks” Files,

SLBD Records.

[20] Minutes of the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore Advisory

Commission, October 24, 1975, SLBD Records; Leelanau Enterprise,

October 21, 1976; Detroit Free Press, March 31, 1975; J.A. Martinek

to John F. Toepp, Michigan Senate, December 26, 1973, “Pinks” Files,

SLBD Records; Kathleen Stocking, Letters from Leelanau (Ann Arbor:

University of Michigan Press, 1990), 164.

[21] State Journal (Lansing), November 20, 1974; Benzie County

Patriot, December 11, 1974; Record-Eagle (Traverse City), February

20, 1975, March 21, 1975.

[22] Miami Herald, June 1, 1976.

[23] Ibid; Benzie County Ad-Visor, September 15, 1976; Record-Eagle

(Traverse City), September 28, 1976.

[24] Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore Clipping File, 1977,

undated Detroit News article, SLBD; Record-Eagle (Traverse City),

September 10, 1977; Rita Hadra Rusco, North Manitou Island:

Between Sunrise and Sunset (n.p.: Bookcrafters, 1991), 140-145.

[25] Elizabeth Edwards, “The Battle for the Bear: An Update,” The

Small-Towner (April, 1986), 42-43.

[26] Detroit Free Press, December 12, 1995.

[27] Elizabeth T. Edwards, “Port Oneida: A Community Slips Away,”

Traverse, the Magazine (March, 1990), 22.

[28] Ibid.
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_notes3.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:16 AM]

[29] Julius Martinek, Oral History Interview, March 1, 1998; Benzie

County Patriot, December 9, 1971; Minutes of the Sleeping Bear

Dunes National Lakeshore Advisory Commission, April 2, 1972.

[30] Julius Martinek to Director, Northeast Region, June 27, 1972,

“Pinks” Files, SLBD Records; Julius Martinek, Oral History Interview,

March 1, 1998.

[31] Minutes of the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore Advisory

Commission, June 17, 1971.

[32] Ibid; John D. Spencer to J.H. Martinek, September 25, 1972,

“Pinks” files, SLBD Records.

[33] Julius Martinek, Oral History Interview, March 1, 1998; Charles

Parkinson, Oral History Interview, March 2, 1998.

[34] Minutes of the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore Advisory

Commission, October 27, 1972.

[35] Charles Parkinson, Oral History Interview, March 2, 1998;

Leelanau Enterprise-Tribune, August 8, 1974.

[36] Charles Parkinson, March 2, 1998; Superintendent’s Annual

Report, 1974, SLBD Records.

[37] Ibid; Record-Eagle (Traverse City), July 2, 1973;William Herd,

Oral History Interview, August13, 1998.

[38] Superintendent’s Annual Report, 1973, 1974, SLBD Records.

[39] Detroit Free Press, August 10, 1981.

[40] J.A. Martinek to Mr. Johnson, Interagency Motor Pool, March 3,

1972, “Pinks” Files, SLBD Records; Charles Parkinson, Oral History

Interview, March 2, 1998; Julius Martinek, Oral History Interview,

March 1, 1998; Jack Pattie, Oral History Interview, November 3, 1998.

[41] Superintendent’s Annual Report, 1974, SLBD Records; Leelanau

Enterprise-Tribune, December 26, 1974; Record-Eagle (Traverse

City), July 2, 1977.

[42] J.A. Martinek to George B. Tiedeman, February 20, 1974; J.A.

Martinek to Acting Regional Director, Midwest Region, April 22,

1974; Dean Einwalter to Superintendent Martinek, March 15, 1976,

“Pinks” Files, SLBD Records.

[43] Superintendent’s Annual Report, 1975, SLBD Records; Leelanau

Enterprise-Tribune, July 3, 1975.

[44] Rusco, North Manitou Island,144-5; Theodore J. Karamanski, The

Pictured Rocks: An Administrative History of Pictured Rocks National

Lakeshore (Omaha, Nebraska: National Park Service, Midwest Region,
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_notes3.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:16 AM]

1995), 73-5; Max Holden, Oral History Interview, August 12, 1998.

[45] Record-Eagle (Traverse City), January 31, 1973, April 18, 1973,

July 18, 1973.

[46] Leelanau Enterprise-Tribune, July 6, 1967; Robert Doherty,

Disputed Waters: Native Americans and the Great Lakes Fishery

(Lexington: University of Kentucky Press, 1990), 61-2; Bogue, Around

the Shores of Lake Michigan, 310-11.

[47] Record-Eagle (Traverse City), July 24, 1971; Minutes of the

Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore Advisory Commission, June

17, 1971, SLBD Records.

[48] E. Genevieve Gillette, Oral History Interview, Tape 22-24A,

Gillette Papers; Julius Martinek, Oral History Interview, March 1,

1998.

[49] Daniel Weber to Carl Johnson, January 2, 1972, Minutes of the

Sleeping Bear National Lakeshore Advisory Commission, January 18,

1972 and June 17, 1971, SLBD Records.

[50] Minutes of the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore Advisory

Commission, October 27, 1972; J.A. Martinek to Director, Northeast

Region, August 30, 1972; National Park Service Policy Statement

Relative to the Proposed Platte River Harbor of Refuge Development,

January 21, 1974, “Pinks” Files, SLBD Records.

[51]Minutes of the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore Advisory

Commission, October 27, 1972.

[52] Leelanau Enterprise-Tribune, October 4, 1973

[53] J.A. Martinek to Director of the Northeast Region, August 30,

1972, “Pinks” Files, SLBD Records.

[54] Richard West Sellers, Preserving Nature in the National Parks: A

History (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1997), 192-5.

[55] National Park Service, A Master Plan For Proposed Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore (Philadelphia: Northeast Regional

Office, National Park Service, 1968), 37-8; E. Genevieve Gillette, Oral

History Interview, Gillette Papers, Tape 24, B-11; J.A. Martinek to

B.A. Honor, November 18, 1976, “Pinks” Files, SLBD Records.

[56] J.A. Martinek to Director, Northeast Region, December 7, 1972,

“Pinks” Files, SLBD Records; National Park Service, Wilderness

Recommendations: Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore,

Michigan (Denver: National Park Service, 1974), n.p.

[57] Ibid.

[58] Minutes of the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore Advisory

Commission, July 19, 1974; Record-Eagle (Traverse City), August 10,

1974.
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_notes3.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:16 AM]

[59]Ibid; Leelanau Enterprise-Tribune, August 8, 1974; Wilderness

Recommendation: Sleeping Bear Dunes, n.p.

[60] Congressman Guy Vander Jagt to Noble Travis, April 16, 1976,

“Pinks” Files, SLBD Records; A Master Plan For Sleeping Bear

Dunes, Proposed National Lakeshore, 37; Record-Eagle (Traverse

City), August 10, 1974.

[61] Record-Eagle (Traverse City), September 21, 1974; Leelanau

Enterprise-Tribune, September 26, 1974.

[62]“U.S. to Begin Flagging for Scenic Road,” undated newspaper

clipping, Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore clipping file,

c.1973; Minutes of the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Advisory Commission, July 19, 1974, SLBD Records.

[63] Richard Miller, et al, Environmental and Economic Impact of the

Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore (Chicago: Wilbur Smith &

Associates, 1974); J.A. Martinek to Regional Director, Mid-Atlantic

Region, January 21, 1974, “Pinks” Files, SLBD Records.

[64] J.A. Martinek to Pam Dow, January 18, 1974, “Pinks” Files,

SLBD Records; Karamanski, The Pictured Rocks, 66-8; Leelanau

Enterprise-Tribune, October 21, 1976.

[65] Superintendent’s Annual Report For 1975: Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore, SLBD Records; Leelanau Enterprise-Tribune,

May 12, 19, 1977.

[66] J.A. Martinek to Regional Director, Midwest Region, August 1,

1975 and February 19, 1976, “Pinks” Files, SLBD Records.

[67] Minutes of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore Staff

Meeting, January 28, 1976, “Pinks” Files, SLBD Records;

Superintendent’s Annual Report, 1979, Sleeping Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, SLBD Records.

[68] Minutes of the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore Advisory

Commission, October 24, 1975, SLBD Records; William Herd,

personal communication, November 29, 1999; Record-Eagle (Traverse

City), June 4, 1977.

[69] Charles Parkinson, Oral History Interview, March 2, 1998;

Superintendent’s Annual Report, 1976, Sleeping Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, SLBD Records; Julius Martinek, Oral History Interview,

March 1, 1998.

[70] Minutes of the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore Advisory

Commission, March 9, 1971, SLBD Records.

[71] John B. Daugherty to Guy Vander Jagt, April 30, 1974, Minutes

of the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore Advisory Commission,

April 26, 1974, SLBD Records; Leelanau Enterprise-Tribune, May 19,

1977.
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_notes3.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:16 AM]

[72] Minutes of the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore Advisory

Commission, October 24, 1975, SLBD Records.

[73] Superintendent’s Annual Report, 1976, Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore, SLBD Records.

[74] Leelanau Enterprise Tribune, May 5, 1977; Charles Parkinson,

Oral History Interview, March 2, 1998.

[75] Julius Martinek, Oral History Interview, March 1, 1998; J.A.

Martinek to Purchasing Agent, City of Dearborn, October 17, 1973,

“Pinks” Files, SLBD Records; Charles Parkinson, March 2, 1998; Peter

LaValley, Oral History Interview, August 14, 1998; Raymond Kimpel,

Oral History Interview, February 26, 1999.

[76] Ibid; John Kawamoto, Personal Communication, March 9, 1999.

[77] Record-Eagle (Traverse City), October 24, 1977.

[78] Ibid.

[79] Ibid; Julius A. Martinek, Oral History Interview, March 1, 1998.

NEXT> Chapter 4 Notes

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_notes4.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:20 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

[1] Record-Eagle (Traverse City), October 17, 1973.

[2]Bill Herd, Oral History Interview, August 13, 1998; Record-Eagle

(Traverse City), October 19, 1977.

[3] Peter LaValley, Oral History Interview, August 14, 1998; John

Dougherty, Oral History Interview, August 14, 1998.

[4] Raymond Kimpel, Oral History Interview, March 8, 1999.

[5] Record-Eagle (Traverse City), June 20, 1977, October 19, 1977;

National Park Service, Midwest Regional Office, Task Directive,

General Management Plan, Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore,

November 22, 1977, GNP File, SLBD Records.

[6] Record-Eagle (Traverse City), November 3, 1977; Leelanau

Enterprise-Tribune, November 10, 17, 1977.

[7] National Park Service, “Secretary Hickel Hails President’s Action

on New Parks,” Press release, November 1, 1970, Division of

Legislative Coordination and Support, General Correspondence, SLBD

Records.

[8] Record-Eagle (Traverse City), February 28, 1978; National Park

Service, Master Plan: Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore,

(Philadephia: Northeast Regional Office, 1970), p.28.

[9] Detroit News, August 13, 1978.

[10] David Hales, Assistant Secretary for Fish, Wildlife and Parks to

Assistant Secretary for Policy, Budget and Administration, January 20,

1978, Washington Office Correspondence File, SLBD Records.

[11] Leelanau Enterprise-Tribune, April 6, 1978, July 6, 1978; RecordEagle (Traverse City), February 28, 1978.

[12] Record-Eagle (Traverse City), February 14, 18, 1978, March 4,

1978; Leelanau Enterprise-Tribune, February 16, 23, 1978.

[13] Record-Eagle (Traverse City), June 28, 1978, December 19, 1978.

[14] Robert Herbst, Assistant Secretary of the Interior to Senator

Robert P. Griffin, November 23, 1978, General Management Plan File,
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_notes4.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:20 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

SLBD Records; Stocking, Letters from the Leelanau, 105.

[15] Record-Eagle (Traverse City), July 18, 1978.

[16] Samuel P. Hays, Beauty, Health, and Permanence: Environmental

Politics in the United States, 1955-1985, (New York: Cambridge

University Press, 1987), 104-8.

[17] Benzie County-Record-Patriot, July 12, 1978; Leelanau

Enterprise-Tribune, July 27, 1978; Daniel J. Tobin, Jr., Acting Director

of the National Park Service to Mary Anne Williams, April 21, 1978,

GNP File, SLBD Records.

[18] Record-Eagle (Traverse City), August 7, 16, 1978; Leelanau

Enterprise-Tribune, July 27, 1978; Ann Arbor News, July 25, 1978;

Superintendent’s Annual Report, Sleeping Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1978, SLBD Records.

[19] Ann Arbor News, July 26, 1978; Leelanau Enterprise-Tribune,

August 3, 1978.

[20] Leelanau Enterprise-Tribune, September 14, 1978.

[21] Denver Service Center, Planning Alternatives Workbook: Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore/Michigan (Denver: National Park

Service, 1978), n.p.

[22] Grand Rapids Press, November 19, 1978.

[23] Benzie County Record-Patriot, November 29, 1978.

[24] Public Involvement Summary For Planning Alternatives

Workbook, Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore/Michigan, n.d.,

General Management Plan File, SLBD Records.

[25] Kathleen Stocking, Personal Communication, July 22, 1998;

Record-Eagle (Traverse City) November 21, 1978.

[26] National Park Service, Draft General Management Plan, Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore/Michigan, (Denver: Denver Service

Center, 1979).

[27] Northwoods Call, August 22, 1979.

[28] Leelanau Enterprise-Tribune, August 16, 1979; Chicago Tribune,

December 23, 1979; Planning Alternative For General Management

Plan, August 15, 1979, Minutes of the Sleeping Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore Advisory Commission, August 17, 1979, SLBD Records.

[29] Labon Vandenhoof quoted in, Stocking, Letters from the

Leelanau, p.101;Citizens Council to James L. Dunning, Record-Eagle

(Traverse City), December 18, 1979.

[30] Record-Eagle (Traverse City), November 29, 1980.

[31] Bill Herd, Oral History Interview, August 13, 1998; Arthur Huey
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_notes4.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:20 AM]

quoted in, Stocking, Letters from the Leelanau, 106.

[32] Peter LaValley, Oral History Interview, August 13, 1998.

[33] Minutes of the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore Advisory

Commission, November 21, 1980, SLBD Records.

[34] Ibid; James West Davidson, William E. Gienapp, Christine Leigh

Heyeman, Mark H. Lytle, and Michael Be. Stoff, Nation of Nations: A

Narrative History of the American Republic (New York: McGraw-Hill,

1998), 1256-7, 1274-5.

[35] Hays, Beauty, Health, and Permanence: Environmental Politics in

the United States, 494.

[36] Minutes of the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore Advisory

Commission, November 21, 1980.

[37] Record-Eagle (Traverse City), May 14, 16, 29, 1981; Leelanau

Enterprise-Tribune, May 28, 1981; Detroit Free Press, May 24, 1981

[38] Ibid; Flint Journal, June 24, 1981.

[39] Ibid; Ron Cockrell, A Signature of Time and Eternity: The

Administrative History of Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore, 304-9.

[40] Detroit Free Press, May 24, 1981.

[41] Albert V. Whitham, Regional Solicitor, Rocky Mountain Region

to Assistant Solicitor, Parks and Recreation, February 2, 1982; Russell

Dickenson, Director, National Park Service to Ric Davidge, Special

Assistant to the Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks,

March 10, 1982, “Stocklen” 46-103 File, SLBD Records.

[42] Grand Rapids Press, January 12, 1982.

[43] Donald R. Brown to Regional Director, May 31, 1979, Stocklen

46-103 File, SLBD Records; Randall R. Pope, Acting Regional

Director, Midwest Region to Congressman Guy Vander Jagt, August

14, 1980, Stocklen 46-103 File, SLBD Records.

[44] Certificate Prohibiting Condemnation, December 17, 1971,

Stocklen 46-103 File, SLBD Records; Henry D. Schmidt, Director,

Northeast Regional Office to Tom Stocklen, March 23, 1971, Stocklen

46-103 File, SLBD Records; Julius Martinek, Personal

Communication, April 6, 1999.

[45] Kathleen Stocking, “Michigan’s Dunes & the Sands of

Bureaucracy,” Enquirer Magazine (Cincinnati) August 12, 1979;

Randall R. Pope, Acting Regional Director to Congressman Guy

Vander Jagt, August 14, 1980; Superintendent Donald R. Brown to

Thomas M. Stocklen, March 10, 1980, Stocklen 46-103 File, SLBD

Records.

[46] Ibid.
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_notes4.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:20 AM]

[47] Ibid; Richard Peterson, Oral History Interview, April 5, 1999.

[48] Leelanau Enterprise and Tribune, April 27, 1978, April12, 1979.

[49] Leelanau Enterprise and Tribune, April 12, 1979, September 23,

1982.

[50] Ibid; Leelanau Enterprise and Tribune, February 28, 1985, May 1,

1986.

[51] James Dunning, Director, Midwest Region to Chief, Office of

Legislation, November 14, 1980, Washington Office Correspondence,

1982-present, SLBD Records; “Sleeping Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore: 3,000 acres in Question,”Michigan Audubon (May/June,

1982), 30, 3, 6-7.

[52] Grand Rapids Press, October 11, 1981.

[53] Superintendent’s Report, Sleeping bear Dunes National Lakeshore,

1982, SLBD Records; Detroit Free Press, September 23, 1982;

Record-Eagle (Traverse City), October 4, 1982.

[54] Benzie County Weekly Express/Press Box, October 7, 1982;

Record-Eagle (Traverse City), August 22, 1983.

[55] Leelanau Enterprise and Tribune, August 4, 1983; Record-Eagle

(Traverse City), August 4, 1983.

[56] Leelanau Enterprise-Tribune, December 31, 1987.

[57] Record-Eagle (Traverse City), May 7, 1979.

[58] Leelanau Enterprise and Tribune, January 8, 1981; Benzie AdVisor, April 4, 1983.

[59] Robert Doherty, Disputed Waters: Native American and the Great

Lakes Fishery (Lexington: University of Kentucky Press, 1990), 122-5;

Record-Eagle (Traverse City), August 17, 1979; Benzie County

Record-Patriot, October 3, 1979.

[60] Minutes of the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore Advisory

Commission, June 18, 1982, SLBD Records; Leelanau EnterpriseTribune, August 19, 1982.

[61] Record-Eagle (Traverse City), September 4, 1979.

[62] Record Eagle (Traverse City), September 19, 1980.

[63] Minutes of the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore Advisory

Commission, May 8, 1981, SLBD Records; Leelanau EnterpriseTribune, May 14, 1981.

[64] Record-Eagle (Traverse City), June 6, 1981; Leelanau EnterpriseTribune, June 28, 1984.
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_notes4.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:20 AM]

[65] National Park Service, Environmental Assessment for a Docking

Facility, Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore (Denver: Denver

Service Center, 1984).

[66] Minutes of the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore Advisory

Commission, September 14, 1984; Record-Eagle (Traverse City),

September 3, 1984; Detroit Free Press, September 30, 1984.

[67] Leelanau Enterprise-Tribune, September 27, 1984.

NEXT> Chapter 5 Notes

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_notes5.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:25 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Chapter 5 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

[1]Michigan Land Use Institute, The Homestead Swap: Trading Public

Land for Private Grain in the Sleeping Bear National Lakeshore (n.p.:

Northern Michigan Environmental Action Council, 1996), 6.

[2]John Holusha, "County Threatens to Cut Timber in National Park,"

New York Times, n.d., Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Clipping File, 1984, July-December, SLBD Records; Rita Rusco, North

Manitou Island: Between Sunrise and Sunset, 150-4.

[3]Record-Eagle (Traverse City), December 12, 1983; James C. Gilbo,

Personal Communication, May 28, 1999.

[4] Record-Eagle (Traverse City), July 21, 1979, December 12, 1983,

July 24, 1986, February 26, 1987; Grand Rapids Press, September 12,

1984; Cockrell, A Signature of Time and Eternity: The Administrative

History of Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore, 293-4.

[5] Record-Eagle (Traverse City), October 17, 1985.

[6] Gina Guy, Regional Solicitor, Rocky Mountain Region to F. Henry

Habicht, Assistant Attorney General, March 30, 1987, Road

Commission Suit File, SLBD Records.

[7] Richard R. Peterson to Guy Vander Jagt, October 12, 1984, Road

Commission Suit File, SLBD Records. Leelanau Enterprise-Tribune,

October 4, 1984.

[8] Detroit News, September 19, 1985; Leelanau Enterprise-Tribune,

September 5, 1985, September 12, 1985, September 19, 1985.

[9] Mining Journal (Marquette, Michigan), December 12-13, 1986;

Grand Rapids Press, December 12, 15, 1986; Leelanau EnterpriseTribune, December 18, 1986.

[10] Ibid; Daily Press (Ashland, Wisconsin), December 27, 1986.

[11] Leelanau Enterprise-Tribune, August 13, 1987; Record-Eagle

(Traverse City), September 20, 1986.

[12] Anne M. Woiwode, Conservation Representative, Sierra Club to

Governor James Blanchard, April 30, 1986, Road Commission Suit

File, SLBD Records; Record-Eagle (Traverse City), August 18, 1986;

Preview, April 6, 1987. For Leelanau County based environmentalists

opposed to the Road Commission's position on North Manitou see:

June Janis to "Pete" Peterson, March 19, 1985, Road Commission Suit
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_notes5.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:25 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

File, SLBD Records.

[13] Plaintiffs' First Interrogatories to Defendant, County of Leelanau

and Leelanau Road Commission v. United States of America, United

States District Court, Western District of Michigan, Case No.G87-

211CA; Leelanau Enterprise-Tribune, April 14, 1988.

[14] Grand Rapids Press, March 1, 1987; Leelanau EnterpriseTribune, May 21, 1987, October 15, 1987, May 5, 1988.

[15] James C. Gilbo, Personal Communication, May 28, 1999;

Leelanau Enterprise-Tribune, May 18, 1989, September 21, 1989.

Ironically this solution to the issue was very similar to a plan proposed

by Superintendent Peterson to the regional office in September of

1981; Superintendent of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore to

Director, Midwest Regional Office, September 23, 1981, County Roads

Issue File, SLBD Records.

[16] Richard Peterson, Oral History Interview, April 5, 1999; Grand

Rapids Press, June 8, 1986.

[17] Detroit News, June 29, 1986; Grand Rapids Press, June 8, 1986;

Record-Eagle (Traverse City), June 18, 1986.

[18] Preview (Traverse City), January 19, 1987.

[19] William Herd, Oral History Interview, August 13, 1998; Richard

Peterson, Oral History Interview, May 27, 1999.

[20] Ibid.

[21] Richard Peterson, Oral History Interview, May 27, 1998; William

Herd, Oral History Interview, August 13, 1998; Leelanau EnterpriseTribune, May 27, 1986.

[22] Ibid.

[23] Max Holden, Oral History Interview, August 12, 1998.

[24] Henry C. Cowles, "The Ecological Relations of the Vegetation on

the Sand Dunes of Lake Michigan," Botanical Gazette, 27, 95-177;

167-202; 281-308; 361-9; W.G. Waterman, Forests and Dunes from

Point Betsie to Sleeping Bear (Evanston, Ill.: Northwestern University,

1922); W.G. Waterman, "Ecology of the Glen Lake and Sleeping Bear

Region," Michigan Academy of Sciences, Arts and Letters, Vol. 6, 351-

75; Robert T. Hatt, Island Life in Lake Michigan (Bloomfield Hills,

Mich.: Cranbrook Institute of Science, 1948).

[25] Richard West Sellers, Preserving Nature in the National Parks: A

History (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1997), 205-19.

[26] Charles M. Anderson, Isle of View: A History of South Manitou

Island (Frankfurt, Mich.: privately printed, 1979); Benzie County

Advisor, June 20, 1989.
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_notes5.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:25 AM]

[27] Superintendent's Annual Report, Sleeping Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1995, SLBD Records; Leelanau Enterprise-Tribune, July

10, 1986.

[28] Leelanau Enterprise-Tribune, May 24, 1984; Benzie County

Advisor, July 29, 1985.

[29] Superintendent's Annual Report, Sleeping Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1984, SLBD Records; Leelanau Enterprise-Tribune, May

17, 1984.

[30] Superintendent's Annual Report, Sleeping Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1985, 1986, 1987, 1995 SLBD Records; Leelanau

Enterprise-Tribune, March 6, 1986.

[31] Leelanau Enterprise-Tribune, November 14, 1991, July 22, 1993.

[32] Leelanau Enterprise-Tribune, October 19, 1995; Ivan D. Miller,

Oral History Interview, March 8, 1999.

[33] Superintendent's Annual Report, Sleeping Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1990, SLBD Records; Record-Eagle (Traverse City), June

10, 1993; The Blade (Toledo, Ohio), March 10, 1988; Brian Hazlett, et

al, The Terrestrial Vegetation and Flora of Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, 1988).

[34] Max Holden, Oral History Interview, August 12, 1998; RecordEagle (Traverse City), July 31, 1991.

[35] Benzie County Record-Patriot, October 20, 1993.

[36] Detroit News, September 15, 1991; Max Holden, Oral History

Interview, August 12, 1998.

[37] Leelanau Enterprise-Tribune, May 2, 1985.

[38] Superintendent's Annual Report, Sleeping Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1993, SLBD Records; Detroit News, May 23, 1993.

[39] Superintendent's Annual Report, Sleeping Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1993, SLBD Records; Rusco, North Manitou Island, 154-5.

[40] Charles Parkinson, Oral History Interview, March 2, 1998;

William Herd, Oral History Interview, August 12, 1998.

[41] William Herd, Oral History Interview, August 12, 1998; LuAnne

Gaykowski Kozma, Living at a Lighthouse: Oral Histories from the

Great Lakes (Allen Park, Mich.: Great Lakes Lighthouse Keepers

Association, 1987).

[42] Record-Eagle (Traverse City), January 12, 1987; Leelanau

Enterprise-Tribune, November 10, 1988.

[43] Superintendent's Annual Report, Sleeping Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1990, SLBD Records.
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_notes5.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:25 AM]

[44] Charles Parkinson, Oral History Interview, March 2, 1998; Benzie

County Advisor, November 11, 1985, July 27, 1992.

[45] Richard Alesch, et al, Development Concept Plan/Interpretive

Prospectus/Environmental Assessment, Glen Haven Area, Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore/Michigan (Denver: Denver Service

Center, National Park Service, 1987), 1-5.

[46] Ibid, 25-9.

[47] Record-Eagle (Traverse City), August 1, 12, 28, 1987.

[48] Alesch, et al, Development Concept Plan, Glen Haven, 26-8;

Record-Eagle (Traverse City), August 12, 13, 1987; Grand Rapids

Press, August 14, 1987.

[49] Richard Alesch, Nancy Baker, Michele D'Arcy, et al,

Development Concept Plan/Interpretive Prospectus, Glen Haven Area,

Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore, Michigan (Denver: National

Park Service, Denver Service Center, 1992).

[50] Record-Eagle (Traverse City), August 12, 1987.

[51] Sylvia B. Kruger, Statement on Preserving Historic Importance of

South Manitou Island, Minutes of the Sleeping Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore Advisory Commission Meeting, June 17, 1977.

[52] Superintendent's Annual Report, Sleeping Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977, SLBD Records; Elizabeth Edwards, "Port Oneida: A

Community Slips Away," Traverse, the Magazine, (March, 1990), 23.

[53] Martha M. Bigelow, Michigan State Historic Preservation Officer

to Merrill D. Beal, Director, Midwest Regional Office, January 4, 1978,

Minutes of the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore Advisory

Commission, November 10, 1978, SLBD Records.

[54] Sylvia B. Kruger, Statement on South Manitou Island for inclusion

into the record of the public meetings, November 1 and 2, 1977 for the

revision of the General Management Plan for Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore, South Manitou Island Management Subunit File,

SLBD Records; National Park Service, Planning Alternatives

Workbook: Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore, Michigan,

November 1978; Preserve Sleeping Bear, Mission Statement, July 14,

1998.

[55] Superintendent's Annual Report, Sleeping Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1989, 1992, SLBD Records; Max Holden, Oral History

Interview, August 13, 1998.

[56] Robert Z. Melnick, Daniel Sponn, and Emma Jane Saxe, Cultural

Landscapes: Rural Historic Districts in the National Park System

(Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, 1984); Ron Cockrell, A

Special History of Port Oneida and the Pyramid Point Agricultural

District, Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore (Omaha, Nebraska:

Midwest Regional Office, National Park Service, 1984); Benzie County
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_notes5.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:25 AM]

Advisor, July 17, 1989.

[57] Elizabeth Edwards, "Port Oneida," Traverse; Elizabeth Edwards,

"Old Mission Crusade," Traverse (September, 1997), 40-7; Susan

Olsen Haswell and Arnold R. Alanen, A Garden Apart: An

Agricultural and Settlement History of Michigan's Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore Region (Omaha: Midwest Regional Office,

National Park Service, 1994); Marla J. McEnaney, William H. Tishler,

and Arnold R. Alanen, Farming at the Water's Edge: An Assessment of

Agricultural and Cultural Landscape Resources in the Proposed Port

Oneida Rural Historic District at Sleeping Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, Michigan (Omaha: Midwest Regional Office, National Park

Service, 1995); Brenda Wheeler Williams, Arnold R. Alanen, William

H. Tishler, Coming Through With Rye: An Historic Agricultural

Landscape Study of South Manitou Island at Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore, Michigan (Omaha: Midwest Field Office, National

Park Service, 1996).

[58] Record-Eagle (Traverse City), August 28; December 4, 1995.

[59] Karamanski, The Pictured Rocks: Administrative History of

Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore, 116-7.

[60] Randal O'Toole, "The National Pork Service," Forbes, November

20, 1995, 160-70; George B. Hartzog, Jr., Battling for the National

Parks. (Mt. Kisco, N.Y.: Moyer Bell, 1988); Record-Eagle (Traverse

City), August 27, 1993.

[61] Neal Bullington, Oral History Interview, August 14, 1998; The

Mining Journal (Marquette, Mich.), August 29, 1993; Grand Rapids

Press, August 29, 1993.

[62] Ibid; Leelanau Enterprise-Tribune, October 20, 1994.

[63] Ibid; Elizabeth Edwards, "Port Oneida," Traverse, 22-4.

[64] Ibid; Leelanau Enterprise-Tribune, September 1, 1983; RecordEagle (Traverse City), November 27, 1995.

[65] Benzie-Record Patriot, March 21, 1990; Benzie County Advisor,

October 12, 1992; O'Toole, "The National Pork Service," Forbes, 166.

[66] Ivan D. Miller, Oral History Interview, March 8, 1999.

[67] Max Holden, Oral History Interview, August 12, 1998.

[68] Rusco, North Manitou Island: Between Sunrise and Sunset, 153-4;

Superintendent's Annual Report, Sleeping Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1987, 1993, SLBD Records.

[69] Environmental Resources Management, Platte River Management

Plan, Boat Launch Facility, Sleeping Bear Dunes (Bloomington,

Minn.: Land and Water Management Division, 1985); Environmental

Resources Management, Platte River Corridor Study (Bloomington,

Minn.: Land and Water Management Division, 1985); Superintendent's
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_notes5.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:25 AM]

Annual Report, Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore, 1985-1992,

SLBD Records.

[70] Denver Service Center, Platte River Management Plan: Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore, Michigan (Denver: National Park

Service, 1992); Benzie Record-Patriot, June 19, 1991.

[71] Benzie County Record-Patriot, December 26, 1990.

[72] Kathy Stocklen to Dearest File [Sleeping Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore], January 5, 1991, Stocklen File #12, SLBD Records; Kathy

Stocklen to Manuel Lujan, Jr., Secretary of the Interior, January 29,

1991, Stocklen File #12, SLBD Records; Opinion and Orders on

Defendants' Motion For Summary Judgement, United States of

America v. 0.96 Acres of Land, More or less, Situated in the County of

Benzie, State of Michigan, T. M. Stocklen, et al., and Unknown

Others, United States District Court, Western District of Michigan,

Southern Division; Record-Eagle (Traverse City), September 30, 1992.

[73] Tom and Kathy Stocklen to Director James Ridenour, September

10, 1992, Stocklen File #13, SLBD Records; Receipt of Funds, United

States of America v. 0.96 Acres......T.M. Stocklen, et al., U.S. District

Court for the Western District of Michigan, December 19, 1992; Tom

and Kathy Stocklen to James Ridenour, December [no day], 1992,

Stocklen File #13, SLBD Records; Elizabeth Edwards, "Suit Sunk,

Case Closed," Traverse, The Magazine (December, 1992), found in

Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore clipping file, 1992, SLBD

Records; Detroit Free Press, June 11, 1995. For more on the Stocklens

see: William Perry Pendley, It Takes a Hero: The Grassroots Battle

Against Environmental Oppression (Bellvue, Wash.: Free Enterprise

Press, 1995).

[74] This latter point was effectively made by Jennette Jaross of

Sandwich, Illinois in a letter to the editor, Leelanau EnterpriseTribune, August 23, 1979. For background on the Homestead

redevelopment see: Michigan Land Use Institute, The Homestead

Swap: Trading Public Land for Private Gain in the Sleeping Bear

Dunes National Lakeshore (Traverse City, Mich.: Northern Michigan

Environmental Action Council, 1996), 5-8.

[75] Ibid; Leelanau Enterprise-Tribune, December 4, 1986.

[76] Ibid.

[77] Record-Eagle (Traverse City), June 3, 1987.

[78] Record-Eagle (Traverse City), February 3, 1987, June 17, 1987,

June 21, 1989; Leelanau Enterprise-Tribune, August 9, 1990.

[79] Leelanau Enterprise-Tribune, February 5, 1987, October 11, 1990;

Chicago Tribune, May 19, 1992.

[80] Record-Eagle (Traverse City), June 21, 1989; January 5, 1993.

[81] Ibid; Detroit Free Press, June 9, 1992.
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_notes5.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:25 AM]

[82] Record-Eagle (Traverse City), June 21, 1989, February 1, 1990.

[83] Michigan Land Use Institute, The Homestead Swap, 7-8.

[84] Detroit Free Press, December 12, 1992; Leelanau EnterpriseTribune, June 17, 1993.

[85] Record-Eagle (Traverse City), February 15, 1993, March 20,

1993.

[86] Record-Eagle (Traverse City), March 29, 1993; Detroit Free

Press, June 24, 1993.

[87] Leelanau Enterprise-Tribune, December 14, 1995; Record-Eagle

(Traverse City), December 14, 1995.

[88] Deborah Wyatt Fellows, "Editor's Note," Traverse (May 1993), 1;

Record-Eagle (Traverse City), March 16, 1993, March 19, 1994.

[89] Leelanau Enterprise-Tribune, December 21, 1995.

NEXT> Conclusion Notes

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_notes6.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:29 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Conclusion Notes

Conclusion Notes

[1] Record-Eagle (Traverse City), May 23,1994; Detroit News,

October 8,1995. 183

[2] Detroit News, November 20,1995; Detroit Free Press, December

12,1995; Leelanau Enterprise-Tribune, November 23,1995.

[3] Dave Hacker, "Sleeping Bear: The Fairy Tale Ends," world wide

web posting, January 1998.

[4] James T. Yenchel, "Great Lakes, Great Times: Hiking, History, &

Heart-Stopping Vitas," Washington Post, July 18, 1993.

[5] Detroit News, September 11,1983; Benzie County Advisor, October

3, 1988; Leelanau Enterprise-Tribune, August 5, 1982; Henry David

Thoreau, quoted in the Chicago Tribune, May 19. 1992.

[6] Grand Rapids Press, October 16,1986; Carolyn Faught, "Storm,"

Traverse, (June, 1998), 38; Chicago Tribune, May 19,1992.

#7 was omitted from the original printing.

[8] Leelanau Enterprise-Tribune, February 5,1987, July 13, 1995.

[9] Dave Hacker, "Sleeping Bear: The Fairy Tale Ends," worldwide

web posting, January, 1998.

[10] Record-Eagle (Traverse City), August 17,1985.

NEXT> Figures
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_notes6.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:29 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_figures1.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:35 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Figures

Figures

Figure 1:

Michigan Transit Company Advertisement, 1926. 

Figure 2:
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_figures1.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:35 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

Michigan Parks Association Flyer, 1961. 

Figure 3:
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_figures1.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:35 AM]

Record-Eagle Editorial Against Proposed Lakeshore, 1961. 

Figure 4:
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_figures1.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:35 AM]

Sleeping Bear National Lakeshore Proposals, Griffin Plan, Hart Plan,

1963.

NEXT> Figures 5-8

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_images1.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:40 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find

Them:" The Origins of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land:

The Early Management

of Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing

the Sleeping Bear

Dunes Park, 1984-

1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear

Dunes National Lakeshore

Images

Images

Allen Edmunds, "father" of the Great Lakes National Parks. 

Sleeping Bear Dunes, 1958.
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_images1.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:40 AM]

Twenty-Five

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and

Present Employees of

Sleeping Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

Empire Lumber Company plant and dock, Empire, Michigan, c. 1910.

D. H. Day Farm, looking from the dune climb area, c. 1925.

Sleeping Bear Bay in the 1930s.

D. H. Day about 1922.
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_images1.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:40 AM]

Promotion for Day Forest Estates from the mid-1920s.

Train on the Day Logging railroad which connected the Glen Haven dock

with logging camps in the interior. 

Farming near North Bar Lake, c. 1940.

Postcard promoting Glen Haven tourism.
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_images1.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:40 AM]

(image #10 missing from original manuscript)

NEXT> More Images

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_biblio.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:45 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Bibliography

Bibliography

Bibliography 

Archival and Manuscript Sources

Michigan Historical Collections, Bentely Historical Library, University

of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan. 

Philip A. Hart Papers. 

E. Genevieve Gillette Papers. 

Martha Griffiths Papers. 

George W. Romney Papers. 

Joseph G. O'Hara Papers. 

Michigan State Archives, Michigan Department of State, Lansing,

Michigan. 

Michigan Conservation Commission Records, 1924-1936. 

Department of Natural Resources, State Park Files, Benzie State Park

and D.H. Day State Park, 1935-1970. 

Michigan Attorney General Records, Parks and Recreation, Sleeping

Bear Dunes, 1945-1962. Michigan State Highway Department Records,

1924-1968. 

Western Michigan Tourist Association Records. 

Leelanau County Historical Society, Leland, Michigan. 

Sleeping Bear Collection. 

Travis D. Noble Papers. 

National Archives and Records Administration, Mid-Atlantic Regional

Center, Philadelphia, 

Pennsylvania. 

Great Lakes Shoreline Survey Records. 

National Park Service, Northeast Regional Office, New Area Planning

Records. 

National Park Service, Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore,

Empire, Michigan. 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_biblio.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:45 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

Legislative Records, 1961-1970. 

Park Planning Files, 1970-1985. 

Reader's Files (outgoing correspondence), 1971-1988. 

Newspaper Clippings, 1970-1995. 

Advisory Commission Minutes, 1971-1990. 

Superintendent's Annual Report, 1971-1995.

Local Newspapers Cited

Record-Eagle (Traverse City, Michigan) 

Leelanau Enterprise-Tribune 

Detroit News 

Detroit Free Press 

Benzie County Patriot 

Benzie County Advisor 

Grand Rapids Press 

Ann Arbor News

Informants and Oral History Interviews

Neal Bullington, Chief of Interpretation, Sleeping Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore. 

Howard Chapman, retired, Director, Rocky Mountain Regional Office,

participated in Great Lakes Shoreline Survey. 

John Daugherty, attorney-at-law and former Advisory Commission

member. 

Jo Ann Evans, Personnel Assistant, Sleeping Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore. 

James C. Gilbo, retired, engineer Leelanau County Road Commission. 

Mary Ellen Hadjsky, local historian, Leland, Michigan. 

Max Holden, Resource Management Specialist, Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore. 

William Herd, Park Ranger, Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore. 

Raymond Kimpel, retired Chief Ranger, Sleeping Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore. 

John Kawamoto, retired, Associate Regional Director, Midwest

Regional Office, National Park Service. 

Peter LaValley, Maintenance Supervisor, Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore. 

Julius A. Martinek, retired, Superintendent of Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore. 

Ivan D. Miller, Superintendent of Sleeping Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore. 

Charles Parkinson, retired, Chief of Interpretation, Sleeping Bear

Dunes National Lakeshore. 

Jack Pattie, Land Acquisition Officer, Saint Croix National Scenic

Riverway, former land acquisition staff of Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore. 

Duane Pearson, Assistant Superintendent, Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore. 

Richard Peterson, Superintendent Big Thicket National Preserve,

former Superintendent Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore. 

Kathleen Stocking, author, daughter of Pierce Stocking, and Leelanau

resident.
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_biblio.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:45 AM]

Books, Reports, Periodicals

Anderson, Charles M. Isle of View: A History of South Manitou

Island. Frankfort, Mich.: privately printed, 1979. 

Alesch, Richard, et al. Development Concept Plan/Interpretive

Prospectus/Environmental Assessment, Glen Haven Area, Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore/Michigan. Denver: Denver Service

Center, 1987. 

Ashworth, William. The Late Great Lakes: An Environmental History.

Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1987. 

Barlowe, Raleigh. "Changing Land Use and Policies: The Lake States,"

The Great Lakes Forests: An Environmental and Social History, edited

by Susan B. Flader. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1983. 

Berthelot, Helen Washburn. Win Some, Lose Some: G. Mennen

Williams and the New Democrats. Detroit: Wayne State University

Press, 1995. 

Billings, Norman F. "Exercise Caution When Selecting Location on a

Lake," Michigan Conservation Magazine (April 1945) 2, 10. 

Bouge, Margaret Beattie. Around the Shores of Lake Michigan: A

Guide to Sites. Madison: State Historical Society of Wisconsin, 1985. 

Carpenter, Russell. "The Development of a Tourist Industry in the

Little Traverse Bay Region." M.A. Essay, Loyola University Chicago,

1994. 

Case, Leonard. Benzie County: A Bicentennial Reader. Benzonia,

Mich.: Benzie County Bi-Centennial Commission, 1976. 

Cockrell, Ron. D.H. Day's Kingdom: A Special History Study of Glen

Haven Village Historic District. Omaha, Nebr.: Midwest Region,

National Park Service, 1984. 

Cockrell, Ron. A Special History of Port Oneida and the Pyramid Point

Agricultural District, Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore.

Omaha, Nebr.: National Park Service, 1984. 

Cockrell, Ron. A Signature of Time and Eternity: The Administrative

History of Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore, Indiana. Omaha, Nebr.:

National Park Service, 1988. 

Cowles, Henery C, "The Ecological Relations of the Vegetation on the

Sand Dunes of Lake Michigan," Botanical Gazette 27, 95-177; 281-

308; 361-9. 

DeLongchamp, Shirley. "Henry Ford's Upper Peninsula," A Most

Superior Land: Life in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, edited by
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_biblio.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:45 AM]

Russell McKee. Lansing: Michigan Department of Natural Resources,

1983. 

Denver Service Center. Platte River Management Plan: Sleeping Bear

Dunes National Lakeshore, Michigan. Denver: National Park Service,

1992. 

Doherty, Robert. Disputed Waters: Native Americans and the Great

Lakes Fishery. Lexington: University of Kentucky Press, 1990. 

Edwards, Elizabeth. "The Battle for the Bear," The Small-Towner,

(April 1986), 42-43. 

Edwards, Elizabeth. "Port Oneida: A Community Slips Away,"

Traverse, (March 1990), 17-24. 

Edwards, Elizabeth. "Suit Sunk, Case Closed," Travserse (December

1992), n.p. 

Edwards, Elizabeth. "Old Mission Crusade," Traverse (September

1997), 40-7. 

Elmer, Arthur C. "The Parks and Recreation Division." Department of

Conservation Biennial Report, 1945-1946. Lansing: State of Michigan,

1946. 

Environmental Resources Management. Platte River Management Plan,

Boat Launch Facility, Sleeping Bear Dunes. Bloomington, Minn.: Land

and Water Management Division, 1985. 

Fraught, Carolyn. "Storm," Travserse (June 1998), 38. 

Golf and Yacht Clubs. Resort Directory of Leland and Surrounding

Region. Leland, Mich.: Leelanau Enterprise, 1937. 

Gordon, Don. "Sleeping Bear, A Big Idea with Little Merit," Michigan

Challenge (March 1962), 12-14. 

Great Lakes Shoreline Survey. Remaining Shoreline Opportunities in

Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania,

New York. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of the Interior, 1959. 

Hartzog, George B. Battling For the National Parks. Mt.Kisco, N.Y.:

Moyer Bell, 1988. 

Haswell Susan Olsen and Arnold R. Alanen. A Garden Apart: An

Agricultural and Settlement History of Michigan's Sleeping Bear

Dunes National Lakeshore Region. Omaha, Nebr.: National Park

Service, 1994. 

Hawley, Jonathon P. "The Politics of National Park System Expansion:

A Comparative Study of the Authorization of the Ozark National

Scenic Riverways in Missouri and the Proposed Authorization of the

Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore in Michigan." Ph.D.

Dissertation, University of Missouri, 1968. 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_biblio.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:45 AM]

Hatt, Robert T. Island Life in Lake Michigan. Bloomfield Hills, Mich.:

Cranbrook Institute of Science, 1948. 

Hays, Samuel P. Beauty, Health, and Permanence: Environmental

Politics in the United States, 1955-1985. New York: Cambridge

University Press, 1987. 

Hazlett, Brian, et al. The Terrestrial Vegetation and Flora of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan,

1988. 

Helm, Nan. Footprints Where Once They Walked. n.p.: privately

printed, n.d. 

Hubbard, Gurdon S. The Autobiography of Gurdon Saltonstall

Hubbard, introduction by Caroline M. McIlvaine. New York: Citadel

Press, 1969. 

Inglis, James Gale. Northern Michigan Handbook for Travelers.

Petoskey, Mich.: Geo. Spring, 1898. 

Institute for Community Development & Services. Economic

Feasibility of the Proposed Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore.

East Lansing, Mich.: Michigan State University, 1961. 

Kalt, Brian Charles. "Sixties Sandstorm: The Fight Over Establishment

of a Sleeping Bear National Lakeshore, 1961-1970." Undergraduate

Seminar Paper, University of Michigan, 1994. 

Karamanski, Theodore J. The Pictured Rocks: An Administrative

History of the Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore. Omaha, Nebr.:

National Park Service, 1995. 

Kehoe, Terrence. Cleaning Up the Great Lakes: From Cooperation to

Confrontation. DeKalb, Ill.: Northem Illinois University Press, 1997. 

Kozuma, LuAnne Gaykowski. Living At a Lighthouse: Oral Histories

from the Great Lakes. Allen Park, Mich.: Great Lakes Lighthouse

Keepers Association 1987. 

Kuchenberg, Tom. Reflections in a Tarnished Mirror: The Use and

Abuse of the Great Lakes. SturgeonBay, Wisc.: Golden Glow

Publishing, 1978. 

Larson, Herbert F. BE-WA-BIC Country: The Story of the Menominee

Iron Range in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. New York: Carlton

Press, 1963. 

Leelanau County Association of Commerce. The Captives: Being the

Story of a Family's Vacation in Leelanau County (Michigan), The Land

of Delight. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Leelanau County Association of

Commerce, 1924. 

Littell, Edmund M. 100 Years in Leelanau. Leland, Mich.: The Print
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_biblio.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:45 AM]

Shop, 1965. 

McEnaney, Maria, William H. Tishler, and Arnold R. Alanen. Farming

at the Water's Edge: An Assessment of Agricultural and Cultural

Landscape Resources in the Proposed Port Oneida Rural Historic

District at Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore. Omaha, Nebr.:

Midwest Region, National Park Service, 1995. 

McKee, Russell. "It Was a Very Stylish Age," Mackinac: The

Gathering Place, edited by Russell McKee. Lansing: Michigan

Department of Natural Resources, 1981. 

Maddock, Stephen J. "An Analysis of Local Opposition to the Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore." Ph.D. Dissertation, University of

Michigan, 1971. 

Mahan, John and Ann. Wild Lake Michigan. Stillwater, Minn.:

Voyageur Press, 1991. 

Meinick, Richard Z., Daniel Sponn, and Emma Jane Saxe. Cultural

Landscapes: Rural Historic Districts in the National Park System.

Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, 1984. 

Michigan Land Use Institute. The Homestead Swap: Trading Public

Land for Private Gain in the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore.

n.p.: Northern Michigan Environmental Action Council, 1996. 

Miller, Richard, et al. Environmental and Economic Impact of the

Sleeping Bear Dunes National 

Lakeshore. Chicago: Wilbur Smith & Associates, 1974. 

National Park Service. Our Fourth Shore: Great Lakes Recreation Area

Survey. Washington, D.C.: United States Department of the Interior,

1959. 

National Park Service. A Proposal: Sleeping Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore. Washington, D.C.: United States Department of the

Interior, 1961. 

National Park Service. A Master Plan For Proposed Sleeping Bear

Dunes National Lakeshore. Philadelphia: Northeast Regional Office,

1968. 

National Park Service. Wilderness Recommendations: Sleeping Bear

Dunes National Lakeshore, Michigan. Denver: Denver Service Center,

1974. 

National Park Service. Environmental Assessment of a Docking

Facility, Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore. Denver: Denver

Service Center, 1984. 

Pace, J.R. The Grand Traverse Region, Historical and Descriptive.

Chicago: J.R. Pace & Co., 1884. 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_biblio.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:45 AM]

Pendley, William Perry. It Takes a Hero: The Grassroots Battle

Against Environmental Oppression. Bellvue, Wash.: Free Enterprise

Press, 1995. 

Pierce, Neal R. and John Keefe. The Great Lakes States: People,

Politics, and Power in the Five Great Lakes States. New York: Norton,

1980. 

Quaife, Milo M. Lake Michigan. New York: Bobbs-Meffill, 1944. 

Rader, Robert Dwight, et al. Beautiful Glen Arbor Township: Facts,

Fantasy & Fotos. Leland, Mich.: The Glen Arbor History Group, 1977. 

Rusco, Rita Hadra. North Manitou Island Between Sunrise and Sunset.

n.p.: Bookcrafters, 1995. 

Schmaltz, Norman John. "The Cutover Land Crusade: The Michigan

Forest Conservation Movement, 1899-1931." Ph.D. Dissertation,

University of Michigan, 1972. 

Sellers, Richard West. Preserving Nature in the National Parks: A

History. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1997. 

Stocking, Kathleen. Letters From Leelanau: Essays of People and

Place. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1990. 

United States Department of the Interior. A Study of the Park and

Recreation Problem of the United States. Washington, D.C.: U.S.

Government Printing Office, 1941. 

Wallis, Allan D. Wheel Estate: The Rise and Decline of Mobile

Homes. New York: Oxford University Press, 1991. 

Walsh, Eileen Patricia. "The Last Resort: Northern Minnesota Tourism

and the Integration of Rural and Urban Worlds, 1900-1950." Ph.D.

Dissertation, University of Minnesota, 1994. 

Waterman, W.G. "Ecology of the Glen Lake and Sleeping Bear

Region," Michigan Academy of 

Sciences, Arts and Letters, Vol. 6, 351-375. 

Waterman, W.G. Forests and Dunes from Point Betsie to Sleeping

Bear. Evanston, Ill.: Northwestem University, 1922. 

Weeks, George. Sleeping Bear, Yesterday and Today. Franklin, Mich.:

Attwerger and Mandel Publishing, 1990. 

Williams, Brenda Wheeler, Arnold R. Alanen, and William H. Tishler.

Coming Through With Rye: An Historic Agricultural Landscape Study

of South Manitou Island at Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore,

Michigan. Omaha, Nebr.: National Park Service, 1996. 

Wirth, Conrad L. Parks, Politics, and the People. Norman: University

of Oklahoma Press, 1980.
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_biblio.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:45 AM]

End of Book

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_1b.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:48 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Chapter One

Lake Passage: The Settlement of the Sleeping Bear Area

 The same forces of wind, water, and soil, which created the

Sleeping Bear Dune also shaped the human history of northeastern

Michigan. Of these Lake Michigan was the most persistent and

powerful influence. Ottawa fur trappers, Irish fisherfolk, and

Scandinavian lumberjacks all used the lake to bring their products to

market. Lake Michigan's 1,180 cubic miles of freshwater were a vast

blue-water frontier owned by no one, open to anyone hardy enough to

paddle a canoe or skilled enough to pilot a schooner. The lakeshore

was a threshold, a door open to the markets of Chicago and Detroit, or

via the Erie Canal, to New York and the world, as well as a pathway to

the wealth of the forested interior.

 It was through this threshold that Ottawa and Chippewa hunters

came each fall to conduct their winter hunts in the interior. Missionary

settlements at Northport, Omena, and Eagletown helped to guarantee a

permanent Native American presence in the lakeshore region by

helping the Indians to both adapt to the growing market economy and

protect their land holdings from white encroachment. Sawmill hamlets

were the first wedge of European-American settlement. Glen Arbor,

Glen Haven, and Empire began as small lumber towns, as did the now

vanished ghost towns of Good Harbor, Port Oneida, and Aral The

nearby Manitou Passage, one of the busiest navigation channels on the

Great Lakes, ensured a steady demand for cordwood. Passing steamers

came to rely on the small ports of the Leelanau Peninsula and the

Manitou Islands to keep them supplied with fuel. Lumber schooners

bound for the crowded lumber market of Chicago also made frequent

stops at the piers built out into the lake at each of the saw mill

settlements. While never prime logging country the Sleeping Bear area

was the scene of several significant logging ventures during the period

between the 1880s and 1920s. Most notable was the Empire Lumber

Company, which grew into a formidable forest products operation.

Founded by the T. Wilce Company, a leading manufacturer of

hardwood flooring. Empire was linked to the forested interior by its

own logging branch line, the Empire and Southeastern Railroad. Two

docks served Chicago-bound ships and a channel was dug through the

beach to South Bar Lake to create an inner harbor for the thriving

lumber port. The D.H. Day lumber operation at Glen Haven was of a

more modest scale. Most of Day's lumber was harvested in the vicinity

of Glen Lake and Little Glen Lake. A tramway, and later a true logging

railroad, linked Day's interior operations with the lakeshore. At Leland

and Frankfort commercial fishing became the chief economic activity.

For both the logging towns and the fishing settlements access to the

lake was the principal geographic asset.[3]
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_1b.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:48 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

 The lake also had a determining impact on the agricultural prospects

of northwestern Michigan. Its vast expanse acts as a great solar heat

collector, moderating inland temperatures and extending the growing

season. Unfortunately, the glacial soils of the Sleeping Bear region

were generally not conducive to agriculture. Grain farms, which

thrived elsewhere in Michigan, were hardscrabble operations at best

along the lakeshore. Dairy farming was a more appropriate adaptation

to the landscape. The Port Oneida fanning community is an example of

a series of backwoods farms which evolved from subsistence

homesteads emphasizing potatoes and grain, to dairy farms. Orchards

of apples and later, cherries, were an even more successful adaptation.

Fruit growing made maximum use of the region's weather and soil

conditions. By the 1930s, northwestern Michigan was one of the

leading cherry producing regions in North America.[4]

 The period from 1900 to 1920 was in many ways a golden era for

the communities of the Sleeping Bear area. The agricultural economy

thrived with a growing demand for both grain and diary products. Fruit

growing was successfully established as a new economic opportunity.

The lake fishery remained strong during these years with the annual

haul on Lake Michigan averaging between 1-3 million pounds. Most

important of all the lumber industry continued strong during these

years. Although the cordwood trade with steamers had ended, as the

boats switched to coal fired engines, and the prime pine and cedar

stands had long since been cut, saw mills kept busy in the Sleeping

Bear area harvesting hardwood timber for a variety of special uses.

Logging was critical to the viability of many of the small towns and

forest farms of the area. Wages from logging and saw mill jobs

circulated throughout the area providing businesses with their thin

margin of profit and affording families on marginal land with both a

local market for their produce and a source of supplementary wage

employment. When the supply of hardwood trees began to slow in the

early 1920s the Sleeping Bear area began to feel the chill of a cold

wind that blew over the barren cut-over lands across the north country

of northern Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota.[5]

 At the time of World War I it was clear that Michigan's lumber

industry in the Lower Peninsula was near collapse. Yet, there was little

public concern over this because of confidence that agriculture would

take over as the principal economic activity on the cutover lands. But

the forest soils of the north country were generally not suited to

agriculture, a fact made abundantly clear when the end of the war

brought a steep decline in farm prices. By 1920 41% of all of

Michigan's cutover lands had been transformed into farms, but in the

decade that followed farming collapsed in the north country as the state

lost more than 12,000 farms. Hundreds of thousands of acres of private

property reverted to government control through tax delinquency. To

manage these vast new holdings of devastated lands and to staunch the

flow of population from the north country the state of Michigan

embraced the banner of conservation. In the 1920s and 1930s, northern

Michigan was reconceived, from a raw resource frontier with ninety

percent of the land in private hands, to a carefully managed landscape

based on a sustainable forest products industry and tourism, with the

bulk of the land controlled by public agencies. Across the north woods
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_1b.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:48 AM]

of the lake states 8.8 million acres of state forests and parks were

created between 1920 and 1945. During the 1920s Michigan

established twelve state forests and by 1930 the Conservation

Department was annually planting 16 million trees. The Fife Lake State

Forest rehabilitated lands within the future lakeshore and throughout

the Platte and Betsie river valleys. The federal government played its

role in stabilizing the region through the creation of seven national

forests, totaling 6.9 million acres, and a network offish and wildlife

reserves totaling an additional half million acres.[6]

NEXT> Chapter One Part C: Tourism: A New Way in the Woods

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_1c.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:53 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Chapter One

Tourism: A New Way in the Woods

 The career of D.H. Day illustrates the change in the Sleeping Bear

area. Day was a lumberman whose company harvested hardwood and

cordwood. But unlike so many lumbermen, whose interest was in

short-term profits, Day was committed to the future of the little towns

of Glen Haven and Glen Arbor. During the 1880s he introduced the

tourist industry to the area by operating two passenger and freight

steamers between northern Michigan and Milwaukee and Chicago.

Although the venture was not a success, it did serve to make the

Sleeping Bear area better known in the cities along the southern rim of

Lake Michigan. A medical doctor from Chicago who visited the area in

the wake of World War I argued: "The great charm of Glen Lake is its

natural beauty which to date is largely unspoiled. There is no spot in

Michigan, nor for that matter anywhere in the middle west, that can

compare with it." While lumber was the core of his business activities,

Day was also an early proponent of fruit growing. His farm boasted

5,000 acres of apple and cherry trees as well as a large dairy. When his

logging operation declined, he tried to transition his business and the

community into fruit growing and tourism. To develop the former he

established the Glen Haven Canning Company and for the later the

Sleeping Bear Inn. The inn was a holdover from the nineteenth century,

which was thoroughly remodeled in 1928 to take advantage of the

growing number of automobile tourists. He founded a local tourist

council that later developed into the Western Michigan Resort

Association. Day's biggest bet on tourism was Day Forest Estates, a

subdivision of his private second-growth forest. He promoted the area

as the "Adirondacks of Michigan." At the time the elite of Chicago and

Detroit were building "Great Camp-like" personal estates in northern

Michigan. One brochure for the promotion even speculated that the

area was "deemed fit for the permanent Summer White House" as well

as the site "for homes of the residents of the Gold Coast of Chicago or

Millionaire's' Row of New York." But the expected millionaires did not

come to Sleeping Bear as fast as Day's failing fortunes required. Even

an eighteen-hole golf course could not attract enough buyers to keep

the venture from failing in the Depression. Day's heirs, following his

death in 1929, continued to promote tourism by operating the Inn and a

fleet of "dunesmobiles," cars that transported excursionists over the

sand hills. [7]

 Day's work in the field of conservation had more of a lasting, if

delayed, impact on the development of a recreation industry in the area

than his real estate endeavors. A dedicated and important member of

the Democratic Party in Michigan, Day served as the chairman of

Michigan's first State Park Commission. In 1919, Day set an

outstanding example by donating thirty-two acres on the shore of Lake
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_1c.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:53 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

Michigan. This area was named D.H. Day State Park, and it was the

first commitment of public lands to recreation in the Sleeping Bear

Area. The area included only just over thirty-two acres and 708 feet of

frontage on Lake Michigan. The Commission established a

campground, log cabin pavilion, and access road at the park.

Unfortunately, public conservation developed very slowly after Day's

grant. The single other park project in the Sleeping Bear area was

Benzie State Park, created in 1923, which included 180 acres near the

mouth of the Platte River. These two small state parks were the germ

from which grew Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore. [8]

 Lumbermen like David Day played a role in developing a recreation

industry in northern Michigan. Throughout the region men with

investments in land and buildings tried to adjust to the altered

economic landscape. The bunkhouse of the Glen Arbor Lumber

Company was converted into the Sylvan Inn and opened to tourists.

But more significant than lumbermen's efforts to attract tourists was the

unlikely alliance between hay fever, religion, and the railroads. Before

the development of antihistamines thousands of Midwesterners

suffered through the spring and early summer from wind-blown pollen.

Most suffered through the season, short of breath and with tear-blurred

vision. The middle class, however, had the option of seeking relief in a

hay fever-free environment like northern Michigan. Colonies of hay

fever exiles began to form during the 1880s. Informally they were

known as "Achoo Clubs." Mackinac Island was a favorite retreat,

although in 1882, the Western Hay Fever Association named Petoskey,

Michigan its headquarters. That village was deemed the "most

favorable resort for hay fever sufferers." Another spur to tourism was

religious retreat camps. The biggest of these in northern Michigan was

the Bay View Association, founded by the Methodists in 1875. What

started out as an informal gathering of like-minded Methodists on

vacation in the Little Traverse Bay area, developed into a major

Chautauqua-like summer resort, complete with religious and

educational programs and a resort village of private summer cottages

quaintly styled with Victorian gingerbread detail The Grand Rapids

and Indiana Railroad recognized a good thing and offered financial

assistance to develop Bay View. Railroad access was critical in

determining which locations in northern Michigan succeeded in

attracting tourists. As lumber declined in the region, transportation

companies came to rely on tourism more and more to sustain their

operations. [9]

 Early recreational developments in the Sleeping Bear area reflect

these same trends. At the mouth of the Crystal River the site of John

LaRue's 1847 trading post was utilized by William Beals, a Missouri

school teacher who fell in love with the area, as the spot for Camp

Leelanau, a summer boy's camp. Camp Leelanau offered boys a rustic

experience with army-style dormitory tents set-up right on the beach

and the only real structure the Beals' frame summer house, the

Homestead. Founded in 1921, Camp Leelanau had two purposes:

education and recreation. In later years the educational mission

developed into the Leelanau School, a private college preparatory

school, while the recreational function matured into the prosperous

Homestead Resort. Spurred by a major investment by the Toledo, Ann
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_1c.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:53 AM]

Arbor, and Northern Michigan Railroad, Frankfort also bid to develop

as a recreational center. In the 1880s, the railroad chose the town as the

eastern terminus of its Lake Michigan car ferry to Kewanee,

Wisconsin. By 1928, there were six boats on regular runs across the

lake. An 1898 traveler's guide praised Frankfort's "quiet beauty" and

noted "it is always left with a little sigh of regret." In 1901, to induce

visitors to make Frankfort a destination the Ann Arbor Railroad built a

major resort hotel in the town. The Royal Frontenac was an imposing

500-foot long wood frame hotel in the tradition of the Grand Hotel on

Mackinac Island or the railroad lodges in the American West. Elegant

and popular, the Royal Frontenac attracted tourists from across the

Midwest. Frankfort's bid, however, to become a resort city was shortcircuited when the Frontenac burned to the ground in 1912. Railroad

access, however, did succeed in making the Crystal Lake area a

popular place for summer homes. Cottagers from Ohio, Indiana, and

other points south took advantage of "resort special" trains replete with

Pullman cars. They would disembark in Frankfort and board a little

shuttle train that took people along the shores of Crystal Lake to

Beulah. [10]

 By the turn of the century a pattern began to emerge in Michigan's

developing recreation industry. Close to the major urban centers

weekend or day trip destinations developed. For Detroit these were

located along Lake St.Clair and the accessible shore of Lake Huron.

Chicagoans via steamers and trains had colonized southeastern

Michigan with a string of resort towns between the Indiana Dunes and

Saugatuck. There were elite resort communities and those with a more

egalitarian atmosphere. There were communities which specifically

catered to Methodists or to Jews, who were often excluded at elite

resorts. Towns like Grand Haven and Benton Harbor promoted their

mineral springs while Harbor Springs and Petoskey emphasized their

pollen-free cool lake breezes. Those interested in boating and fishing,

with all the comforts of home, might favor the Les Cheneaux Islands

while those looking to rough it might settle for a tent or shanty in the

Upper Peninsula. Mackinac Island, of course, was the premier resort

destination in the Midwest, followed closely by the Little Traverse Bay

communities of Petoskey, Harbor Springs, and Charlevoix. Here

elegant fall-service hotels catered to long-standing, long-staying, and

discriminating customers. On Grand Traverse Bay a more complex

picture presented itself. More than most of the towns in northwestern

Michigan, Traverse City had developed an industrial character, yet

northward along the bay were a string of resorts which clearly fancied

themselves as a slightly more rustic extension of genteel Charlevoix.

Leelanau County was influenced by these developments. While

Frankfort and Benzie County failed to make the most of thenopportunity to utilize their railroad connections to attract an elite, outof-state, tourist clientele when the Frontenac Hotel burned down,

Leelanau County was picking up the spill-over from its successful

resort neighbors to the north.

 As late as 1884 Leelanau County was dismissed with the

observation: "There is not a single village of any commercial

importance, and not a railroad in the county." But by 1900 tourism had

begun to shape the county's growth. Steam launches were put to work
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_1c.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:53 AM]

on Lake Leelanau which allowed vacationers traveling north by rail

from Traverse City to comfortably reach the area. Large hotels were

built in Leland in 1901 and 1908, while summer homes were built

along Lake Leelanau's extensive shores. In 1903, a branch line was

built from Traverse City to Northport and the tourist industry thrived.

As elsewhere in Michigan Leelanau County developed a distinct

pattern of recreation.

 Resorts did best along the shore of Grand Traverse Bay, particularly

at Suttons Bay and Northport, while summer homes dominated the

shore of Lake Leelanau. Transportation connections determined who

came to build those summer homes. People from Illinois, especially the

Chicago area, and Indiana, mostly Fort Wayne and Muncie, dominated

summer home ownership in the Leland area. The Grand Rapids and

Indiana Railroad gave the Hoosiers direct access to Traverse City and

Northport. The railroad also had a summer policy of attaching Pullman

cars originating in Chicago to the trains as they went through Grand

Rapids. Chicagoans also had the opportunity of availing themselves of

the regular steamer routes to the Sleeping Bear area. A review of a

resort directory for the Leland area in 1937 indicates that about ten

percent of summer cottage owners were local residents of Leelanau or

Grand Traverse counties while more than half of the summer residents

were from Indiana and Illinois. These "summer neighbors," as they

styled themselves were an economically and socially distinguished

group: numerous industrialists (including F.E. Ball of Muncie), the

expected large number of lawyers and physicians, as well as a

surprising number of scientists and academicians. The yacht and

country clubs were the gathering place for evening or afternoon

socializing in a setting that was both congenial and controlled. [11]

 The little towns of Glen Haven and Glen Arbor, at the extreme

southwestern comer of Leelanau County, were on the fringe of the

county's developing tourist industry. Glen Haven could boast excellent

steamer connections to Chicago and that made it the point-of-entry for

many of the first vacationers in the area. The first resorts were rough

affairs run by local cherry growers or city folks charmed by the gentle

pace of life into relocating in the Glen Lake area for the season. The

Tonawathya Resort was purchased in 1906 by a burned-out Chicago

businessman and run by his wife for several decades. The resort

enjoyed a faithful clientele, largely from the Windy City. Meals were

served family-style and featured locally grown fresh produce. Boating

was a prominent feature of the recreation scene at Tonawathya. Over

time, each of the resorts along the lake developed its own character,

reflecting the interests and personality of its owner. George Grady's

Sylvan Inn was noted for its good food, Dunn's Resort catered to guests

from Detroit, the Glen Eden Hotel, located near Fishers Point was run

by a homeopathic doctor and functioned as something of a health

resort. The resorts served to introduce to the region many urbanites

who eventually purchased lakeside summer homes of their own. Not

infrequently they purchased lots near the resorts at which they stayed

during their first few summers in the Glen Lake area. Most visitors

arrived by lake steamer. During the period between 1910 and 1931

crowds would gather at the Glen Haven docks on Saturdays and

Sundays. Motorcoaches awaited newly arriving resort guests while
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_1c.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:53 AM]

many summer home residents rode to the docks to meet husbands or

fathers arriving from the city. "They leave Chicago Friday night,"

explained a tourist publication, "and get here the next morning; first

stop. They're with their families until Sunday night when the boat takes

'em back again, ready for the job. Great for 'em!" [12]

 But such gloss could not obscure the fact that the lack of good rail

connections, which were the backbone of most successful vacation

spots, retarded the growth of a recreation industry in the Sleeping Bear

area. A Chicagoan who purchased 170 acres of wooded land on the

shore of Glen Lake in 1919 credited himself with having "discovered"

the area: "I say I 'discovered' it," he wrote a friend, "because it was

readily accessible only by boat from Chicago, the main roads being

little more than sand trails." David Day understood the importance of

improving road access to the Glen Lake area. As president of the

Western Michigan Development Bureau he was one of the early

leaders of the "good roads movement" in Michigan. In 1910, Day

joined the Western Michigan Pike Association, and for a decade he

served as county road commissioner. It was with the rise of automobile

travel that the Glen Lake area of the lakeshore began to really

experience the tourist boom.13

 Just as the fur trade had transformed land use and population

distribution in seventeenth century Michigan and the logging industry

had radically altered the state's landscape during the nineteenth century,

tourism and conservation reordered land ownership patterns and public

attitudes toward the north country during the twentieth century. The

tourist industry had begun in Michigan via steamers and railroads but

the industry drove to prominence in the state on the wheels of the

automobile. America in 1920 was for the first time in its history a

largely urban nation. The automobile, which did so much to expand

Michigan's industrial cities, was also responsible for providing average

working people with a new flexible means of accessing the

countryside. Michigan became a case study in the linkage between

transportation and recreation. It is no accident that state park

development began in the 1920s, a decade when automobile ownership

became a part of the American Dream. In 1920, there were 8 million

cars on American roads. Of those, an estimated 5 million were used for

camping trips to the countryside. Unfortunately, there were literally no

facilities available for these visitors. Not only were there no camp

grounds, there were no roadside public restrooms. The first public

roadside rest area was established in Iron County, Michigan in 1919.

Before that time car campers put up tents where they pleased on private

land, utilized farmers' out houses, and disposed of their trash as they

saw fit. County and state parks were a way to preserve public access to

attractive camping and picnicking grounds but they also were a needed

step to channel the unregulated flow of campers away from private

property. State action in promotion of tourism was essential on two

fronts: the acquisition and management of recreation lands and in the

establishment and maintenance of surfaced roads to expand urbanites'

range of access to the countryside. [14]

 The opening of M-22 in Leelanau County was one of the most

important developments in the spread of tourism in the Sleeping Bear
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_1c.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:53 AM]

area. Quick to cash in on this more mobile tourist trade, the Leelanau

County Association of Commerce produced a glossy color promotional

booklet in 1924: The Captives: Being the Story of a Family's Vacation

in Leelanau County (Michigan), The Land of Delight. The narrative

told of a fictions all-American family's discovery of Leelanau County's

many attractions and reveals the way tourist promoters of that era

wished to present the area. The father, a iron-bottomed, hard-driver, is

determined to push down the highway to Mackinac, but wife and

children persuade him to turn off the main road and take M-22's

"Seventy-five miles of Lake all the Way." With stops at Empire, Glen

Lake, and Glen Haven the father is gradually seduced by the gracious

people, charming accommodations, and landscape so striking, that

when he looks down from the vista at Miller Hill "there were no

exclamations, no cries of delight. It was too tremendously beautiful for

that." The family enjoyed meals such as "they had not tasted in

months" swam at beaches so level and pure that there was "no chance

of accident or disease," caught creels of trout, played golf, camped, and

canoed. The moral of the tale was summed up by a kindly local who,

after recounting the history of the area, says: "Folks 've been comin'

ever since to settle and now city folks 've found out that we've got

better roads, that we're off the beaten trail and they've come to find

contentment... like you have, friend." [15]

 Despite the egalitarian tone of such an appeal, there is no doubt that

during the 1920s and 1930s the Glen Lake area aspired to the elevated

social standing of Petoskey and Mackinac. Day Forest Estates billed

itself as "America's Premier Exclusive Summer Community" and

agents for the subdivision pitched lots to some of the most wealthy and

influential men in the nation. The inclusion of an air-strip and golf

course in the initial plans for the project reflected this orientation as did

the 1929 brochure which promised readers: "Estates ideally restricted."

The Glen Lake Country Club was more blunt. It specified "Gentiles

Only" on its 1931 program. The Crystal Downs golf course had a large

rock outside its entrance emblazoned with the same anti-Semitic

sentiment. At the time, such restrictions were common at the watering

holes of the well-to-do all across America. Such policies reflect

summer residents desire to control the social interactions. Not

infrequently lake lots would be sold only to friends, cousins, or

acquaintances from the city. Strangers lacking such personal

connections often found it hard to purchase property on Glen Lake or

Lake Leelanau. [16]

 The automobile created two new types of outdoor recreation in

America that would shape the development of the tourist industry in

twentieth century Michigan. The middle class summer cottage owner

were the first of these, while the institution of the "vacation" and the

"weekend" were the second. The automobile democratized access to

the countryside. Rural retreats were long a symbol of the status of the

wealthy. Beginning in the 1920s, a cabin on a lakeside lot gradually

became both desirable and attainable for a broader range of the

population. Collective bargaining agreements won by organized labor

in the automotive and steel industries during the 1930s gave an even

large circle of Midwesterners both the time and the money to acquire

their own piece of the north woods. The ritual of going "up north"
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_1c.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:53 AM]

begun by the working class in the 1920s as a male-only recreation

became, with the acquisition of a family car and paid vacation, an

annual family ritual A ring of development pressure radiated outward

from the major cities of Michigan, planting summer cottages with

increasing density along the shores of all available lakes. The Sleeping

Bear area, due to its location was not as severely affected by this trend

as popular downstate resort lakes such as Paw Paw, Kent, Gull, and, of

course. Lake St. Clair. Nonetheless, during the 1930s and 1940s the

shores of Crystal, Platte, and Glen lakes all saw an expansion of

summer cottages.

 The other type of outdoor recreation created by the automobile was,

of course, the car camper. This group grew dramatically from its

beginnings in the 1920s. By the eve of World War II car campers had

clearly exceeded the capacity of public facilities in southeastern

Michigan and even remote parks in northwestern Michigan began to

overflow with campers on holiday weekends. The Michigan

Department of Conservation, the largest single landowner in northern

Michigan, became the vehicle through which the ordinary citizens

attempted to influence the direction of Michigan's recreational boom.

This multiple-use agency was called upon to balance the needs of

outdoor recreation with timber production, the growing demand for

summer homes with the obvious need for more state parks, and calls

for game stocking with the need for habitat protection. A National Park

Service study of outdoor recreation planning in Michigan, done as part

of the 1941 A Study of the Park and Recreation Problem of the United

States predicted that the future of the tourist industry in the northern

part of the state "will depend upon proper land use, the proper

distribution of public areas and private holdings, and enough control

over private developments to protect community interests." Yet, the

dependence of the recreation industry in its early years on government

expenditures was problematical because there were few established

revenue streams to fund the infrastructural investment needed. Public

officials were forced to choose between competing goals and often,

competing communities. [17]

NEXT> Chapter One Part D: A Sleeping Bear State Park

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_1d.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:57 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Chapter One

A Sleeping Bear State Park

 In 1941, residents of Benzie County were interested in protecting

their own recreational opportunities from the increasing privatization of

lake shore lands as well as attracting a larger share of the automobile

camper trade. They prevailed upon the Department of Conservation to

survey their area for a potential new state park. There was a very

popular, but very small, 180-acre state facility, Benzie State Park, near

the mouth of the Platte River. The park had been created in 1923

through donations and exchanges between the State and J.W. Dye.

Frankfort lobbied for that park to be expanded or for a second park to

be created in the dune country between Point Betsie and the west end

of Crystal Lake. At the same time Leelanau County, just to the north,

also coveted a state park. Three members of that county's board pitched

their area to the director of the agency. Diplomatically he agreed to

extend the Conservation Department's survey of potential parklands to

the entire Lake Michigan shoreline between Frankfort and Leland. [18]

 John Rogers, the Assistant Chief of the Division of Parks and

Recreation, headed the survey and evaluation of the region. He was

dismayed by the crowded and inadequate size of Benzie State Park, but

was skeptical of the possibility of expanding the park to ease

congestion there. Rogers' evaluation was strongly influenced by his

interpretation of the mission of state parks as scenes of active

recreation. The attractiveness and safety of the beaches, the suitability

of back areas for campgrounds, the type of activities which could be

promoted to visitors, were all critical considerations that inclined him

to discount the Benzie County sites. Rather it was the Glen Lake area

which he felt offered the "greatest attraction."

 The first recommendation I would make is that if the state was to

have only one state park in the Leelanau Peninsula (Benzie and

Leelanau Counties) that it be located in the vicinity of Glen Lake and

the Sleeping Bear Dunes...this possible area...in the writers opinion, is

the outstanding area in the lower peninsula. We have here in Michigan

our Tahquamenon Falls, our Huron and Porcupine Mountains, our

Copper Country, etc. which we proclaim to the vacationer that he

should see because of their grandeur. In the writer's opinion this

possible park area at Glen Lake is the equal of any of those places and

is entirely different. Michigan would have a park that very few states in

the nation could boast an equal.

 The area Rogers recommended for park status was composed of the

Sleeping Bear Dunes, the D.H. Day Forest Estates, and a small portion

(1,000 feet) of the north shore of Glen Lake, a total of 5,800 acres.

Rogers recognized that the Sleeping Bear Dunes had the grand scale
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_1d.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:57 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

that could attract visitors from around the Midwest, while Glen Lake

offered protected water recreation, and the Day Forest Estates provided

the vistas to appreciate each. The uniting of the dunes, backlands, and

interior lakes into a single park plan made objective sense to a veteran

recreation planner like Rogers, yet it laid the seed for the controversy in

which the National Park Service was embroiled almost a generation

later. [19]

 Rogers' report was received enthusiastically in Lansing.

Unfortunately, the Department of Conservation would face years of

frustration before his recommendations could be acted upon. World

War II was the first roadblock. As most public resources were focused

on winning the war no action was taken on state park expansion during

the conflict. Five years later, in May of 1946, Rogers revisited the area

and found that save for some commercial logging within the Day

forest, the proposed park area was little changed. In short order the

Conservation Commission voted to approve the Sleeping Bear Park

Project. This action set the boundaries for the future state park but did

not provide the land acquisition money to make the project a reality.

The Conservation Department opened negotiations with the Grand

Rapids Trust Company, which took over supervision of the failed Day

Forest Estates project, and negotiated an option to purchase a large

portion of the trust lands for $100,000. There the project stalled. The

independent Conservation Commission refused to approve further land

acquisitions until the legislature agreed to approve larger regular

appropriations for site development and maintenance at the existing

state parks. The Sleeping Bear—Glen Lake park plan was caught in the

middle and the option lapsed. [20]

 The close-knit Glen Lake community supported the state park

proposal, which only included 1,000 feet of frontage on Glen Lake.

They took deep pride in the scenic lake and for years they boasted that

National Geographic Magazine had declared it was "among the five

most beautiful lakes in the world." When a genuine National

Geographic representative visited the area in 1934 he disputed the

validity of the statement, but did agree "I have never seen a lake more

beautiful." Christopher G. Parnall, a shoreline property owner from

Ann Arbor, had boosted state park status for a portion of the lake as

early as 1924. When the state let its option lapse Parnall attempted to

rally Glen Lake property owners to purchase the land themselves.

Parnall was deeply concerned that an outside private owner intent on

aggressive development might purchase the Day Estates. On May

8,1949 about fifty interested people gathered in Glen Arbor and

pledged subscriptions to a fund for the purchase of the Day Forest

Estate. An escrow account was established. For every $1,000

subscribed toward the purchase of the whole property each contributor

would be entitled to one hundred feet of frontage on Glen Lake or Lake

Michigan and a pro rata share of the remaining back lands. Parnall's

effort, however, fell short. Although more than $70,000 was initially

pledged; only $50,000 was actually placed in the escrow account. An

attempt to pool the funds of the Glen Lake owners and the Department

of Conservation also failed and the plan had to be abandoned. The

effort was another manifestation of the Glen Lake owners desire to

control conditions around their beloved lake and indication of the
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_1d.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:57 AM]

financial resources at then-disposal. [21]

 Lacking acquisition funds the Department of Conservation was

forced into a patient, catch-as-catch-can development approach.

Existing state lands in the area, which included most of the Sleeping

Bear Dunes, were consolidated under state park administration and

over the years small additions to the park project were made by gift

and purchase using fish and game funds or modest appropriations.

Nonetheless, considerable lands within the boundary of the park

remained in private hands. By 1963, the state owned only 2,044 acres

of the proposed 5,800-acre park. Realization of the dream of a Sleeping

Bear Dunes—Glen Lake park had to wait until the creation of the

national lakeshore.

 The failure of the Conservation Department to realize its vision for

a Sleeping Bear state park was not unique. The famed Pictured Rocks

region of the Upper Peninsula was similarly created as a state park

project in 1953, only to falter for lack of acquisition and development

funds. The Grand Sable Dunes on Lake Superior bad been declared a

state park in 1931, but a generation latter the park consisted of little

more than an inaccessible and unmanaged collection of tax delinquent

lands. The fact was that Michigan's state parks were in a state of crisis

in the wake of a boom in outdoor recreation following the end of

World War II. By 1948 attendance at Michigan state parks was

approximately twice that of the population of the entire state. With that

heavy use came the demand for modem conveniences such as flush

toilets and paved roads. But flat budgets meant that the agency was

barely able to maintain Civilian Conservation Corps and Works

Progress Administration era improvements, which were beginning to

suffer deterioration, let alone sponsor extensive new development. In

1953, when the existing system was swamped with more than 14

million visitors, the legislature appropriated little more than ten cents

per visitor to pay not only for maintenance but to fund new facilities as

well. The state tried to solve the revenue crisis in recreation by

instituting an annual two dollar state park automobile admission

sticker. The millions brought in from this source, however, proved only

a temporary solution as ever-increasing usage increased the demand for

expensive new developments. The funding crisis was part of a general

cash shortfall that effected the entire state government and resulted in a

$100 million dollar budget deficit by 1959. Democratic Governor G.

Mennen "Soapy" Williams rather unrealistically proposed a corporate

profits tax as a way to reinvigorate state agencies. The Michigan

Republican party, not to mention the giant automotive manufacturers in

the state, did not take kindly to this solution, and countered with a

proposal to increase the sales tax. The dispute that followed paralyzed

Michigan and left it in such financial shambles that people bitterly

joked that the favorite drink in the state capital of Lansing was

"Michigan on the rocks."

 During the late 1950s the Department of Conservation consolidated

their holdings in the Sleeping Bear region into a unit named D.H. Day

State Park but which included that portion of the Sleeping Bear-Glen

Lake park which had been acquired as well as Benzie State Park. The

consolidation was in many ways an admission of failure. In 1954,
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_1d.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:57 AM]

Charles F. Boehler a planning consultant to the Conservation

Department, had recommended that the state double the size of Benzie

State Park to include both banks of the Platte River, a portion of the

Platte Plains, and the Empire Dunes. The Michigan Natural Areas

Council, a group of scientists and conservationists who represented the

Nature Conservancy in Michigan, enthusiastically seconded this plan.

But the initiative at Benzie, like the development of the Sleeping Bear

Park, was stymied by the state's fiscal crisis. The park superintendent at

D.H. Day State Park had to sit frustrated on the sidelines while the land

at the mouth of the Platte and along the shore of Glen Lake was

subdivided and sold.[24]

 A major loss to the state park project was the purchase of the Day

Forest Estate by Pierce Stocking, a Cadillac, Michigan, lumberman. On

the surface Stocking was just the type of purchaser both the state and

the Glen Lake summer homeowners had tried prevent from taking

possession of the scenic tract. He was a small-scale independent

lumberman, a by-the-seat-of-his-pants entrepreneur, leveraged to the

hilt and in need of a quick turnaround on his investment. The sate

guaranteed that Michigan's first private forest reservation and the land

once set aside as the playground for millionaires would be immediately

brought under the bite of the chainsaw. Stocking had made his first

purchases in the Sleeping Bear area in the late 1940s. He also made

extensive purchases on South Manitou Island. The fogging operation

there nearly bankrupted him due to high transportation costs and the

challenge of bringing logs across the Manitou Passage. Whatever

Stocking made in his ventures he returned to extending his operations,

either through equipment purchases or the acquisition of new real

estate in the area. Like many a previous sojoumer to the Sleeping Bear,

Stocking fell in love with the area. Against his wife's objections he

built his home on the Day tract, high on a hill overlooking duned

lakeshore. At his own expense he built and maintained a nearby scenic

overlook and picnic area to share the dramatic vistas with others.

Stockings' attempts to develop other tourist facilities on his portion of

the dunes brought him into conflict with the Department of

Conservation. [25]

 The Sleeping Bear—Glen Lake park area was a patchwork of

property lines with the State of Michigan, Pierce Stocking, and Louis

Warnes being the largest owners. Warnes was the son-in-law of David

Day and with his wife Marion, Day's youngest daughter, he inherited

much of the Glen Haven property of the old lumberman. For years they

operated the Day store in Glen Haven, until by chance, they discovered

a way to profit from their proximity to the dunes. In 1934 and 1935 the

Frankfort Glider Club used the high perched dunes at Sleeping Bear to

launch their sail planes. To get the cumbersome gliders to the top of

the dune one club member equipped his Ford with oversized balloon

tires. The car worked so well on the sand slopes that Louis Warnes,

who cooperated with the club, decided to fit-out his own vehicle the

same way and offer tours of the dune country. For the next forty-three

years motorized dune tours were a principal way visitors to Sleeping

Bear saw the sites. Warnes was a supporter of the state park and he

made several significant land sales to the Department of Conservation.

The dunesmobile rides continued under a state concession license.
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_1d.htm[7/11/2012 10:13:57 AM]

Business was so good in 1956 that Warnes, backed by a new ten-year

concession agreement, purchased ten brand-new Oldsmobile 88's. A

second concession, a lunch counter at the foot of the dune climb area,

was also granted to Warnes. Competitors, however, were beginning to

encroach on his trade. Francis Harrigan, a Saginaw businessman,

opened his own dune ride using a modified pick-up truck and

following a route partially across state parklands. Warnes naturally

appealed to the Department of Conservation to stop Harrigan's

operation. More of a challenge was Pierce Stocking's request to use a

portion of state land to operate his own dune ride and his critique that

Warnes ride was both harmful to the environment and too expensive

for the average citizen too enjoy. Out of what appears to have been a

mixture of genuine concern and personal cussedness, Stocking tried to

get the state to either allow his plans to go forward or to agree to limit

further tourist development within the state park. Stocking's leverage

for such a request was that the patchwork of ownership in the area was

such that while he needed state permission to reach some of his lands,

the state operated areas like the dune climb which gave visitors access

to dune lands owned by Stocking. To complicate things further there

were tracts within the park project area in which the Department of

Conservation and Stocking shared an ownership interest. Throughout

the 1950s the state and Pierce Stocking each continued to make land

purchases in the Glen Lake area, their contentious relationship a

constant reminder of Michigan's botched opportunity to develop a

Sleeping Bear park. [26]

NEXT> Chapter One Part E: The Great Lakes Shoreline Survey

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_1e.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:02 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Chapter One

The Great Lakes Shoreline Survey

 The problems experienced by Michigan in attempting to meet the

expanding public demand for recreational lands were by no means

unique. The number of Americans engaged in camping, fishing, hiking,

and boating grew every year during the 1950s. Annually the

Department of Conservation brought new recreational lands under state

management—state park acreage actually doubled between 1948 and

1972, but the rate of growth was too slow to stay ahead of the demand

curve. "Never before in the history of recreation and wildlife

conservation," observed a federal report, "have the Great Lakes been

faced with the magnitude of recreational uses that has roared into the

parks, game areas, fishing sites." Those diverse uses created a

competition among users for the vital commodity demanded by all

outdoor enthusiasts—water recreation sites. In 1945, Michigan

Conservation Magazine predicted the boom:

 "When the war's over I'll trade this foxhole for a boat livery on

some lake back home"—"We're saving our bonds for a cottage on a

lake."—When there're tires and gas again we're going to find a little

home on a lake and enjoy life."—Today's dreams, tomorrows realities."

 The silence following the final burst of gunfire in this terrible

conflict will be counterbalanced by a swelling sound a hemisphere

away as once again the hum of wild-ward bound traffic resumes over

now deserted highways. War weary soldiers and work-weary stayers

will respond alike to the call of nature's tranquility, and Michigan's

outdoor playground will be visited by increasing thousands—some to

return and stay.

 Summer homes, already common in Michigan before World War II,

spread at an even more rapid rate in the 1950s. On popular southern

Michigan lakes such as Paw Paw Lake cottages were planted on

increasingly smaller lots, giving portions of the lakeshore an urban-like

appearance of density. Although there are 8,000 named lakes in

Michigan, those lakes accessible to Chicago, Toledo, and the cities of

southern Michigan bore the brunt of this deluge. Savvy buyers looked

farther north where less money bought more frontage. A Michigan

Conservation Magazine writer encouraged this strategy: "great

improvements in travel facilities is probable in the near postwar future

and mileage distances may represent shorter and shorter travel time.

Scores of beautiful lakes in the state have not been developed simply

because of their remoteness." The Department of Conservation's

aborted plans to expand Benzie and D.H. Day state parks were part of

a conscious effort to get ahead of the rising tide of recreational use and

secure public access to the most favorable locations. [27]
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_1e.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:02 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

 Michigan actually did a better job than many other state's both

anticipating and adjusting to the postwar recreation boom, but in the

end the national trend required a national response. While little was

done to expand the size of federal recreational holdings during the

1950s, the administration of Dwight D. Eisenhower did lay the

foundation for more aggressive action later through its strong support

for upgrading current facilities and planning for future growth. Mission

66, a ten-year program begun in 1956 to improve visitor facilities at all

national parks, was an example of the former. The establishment of the

National Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission in 1958

made expanding recreational opportunities a high priority for the

Department of Agriculture, the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife,

even the Army Corps of Engineers. A new federal agency, the Bureau

of Outdoor Recreation, was eventually created to spearhead the

development of new recreation areas. But before that agency was in

place the National Park Service accomplished the most important

recreational planning initiative of the postwar period, the national

shoreline survey. [28]

 During the New Deal era, the National Park Service, supported by

relief funds and inspired by the Franklin D. Roosevelt administration's

fascination with regional planning, undertook a study of seashore

conservation. Survey teams were sent along the Atlantic, Pacific, and

Gulf coasts. Out of this fieldwork came the recommendation that

fifteen select coastal areas be added to the national park system. One of

these sites. Cape Hatteras National Seashore, was actually pushed

through Congress and became a reality. The outbreak of World War II

brought war to America's shores and the momentum that had been built

to create additional seaside units was lost. Conrad Wirth, the National

Park Service director in 1956, had worked on the 1930s shoreline

survey and felt it was "one of the most interesting and worthwhile of

the New Deal conservation programs." Even before "Mission 66" was

adopted Wirth made sure that shoreline conservation was an agency

priority. In 1954, Wirth ordered the a second set of shoreline surveys,

as the New Deal era data was nearly twenty years old. The park service

director had an "angel" who shared his commitment to the nation's

seashores, Paul Mellon. Along with his sister, Alisa Bruce, Paul

Mellon was the heir to the Mellon bank fortune. Over the years the

Mellon heirs used their wealth and influence to support conservation

programs. Over time they would fund the establishment of the White

House Rose Garden, the landscaping of Lafayette Park, and the

purchase of Cumberland Island, Georgia. Their most important

contribution to the American landscape, however, was the decision to

recommend that their Old Dominion Foundation and Avalon

Foundation fund the second shoreline survey. [29]

 The survey, which began with the Atlantic Coast, was directed by a

twenty-year veteran of the National Park Service, Allen T. Edmunds.

The lanky former Navy Lieutenant Commander was a native of Battle

Creek, Michigan, and a graduate of Michigan State University. His

specialty within the park service was planning and he had considerable

experience working with state and local conservation organizations.

Managing the survey proved to be the greatest challenge of his career.
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_1e.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:02 AM]

Donor relations was a unique (for a government employee) and

important part of the job. Paul Mellon had a strong personal interest in

the Atlantic and Gulf coasts. He met frequently with Edmunds and

occasionally accompanied him or other team members into the field.

The successful completion of the survey of the east and southern shores

of the nation won Mellon's confidence in the proposal to fund the

survey of the Pacific and Great Lakes— areas with which he had less

personal interest. In October 1956, the Mellon foundations awarded an

additional $120,000 to the National Park Service. The Pacific coast

study was budgeted at $60,000 and scheduled for one year, while the

Great Lakes study, which was the first undertaking of its kind in the

region, was budgeted at $80,000 and scheduled for two years. As

Edmunds began the Great Lakes survey Director Wirth reminded him

that it had taken fifteen years to get a single new national park out of

the 1934-35 shoreline survey. If nothing came of the Great Lakes

effort, "don't be discouraged." [30]

 The Great Lakes survey began in June of 1957 with an aerial

reconnaissance of the entire American shore of the lakes. A United

States Coast Guard UF-1G Albatross took Edmunds and his survey

team from the St. Lawrence River, along the shores of the lakes. The

flight took the better part of five days and twenty-eight hours of time

in the air. On June 17th the team was over northwestern Michigan.

Even at 600 feet and at 150 miles-per-hour they were struck by the

"fine possibilities" offered by the region's undeveloped shore of

beaches, dunes, and bluffs and it was immediately marked for closer

on-the-ground evaluation. The flight made clear that the bulk of the

areas of potential national significance were to be found on Lakes

Superior and Michigan. Flying along the shore of Lake Erie Edmunds

thought of a statement recently made by Henry T. Heald, President of

Ford Motor Company. In twenty years he predicted the shores of the

Great Lakes would be "unrelieved urban areas," from Milwaukee to

Buffalo. The flight was followed by a series of informational meetings

with state conservation officials in the states along the Great Lakes.

Ownership maps were obtained and the park service team was briefed

on the development plans and pressures at work in each state. Field

studies began immediately afterward and in the 1957 season were

limited to the Upper Great Lakes (Superior, Michigan, and Huron).

Careful coordination by Allen Edmunds resulted in outstanding interagency cooperation. The Coast Guard provided boats and helicopters,

the Wisconsin and Michigan Conservation departments gave the field

team access to their planes. The Upper Peninsula of Michigan

presented the greatest challenge to the survey. Large portions of its

shore were inaccessible by land, yet its wild nature—ninety percent

undeveloped—made much of the shore a prime candidate for close

inspection. In the end the Upper Peninsula yielded what the survey

team regarded as the two most outstanding natural areas on the Great

Lakes—the Pictured Rocks area and the Huron Mountains. [31]

 The field team during 1957 was composed strictly of planners. E.

Winton Perkins, reassigned at the last minute from the Lower Colorado

River Survey, was the chief-of-the-party. Edmund B. Rogers, Assistant

to the Rocky Mountain Regional director, was loaned to the survey for

a portion of the summer while Howard Chapman, a recreation
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_1e.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:02 AM]

specialist, was a member of the peripatetic team from the beginning to

the end of the project. "Since the first of June," Perkins wrote, 'I've

traveled 25,000 miles by plane, train, car, bus and boat which left very

little time for lounging on those Great Lakes beaches." Although the

team worked hard, recreation was their principle interest. Prime

undeveloped country in their view was land which, in addition to

having outstanding scenic values, could be utilized for a variety of

outdoor recreation pursuits. Their instructions, however, cautioned

them to consider recreation "in its broad sense" and to look for areas of

"scenic, scientific and historical interest as well as those chiefly

valuable for active recreation." This broader emphasis to include

historic and scientific values differentiated the Great Lakes survey

from the narrower Atlantic and Gulf surveys. To meet this goal the

survey added a historian, James Sullivan, and a biologist, Donald

Humphrey, during the second season to aid in evaluation of the areas

of prime interest. Early on the survey attempted to create a point

classification to aid in comparative evaluation, but the effort was

abandoned as too arbitrary. In the end what proved the most reliable

index for comparing values was the fact that the survey covered every

foot of Great Lakes shoreline on the United States side of the lake.

This allowed them, in Edmunds's words, to "think in terms of genuine

superlatives." The ultimate goal of the effort was to select areas "that

should be properly included in a well-rounded and adequate National

Park System." [32]

 The second field season of the survey began with another set of

comprehensive overflights, this time by helicopter. The ground team

then worked their way west from the St. Lawrence. Their findings

along the Erie and Ontario shores confirmed the aerial observations that

the prime park prospects were in Michigan and that is where the bulk

of the 1958 field season was spent, closely examining those areas that

had been identified as having a high potential. The Sleeping Bear area

was intensively explored in July. The dunes at Empire and Sleeping

Bear drew close inspection as did the Platte River plains and Point

Betsie. South Manitou Island received the most enthusiastic comments:

"There is something about South Manitou Island that is very charming:

in its gently sloping terrain, its mixed forests, the old settlement, the

lighthouse, combined with the gull colony on the tip, giving it an other

worldly quality." In view of the firestorm of grief it would later cause

the park service. Glen Lake was treated in the field-notes very matterof-factly. There was no hyperbole about it being one of the most

beautiful lakes in the world, only the observation that although there

was "considerable resort development all along its shore" the

combination of the inland lakes and the dunes made for "an extremely

well-balanced park area." The reconnaissance was made by the entire

survey team, some of the time escorted by the staff of the Michigan

Department of Conservation. This commitment of time and staff

indicates the seriousness of the survey's interest in the area but also

that, as one of the survey members confided to a supporter, "they had

been a little hesitant about Sleeping Bear." [33]

 The survey teams tried to be thorough as well as discreet. Followup visits to promising sites always included a careful review of the

land ownership pattern, including ascertaining how much land was in
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_1e.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:02 AM]

public hands, the scale of subdivisions or resort developments, and the

per-foot cost of waterfront and backlands real estate. The results of

such economic analysis were balanced with recreational and natural

values in assessing the potential of an area. Discretion was important in

order to get accurate information and to avoid precipitating a

speculative wave in a high potential area. Genevieve E. Gillette,

President of the Michigan Parks Association, later a strong supporter of

the survey's recommendations, tried to hunt-up the park service team

when they were working in the Sleeping Bear area. At the Park Hotel

in Traverse City, however, she could not, even with the help of an

obliging desk clerk, find any registered guests from Philadelphia or

Washington, D.C., let alone from the Department of the Interior. Only

by recognizing several Michigan conservation representatives on the

hotel porch was she able to link-up with the survey team. [34]

 The survey was completed by the end of the 1958 field season and

Edmunds directed his staff in the production of a final report of their

findings. The report. Remaining Shoreline, was a vital step in the

expansion of the National Park Service into the Great Lakes region. At

the time it was released there were only three existing national park

units in the region: Isle Royale National Park, Grand Portage National

Monument, and Perry's Victory National Monument. In the wake of

Edmunds's visionary report six major national parks were established

in the Great Lakes region, thereby giving the National Park Service a

much greater opportunity to directly serve the 40 million residents of

the region.

 The Great Lakes Shoreline Survey made thirteen specific

recommendations:

1. A minimum of fifteen percent of the shoreline of the Great Lakes

should be in public ownership, around urban areas the figure should be

twenty percent.

2. Marshes and swamps may not be scenic but they require protection

as a wildlife area.

3. As natural areas gradually disappear, examples of outstanding biotic

communities become more important for preservation and study.

4. Historic sites along the shoreline also deserve to be protected and

interpreted.

5. When military or Coast Guard facilities are decommissioned they

should be dedicated to public recreation.

6. Great Lakes islands need to be protected as "unspoiled settings and

biotic laboratories for the future."

7. Facilities for boat dockage on the Great Lakes should be a major

public concern.

8. Except for a few outstanding, outlying sites recreation resources

should be concentrated near major cities such as Detroit, Chicago, and

Cleveland.
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_1e.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:02 AM]

9. Near urban areas consideration should be given for creation of

additional shoreline recreation sites via landfills.

10. Port sites should not be developed in conflict with recreational

values.

11. Development of existing highways "should receive careful planning

and controls to prevent unrestricted development which could

adversely affect or destroy existing intrinsic values. Alignment of any

future lakeshore highways should be carefully planned so as not to

restrict ultimate development of existing and proposed recreation areas.

12. Water pollution threatens recreation and biotic values. Legislation

and enforcement are required.

13. In view of their possible national significance, further study should

be given to Pigeon Point, the Huron Mountains, the Pictured Rocks,

Sleeping Bear, and Indiana Dunes to determine the best plan for their

preservation.

 In retrospect these recommendations seem a mixture of the

visionary and the time-bound concerns of another generation. The

report recognized the importance of wetlands as a means of preserving

biodiversity, but did not appreciate the role of wetlands in fighting

water pollution and flooding. They acknowledged the growing problem

of water pollution in the Great Lakes area, but did not foresee how it

might negatively impact the demand for outdoor recreation on the

lakes. Like so many planning documents, then and now, it tended to

project unchanged the trends of the moment. In their view recreational

demand would continue to grow unchecked, leisure time would

continue to grow, and the urban populations of Chicago, Detroit, and

Cleveland would continue to grow. Like so many of the other

government observers of the period Edmunds's team over-projected the

significance of the St. Lawrence Seaway, an enlarged set of canals

designed to offer larger ocean vessels access from the lakes to the

oceans. Although the seaway did trigger harbor construction, which

horribly scarred the Indiana Dunes, that process was not repeated

elsewhere. The seaway was hamstrung by east and gulf coast

congressman who only agreed to the project after it was amended to

ensure that it would prove no long-term threat to their own regions.

The expected maritime revival of the seaway turned out to be an

economic blip, not a boom.35

 In many ways the survey report was a conservative document. The

recommendation that fifteen percent of the Great Lakes shoreline

should be in public ownership was not as bold as it sounded, since the

park projects they recommended were in areas such as northern

Michigan where up to forty percent of the shoreline was already

publicly owned. Fred A. Seaton, Secretary of the Interior, had

expressed the opinion that the National Park Service should

recommend no more than three sites for potential park status out of the

combined surveys of the Atlantic, Gulf; Pacific, and Great Lakes

shorelines. This type of pressure, the experience of the long struggle to

create Cape Hatteras National Seashore, and, of course, the known
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_1e.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:02 AM]

shortage of land acquisition funds combined to constrain the survey's

conclusions. Edmunds clearly exceeded Secretary Seaton's

recommendation when he recommended four areas from the Great

Lakes alone as potential national parks. Left out of the report was any

federal role in urban recreation, clearly one of the great needs in the

region, save perhaps for the recommendation to preserve the Indiana

Dunes. Only that latter site was located anywhere near the region's

population centers. The other recommended sites. Sleeping Bear,

Pictured Rocks, the Huron Mountains, and Pigeon Point, were all

remote from the cities. Even in the thinly populated Lake Superior

region the survey team moved deliberately. Conspicuously absent from

the shoreline survey report is the recommendation that Wisconsin's

Apostle Islands be made a national park. Local boosters had urged

such an action consistently since the 1920s. A park service

representative at that time decried that as a park project the cutover

islands and shoreline there did not "amount to a hill of beans." The

Great Lakes Shoreline Survey a generation later viewed the landscape

of the Apostle Islands more positively. They urged the state of

Wisconsin to preserve the beaches along Lake Superior and suggested

one of the Apostle Islands might make a good state park. The Apostle

Islands, today a successful national lakeshore, were not viewed by

Edmunds and his team as one of the region's outstanding recreational

resources. [36]

 It was the political pressure of Wisconsin Senator Gaylord Nelson

that forced the National Park Service to look again at the Apostle

Islands. Clout also played a role in the demise of the Huron Mountains

as a potential national park. Allen Edmunds's team were more

impressed by this area than any other part of the entire Great Lakes

region. Located on the shore of Lake Superior just west of Marquette,

Michigan, the Huron Mountains were unknown to most residents of the

Upper Peninsula, let alone most Midwestemers. After their first look at

the area the survey team noted: "There is practically no development,

its scenic qualities are superior and its variety of features is unequalled.

Its shoreline consists of 50' - 100' red rock, sheer cliffs, granite

outcroppings, and white sand beaches. There are interesting offshore

islands and beautiful inland lakes." Closer inspection of the area by

boat, helicopter and foot backed up these original conclusions but also

presented a problem. The Huron Mountains were almost entirely

privately owned, largely by the forest products company Celotex and

by the elite Huron Mountain Club. Founded in 1889, the Huron

Mountain Club, was a unique Midwestern expression of the same

outdoor impulse that led east coast industrialists and financiers to build

elaborate, rustic summer retreats in the Adirondack Mountains. Fifty

families, for almost five generations controlled 22,000 acres of

mountains, lakes, and canyons. Lumber and land magnet John

Longyear was one of the original members, others were manufacturing

or steel tycoons, attorneys and physicians. Henry Ford was left

dangling on a waiting list for seven years before his membership was

accepted. Some of the summer homes were beautiful log structures in

the style of the Adirondack "Great Camps," others simple summer

cottages, and some, in the words of the survey team, were little more

than "glorified shacks." Locked gates, fences, and guards assured the

members of their privacy and kept the area all but unknown. Since the
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_1e.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:02 AM]

club's creation the logged-over Huron Mountains had regrown its

forest cover and the entire area appeared to be a splendid nearwilderness. [37]

 As much as the survey team was intrigued with the Huron

Mountains contact with the leadership of the club seems to have

inclined them to back off from recommending the area as a potential

national park. A 1957 progress report concluded: "no active program

or pressure for state acquisition is recommended for this area.

However, continued contact with the present organization is suggested

in order to be in on the ground floor should an opportunity for

acquisition arise." This diffident evaluation, however, did not stand. In

July 1959 National Park Service Director Conrad L. Wirth inspected

for himself the highlight areas identified by the shoreline survey. He

was "very much impressed" by the Huron Mountains area and ordered

that it be included among the sites to be recommended for

consideration as potential parks. Alarmed by this decision the Huron

Mountain Club made its case for continued private ownership in the

press while remaining constructively, if not fully cooperatively

engaged with the park service. Requests by park planners to enter club

lands were fended-off while contacts and informal visits by high level

National Park Service officials were courted. An Outdoor America

article posed the issue as a choice between a noisy, crowded public

park and "a private wilderness for those who own it—and who have

faithfully preserved it." The park service also sought high level

discussions with the club, hoping to sell them on the idea that a Huron

Mountain park might be developed which would include the club

owners summer homes as an in-holding. For its part the club pointed

out their existing policy of allowing accredited naturalists access to

their lands. An April 1960 meeting between club President Kent

Chandler and Conrad Wirth brought an end to the prospect of a Huron

Mountain national park. At that time Chandler likely revealed his

political hand to Director Wirth, for the latter immediately changed his

tune. The "frontier is gone," the park service director wrote shortly

afterward, and the National Park Service had a huge job trying to

preserve what was left of the American environment, therefore "I am

not worrying about the relatively few remaining natural areas managed

like the Huron Mountain Club property, so long as they are in the

hands of the present owners." The extent of the clout the club brought

to bear is suggested by the fact that unlike the Pictured Rocks and

Sleeping Bear Dunes, the much more promising Huron Mountains were

never proposed for national park status by a single Michigan senator or

congressional representative. The fifty well-heeled owners of the

Huron Mountains accomplished what the hundreds of less wellconnected cottage owners in the Sleeping Bear area could not do—stop

a national park. [38]

 The Great Lakes Shoreline Survey, however, did succeed in

bringing the National Park Service into the Great Lakes region in a

major way. For years the agency had fended off requests from the

residents of northern Minnesota, Wisconsin and Michigan to create a

national park in their area by disparaging the region's second growth

forests and its lack of monumental grandeur similar to the great parks

of the mountain west. The demand for outdoor recreation that followed
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_1e.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:02 AM]

World War II had changed that by forcing the agency to look at the

region in a new way. In the process the National Park Service found in

the Pictured Rocks and Sleeping Bear Dunes sites that possessed both

the water recreation areas so typical of the north woods and landscapes

with scenic assets which compared favorably with the best of

America's national parks.

 "National Parks are where you find them," a park planner advised a

summer homeowner critical of the recommendation to federalize the

dunes. What he meant was that in the late 1950s the Sleeping Bear area

fit perfectly the blend of recreational, natural, and esthetic requirements

required by the shoreline survey. Sleeping Bear Dunes, although it was

not as close to major urban areas as the Indiana Dunes, nor as scenic as

the Pictured Rocks, nor as unspoiled as the Huron Mountains, probably

possessed better than any other area the blend of features sought by

park planners. It was more unspoiled than Indiana Dunes, more

spectacular than anything offered by the Apostle Islands, and much

closer to major population centers than the Pictured Rocks. Sleeping

Bear was a recreation area on the cusp of change when it was

discovered by the shoreline survey. For nearly twenty years the

Michigan Department of Conservation had tried with limited means

and limited success to shape the development of Sleeping Bear toward

public access and resource preservation. Now the National Park

Service saw in the Sleeping Bear and Pictured Rocks a chance to create

a new type of national park. But if from a park planner's point-of-view

parks "are where you find them", from a political perspective national

parks are created in the stow, imperfect give-and-take of the legislative

arena. By no means would the park envisioned by Allen T. Edmunds

and his planners be the park that emerged from the legislative process.

The best the park service could hope was to avoid, as they could not

with the Huron Mountains proposal, a complete shipwreck of their

work. E. Winton Perkins, head of the Great Lakes Survey field team,

understood what was at stake. "As this is being written," he concluded

his report, "surveyors are subdividing some of the remaining beach

areas and bulldozers are opening new access roads. Time is of the

essence....." [39]

NEXT> Chapter 2 "We're Going For the Right Thing:" The Legislative

Struggle to Create Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore, 1971-1977

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_2b.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:06 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Chapter Two

SOS The First Sleeping Bear Bill

 The first step in fashioning a national park out of the work of the

Great Lakes Shoreline Survey was boldly taken by four members of the

United States Senate in the summer of 1959. Richard L. Neuberger of

Oregon, James E. Murray of Montana, Clinton P. Anderson of New

Mexico, and Paul H. Douglas of Illinois, jointly sponsored S.2460, an

omnibus shoreline preservation bill. They cobbled the best areas

identified by the National Park Service from all of the shoreline

surveys into a single bill. Behind the catchy title “Save Our

Shorelines,” or simply “S.O.S.,” they grandiosely proposed a $50

million appropriation to create ten shoreline recreation areas. Their

sites included Cape Cod, Massachusetts, Padre Island, Texas, the

Oregon Dunes, Indiana Dunes, Point Reyes, California, Cumberland

Island, Georgia, the Channel Islands, California, and the Huron

Mountains, the Pictured Rocks, and the Sleeping Bear Dunes in

Michigan. “Nearly all of the great National Parks of the United States

are in mountain ranges,” Richard Neuberger told the New York Times.

“In the process of setting aside these magnificent upland reserves, the

nation has neglected another realm which is equally alluring to the

tourist and the seeker of outdoor recreation. This realm consists of the

seacoasts and shorelines of the United States which are among the

most beautiful on earth.” Like Senator Neuberger’s rhetoric, the S.O.S.

bill was more designed to inspire future action than to be a serious

proposal. Not only was S.O.S. opposed by the Eisenhower

administration, it had only modest support from legislators actually

representing the states effected by the bill, although Philip A. Hart,

Michigan’s junior Democratic senator did step forward as a cosponsor. Neuberger’s real concern was to promote the prospect of an

Oregon Dunes and Sea-Lion Caves National Recreation Area. While

he promoted S.O.S. in the national press he also sponsored a much less

ambitious $15 million bill to create three new shoreline parks at the

discretion of the Secretary of the Interior. Senate Bill 2460 succeeded

in its initial purpose of putting shoreline parks on the legislative table.

Individual bills were introduced for the creation of new park units at

Cape Cod, Oregon Dunes, Padre Island, Point Reyes, and Indiana

Dunes and the general issue of shoreline preservation was brought

before the public through local and national media. But Senate Bill

2460 and House Resolution 8445, the companion bill sponsored by

John Dingell, a Democratic congressman from lower Michigan, had a

very negative impact on the prospect of realizing Michigan’s new

proposed national parks.[2]

 The “Save Our Shoreline” bill came at an unfortunate time for the

National Park Service in Michigan. In July 1959, the agency had just

begun its specialized studies of Sleeping Bear, Pictured Rocks, and the
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_2b.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:06 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

Huron Mountains. Unlike Cape Cod, where the park service was well

along in its plans for a park, the Michigan sites were known only

through the recommendations of the Great Lakes Shoreline Survey.

Casting those general recommendations into the form of a legal

proposal exposed the budding park projects to premature public

scrutiny. The greatest damage was done to the Huron Mountain

proposal. While the National Park Service was still trying to negotiate

access to the private preserve, critics were able to blast the prospect of

a significant taking of well-managed private conservation lands. The

Huron Mountain Club was able to frame the public debate strictly in its

own terms. They were the “wise” husbands of the area and the

government was uninformed about the recreational potential of the

area. “We know very well,” said Renville Wheat, a club director, that

“casual visitors or tourists unaccustomed to such conditions

(wilderness) would generally speaking, not enjoy these woods.”

Concepts only in the discussion stage at the Northeast Region Office,

of trying to preserve individual club members’ holdings while opening

the lakes and mountains to the public, of working in partnership with

the Huron Mountain Club, were too raw to be floated publicly. Before

the park service even knew the battle had been joined, the club

engineered a resolution in the Michigan State Senate to condemn a

Huron Mountain National Park.[3]

 While most of the attention generated by “Save Our Shorelines” in

Michigan was focused on the Huron Mountain proposal, the wellmeaning omnibus bill did negatively impact the Sleeping Bear area’s

park prospects. Senate Bill 2460 called for a 26,000 acre recreation

area at Sleeping Bear. This figure was based on a one-page

description of the area in the report of the shoreline survey. It did not

grow out of a detailed local investigation and consultation with state

officials and local conservationists. The bill did not even set any

boundaries for the proposed park, leaving that to the discretion of the

Secretary of the Interior. The prospect of a 26,000 acre park at

Sleeping Bear did not draw a lot of attention, but when the agency after

completing its detailed study of the Sleeping Bear area recommend a

77,000 acre park, the fact that a much smaller amount of land had been

earlier endorsed was used to question the creditability of park planners

and bolster opposition calls for a smaller dune park. Senator Philip

Hart, who was on record as endorsing the 26,000 acre park, learned his

lesson from the “Save Our Shorelines” bill. His office thereafter

attempted to work closely with the National Park Service, he patiently

avoided premature legislation, urged park supporters to be circumspect,

least they arouse “local opposition,” and he waited until the official

proposal was ready for public scrutiny.[4]

NEXT> The National Park Service Proposal: Sleeping Bear Seashore

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_2b.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:06 AM]
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_2c.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:12 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Chapter Two

The National Park Service Proposal: Sleeping Bear Seashore

 That official proposal marked a major departure from the work of

the shoreline survey, even though both reports shared several of the

same authors. The reasons for this departure are more difficult to

understand than to narrate. As late as the summer of 1960 the park

service planners had in mind a modest recreation area of about 30,000

acres which included very little of the private lands around the shores

of the inland lakes. This conservative view likely reflects the novelty

in 1959 of carving national park units out of private holdings and a

realistic understanding of the budget limitations traditionally placed on

park projects. The shoreline proposals, particularly the Cape Cod

seashore and the development of new streams of revenue dedicated to

park projects, such as the Land and Water Conservation Fund, were

about to effect a revolution in park expansion. But those developments

were still in the future. It was only after local conservationists

expressed a lack of enthusiasm for the National Park Service’s modest

plans for Sleeping Bear did the proposed park become large and

controversial. The person most responsible for that change was E.

Genevieve Gillette, the President of the Michigan Parks Association.

 Genevieve Gillette was the grand dame of conservation in

Michigan. In 1920, she had been the first woman to graduate from

Michigan State University’s School of Landscape Architecture. She

went on to work for several years in Chicago as an assistant to the

dean of American landscape architects, Jens Jensen. Returning to

Michigan she set-up her own practice. In addition to consulting on

landscape design she became a vigorous proponent of the establishment

of public preserves and recreation areas. Her former Michigan State

classmate and life-long friend, P.J. Hoffmaster, became the first head

of Michigan’s budding state park system. His work with the

Conservation Commission and her work as a tireless lobbyist played a

major role in transforming the Michigan state park system into one of

the best in America. In 1959, she founded the Michigan Parks

Association to bring under one organization all of the naturalists,

sportsmen, and tourism promoters she had previously rallied to sponsor

park projects. That organization’s support would be vital to the

National Park Service if their Sleeping Bear proposal was going to be

successful.

 In the fall of 1959, the planners from the Northeast Region Office

briefed the leaders of the Michigan Parks Association on their

recommendations for Pictured Rocks and Sleeping Bear.[5] The

response to the Pictured Rocks proposal was unequivocally supportive.

But the briefing on a Sleeping Bear park by Regional Director Ronald

F. Lee left Genevieve Gillette cool. “Mr. Lee, one thing you’ll have to
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_2c.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:12 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

explain to me,” Gillette said. “I have the understanding.....that our

National Parks are examples of great natural architecture and that they

are great pieces of natural scenery that we must all protect them, and

while they are to be used by the people, the over-riding thing is that

they are so unusual they should be protected for the generations to

come....It didn’t seem to me that a sand dune compared in any way

with such a thing as Rocky Mountain National Park. It seemed to be,

while I didn’t like to admit it, that it was probably second-rate.”

Gillette frankly thought that the park service must be so pushed to find

recreational lands that it was “lowering its standards.” Lee defended

the park plan by arguing Sleeping Bear’s unique geological origin as a

perched dune created solely by the action of wind and water. Gillette

countered that if it was the geological story that made Sleeping Bear of

national significance than the 26,000 acre area set aside in the park

service proposal was too small to “really tell the story of what

happened before Sleeping Bear.” “The greatest part of that story is

quite a bit farther south and you’re not even talking about it,” argued

Gillette. She went to a map of the area and traced out Platte Lake and

the Platte River and contended that they were crucial to telling the

“natural history of this region.” She concluded by flatly stating, “I am

not going to work ten years for a bill, unless it’s a better thing than this

bill is.”[6] 

 Gillette had used a complex geological argument, about the Platte

River area illustrating how the creation of the dune changed the

topography of the area to the south of Sleeping Bear to justify adding

the Platte River, Platte Lake, and Platte Plains to the park proposal. It

was an old argument that she had long used to try and persuade the

State of Michigan to expand Benzie State Park. Since the early 1940’s,

Gillette had worked with the Michigan Botanical Club and the

Cranbrook Institute of Science to have the Platte Plains protected in a

park. It was Gillette’s involvement, her insistence that “we’re going

for the right thing,” that sent the National Park Service planners back

to the Sleeping Bear area to reconsider their plan and to inspect the

Platte River country. In the summer of 1960, the agency again met

with Gillette and presented a greatly expanded park proposal. [7]

 The new proposal was vastly different than the draft Sleeping Bear

proposal. In place of a 26,000 acre park it called for 77,000 acres.

While the earlier plan had emphasized the recreational resources of the

area this final proposal put an equal emphasis on scenic and scientific

values. “The most striking scenic landscape on Lake Michigan is

found in the Sleeping Bear region,” the proposal claimed. It aimed to

preserve a “Land of Vistas,” the bays and bluffs of the dunes, the

morainal plateau, and the stunning views of the inland lakes. To do so

it included within the park boundaries the entirety of eleven inland

lakes including Glen Lake, Platte Lake, Little Traverse Lake, Long

Lake, and Little Platte Lake. Also included were portions of the

Crystal Lake Moraine, which afforded spectacular views of the

gorgeous lake, but at the expense of taking out three holes from the

elite Crystal Downs Country Club. The proposal had within it a

contradiction which was later skillfully exploited by opponents to the

park and which has bedeviled subsequent management of the

lakeshore. On one hand the report clearly stated that “The mission of
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_2c.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:12 AM]

the National Park Service, if a National Seashore is created at Sleeping

Bear, will be to protect and preserve the natural features and bring to

the public an understanding of these phenomena through a program of

interpretation.” Yet the report also predicted that within the first five

years of establishment the lakeshore would have a major and favorable

economic development impact on the area by attracting an additional

1.2 million visitors. Clearly economic development was the sugar

coating that the park service hoped to offer the local communities for

the bitter pill of land acquisition with its prospect of loss of tax base

and dislocation of families. The linkage of economic revival and

conservation would become the principal strategy for selling the

Pictured Rocks and Apostle Islands proposals to the residents of the

Lake Superior region. Benzie County with only 8,500 permanent

residents and chronic sixteen percent unemployment, was not immune

to the lure of jobs and a rise in property values, but the incentive was

much less attractive than in the beleaguered Upper Peninsula. At

Sleeping Bear the unlikely blending of development and preservation

caused many to question the thoroughness of federal planning or to

suspect an ulterior motive behind the park proposal. The published

version of the proposal had an additional weakness, it was extremely

vague. The boundaries were imprecisely laid out on a large-scale

map. Large numbers of summer homes were included within the park

but the proposal promised to “keep to a minimum the disruption of

economic and private life.”[8]

NEXT> S.2153 Senator Hart's Sleeping Bear Bill

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_2d.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:16 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Chapter Two

S.2153 Senator Hart's Sleeping Bear Bill

 The politician most responsible for the eventual establishment of

Sleeping Bear National Lakeshore was Philip A. Hart, Michigan’s

Democratic senator from 1958 to 1976. Hart was, in the words of a

long-time activist in Michigan politics, “a genuine humanitarian.”

Naturally quiet, reserved in manner, he was anything but a typical

politician. His experience in World War II as an officer in the D-Day

invasion left him severely wounded, and after a long recovery, anxious

to do something positive with his life. His marriage to a daughter of

the powerful and wealthy Briggs family in Detroit gave him an entrée

into Michigan politics. He was unphotogenic, modest to the point of

being apologetic about running, scrupulous about campaign

contributions, and intellectual in appearance and actual behavior. He

was neither eloquent on the campaign trail or decisive in office. “He

debated every possible angle to the solution before he would tell you

his decision,” recalled a former aide. “Often, if you didn’t press him

hard, he would never tell you what he decided.” Yet as deliberate as

Hart was about taking a stand he was dogged in maintaining his

position, regardless of the pressure. “Once he made up his mind,” a

supporter recalled, “nothing could get him to change it.” [9]

 It was this later quality which would have a critical impact on the

fate of the park service’s Sleeping Bear shoreline proposal. Hart

became the champion of the Sleeping Bear park in 1961 and he never

backed down in the long fight that followed. Hart’s commitment to the

lakeshore grew-out of his belief that it was a project in the interest of

the majority of his Michigan constituents and that it would serve the

long-term needs of the American people. He personally had a summer

house on Mackinac Island. He knew the popularity of the northern

lakes region and the limitations of living within a publicly administered

park area. Although the creation of National Lakeshores at Pictured

Rocks and Sleeping Bear are a lasting legacy of his Senate career, Hart

was not an enthusiastic conservationist in the mold of his fellow

Democrats Senator Gaylord Nelson of Wisconsin or Frank Church of

Idaho. The issues closest to Hart were civil rights and consumer

affairs. “He was tolerant of everyone’s right to follow his or her own

conscience,” a colleague recalled. In time he became known as the

“conscience of the Senate” for his consistent support of civil rights

legislation. His greatest moment came when Lyndon Johnson handpicked Hart to shepherd the Voting Rights Act through the teeth of a

Senate southern filibuster. While Hart was steadfast in his support for

the Sleeping Bear proposal, he was seldom involved personally with

the drafting or negotiations necessary to make the bill a reality. Hart

had a reputation for having brought together an efficient staff and it

was to that staff that he, by-and-large, delegated the Sleeping Bear
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_2d.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:16 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

issue. [10]

 Hart’s proxies in the Sleeping Bear fight were Muriel Ferris and

William Welsh. The latter was the Senator’s Administrative Assistant

and a long-time Democratic Party--Washington operator. Welsh

worked his way from positions in organized labor to Executive

Secretary of the Democratic National Committee, to Hart’s staff, and

eventually served on the staff of Vice-President Hubert H. Humphrey.

Welsh was reputed to have “a keen political mind—and a sharp eye.”

He was very experienced with legislative matters and often represented

the Senator in vital negotiations concerning the lakeshore proposals.

Muriel Ferris was the staff member most intimately engaged with the

Sleeping Bear issue. She attended meetings, organized supporters, and

absorbed the flak of opponents from the beginning of the process in

1961 until the creation of the lakeshore in 1971. More than any other

member of the Senator’s staff she was interested in environmental

issues. Her close and personal association with conservation groups

like the Michigan Parks Association helped to keep alive support for

the lakeshore plan during the decade long struggle. [11]

 Hart’s first Sleeping Bear bill, S.2153 was introduced jointly with

S.2152, the bill to create Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore on June

27, 1961. Both bills were strongly influenced by the National Park

Service proposals and by the legislation, then near final passage, to

create Cape Cod National Seashore. The Cape Cod bill had broken

new conservation ground through its attempt to harmonize existing

private developments with long-term conservation and by its

revolutionary procedure of authorizing federal funds to purchase those

private lands vital to public recreation and resource protection. Hart‘s

bill had five vital provisions:

It called for a 77,000 acre recreation area in Leland and Benzie

counties; 

i) It gave the Secretary of the Interior the power to

purchase or condemn all private land within the park;

ii) Owners of residences could negotiate for 25 year leases;

iii) Owners of residences might also be able to retain

ownership in the park provided local zoning was in place;

iv) Contrary to usual National Park Service Policy, hunting

would be permitted.

Hart had worked closely with the National Park Service on the bill and

he felt confident that the legislation would meet with the support of his

constituents. [12]

 At first, there was little indication of a controversy over the bill.

When the Michigan Park Association arranged an informational

meeting on the proposal in Lansing, although notices had been sent to

the Traverse City and Frankfort newspapers, only two people outside

of the association bothered to attend. Such a response, however, was

misleading. Around the Platte Lakes and in Glen Arbor word of Hart’s

bill spread like spilt milk. In the hot summer sun dismay soured into

anger. Through neighbor talking to neighbor, summer residents to
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_2d.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:16 AM]

locals, a series of community meetings were organized. In a short time

the Citizens’ Council of the Sleeping Bear was formed as an organized

expression of local concern. Senator Hart’s office began to receive

bundles of letters protesting his bill. Publicly he nursed the fiction that

the public response to the Sleeping Bear park had been favorable,

while behind the scenes his staff scrambled to come-up with a response

that would calm the rising negative response. The solution, arrived at

in conjunction with the National Park Service, was to have Conrad

Wirth, the Director of the National Park Service travel to the area and

calm things down. [13] 

 Senator Hart’s staff, the National Park Service, and the Michigan

Parks Association were all guilty of believing their own public

pronouncements. The feeling was that people in northwestern Michigan

simply were operating in an information vacuum: they did not

understand the bill. What was needed was an official spokesman who

could separate the facts from the misapprehensions. Conrad Wirth,

who was warned by a local supporter, “its going to be rugged,” merely

joked “I never get called unless there’s really fireworks.” But the fact

was neither he nor Muriel Ferris, who also had journeyed from

Washington, D.C., anticipated the traumatic evening. Wirth spent the

day of the meeting getting his first close-up inspection of the park

area. “I don’t know much about this project,” he told Genevieve

Gillette, but “I am sold on it.” The trouble was Gillette was just about

the only person in the audience who agreed with him. [14]

 August 30, 1961, the day of Director Wirth’s appearance at the

public meeting in the Glen Lake Community High School, was the day

the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore proposal nearly died. It

was a hot, humid evening. The little school gymnasium, set-up like an

auditorium, was packed with people. It was the end of the summer

season and 1,500 to 2,000 angry summer and year-around residents

had gathered. As Wirth and his park service staff came into the

building they found the hallways leading to the gym packed with an

overflow crowd. On the stage was a Michigan highway map with all

state and federal forest and park lands highlighted in green to make the

point that more recreation land was not needed. The moderator of the

meeting was Ove F. Jensen, a long-time summer home owner who had

retired to Glen Lake. As chairman of the Citizens’ Council of the

Sleeping Bear Dunes Area he was anything but a neutral voice.

Director Wirth began with a slide presentation on the park service plan

for Sleeping Bear. The rest of the meeting was to be devoted to

questions. Rather than rely on spontaneous questions from the floor,

the Citizens’ Council had very cleverly prepared a long list of very

detailed and antagonistically worded questions. Jensen put the

questions to the Director and insisted that each be answered. Had

Wirth been better informed regarding the proposal he would have

made a stronger showing. At one point he described the area around

Sleeping Bear as “undeveloped.” Jensen shot back at him that the park

service’s own study allowed there were more than a thousand

residences in the project area. Press accounts noted that he was “at

times ill-prepared to explain the proposal,” but the fact was that many

of the questions were not fully answerable at that early stage of the

project. [15]
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_2d.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:16 AM]

 The audience, hot and uncomfortable in the packed room, was

restless and rude. Catcalls, jeers, and “humorless laughter” greeted

many of Wirth’s remarks. He emphasized that a federally approved

zoning ordinance would allow most summer home owners to remain

within the proposed recreation area, not realizing how hollow that

sounded to his audience because all previous attempts at zoning in the

area had been popularly defeated. Lamely the Director tried to

emphasize the long-term beneficial aspects of the plan, such as the

protection of the dunes and the increase of annual local revenues by a

projected $10 million. Exacerbated members of the audience shouted

back that they had moved to Leelanau County to avoid the crowds of

visitors conjured by Wirth. The breaking point came when the

Director, a second-generation park service employee and a veteran of

more than thirty years of federal service, tried to defend the objectivity

and competence of the team that put-together the Sleeping Bear plan.

The crowd, however, would have none of it and complaints about not

wanting to turn over the fate of their homes “to the bureaucrats” were

voiced. Wirth, his dander up, proclaimed: “I’m a bureaucrat and proud

of it.” The meeting degenerated from there. The Director alternated

his responses from the terse, “I expect you will disagree, so there is

little point in answering,” to the combative, as when he told Citizens’

Council representatives “You have made a good showing, but we will

vote you down.” The meeting ended with Ove Jensen again

demonstrating his deft handling of the situation. He asked all people

opposed to the project to stand up. Virtually the entire room rose as

one, save for four chairs in the front row where Muriel Ferris,

Genevieve Gillette, and two representatives of the Michigan

Conservation Commission sat. “People around us tried to pull us up by

the arms,” Gillette later recalled. “No, not me,” shouted the feisty

conservationist, “I’m Miss Genevieve Gillette, I’m President of the

Michigan Parks Association, and I’m for this Park 100%.” But it was

clear that she was nearly the only person in the hall so inclined. [16]

 For supporters of the Sleeping Bear bill the evening had gone about

as bad as it could have. Senator Hart’s hope that the meeting would

generate “more light than heat” was dashed. Conrad Wirth felt that he

had been ambushed. The blame, however, had to be shared by Hart

and the park service. The latter sent the Director in without properly

exploring local sentiment or fully briefing him on the plan. Hart was

guilty of deferring to Wirth a job he should have done himself, explain

why he was asking the Sleeping Bear homeowners to bear a burden for

the good of all of Michigan. Not only did Hart beg-off that job but he

left the planning of the meeting to the opposition Citizens’ Council.

Wirth compounded these errors by losing his composure. He latter

admitted to an Iowa congressman, “it was a real bad night, sir.” [17]

 For the opponents of S.2153 the meeting was a defining and

exhilarating moment. They had stood up, toe-to-toe with the experts

from Washington and carried the day. The meeting had helped to forge

a group of anxious and bewildered property-owners into a defiant and

assertive organization. Many people heard and reported that Wirth

threatened to take their homes. The image of the National Park Service

they took away from the meeting was one of an arrogant, elitist, out-
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_2d.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:16 AM]

of-control agency. The Record-Eagle (Traverse City, Michigan)

editorialized that Wirth’s performance was “an appalling and almost

unbelievable demonstration of how far bureaucratic planners in

Washington can go in disregarding the people’s rights.” Donations

began to flood into the Glen Arbor-based Citizens’ Council of the

Sleeping Bear Dunes Area. In little more than two weeks after the

meeting they had received more than $16,000 in pledges and

donations. Similar associations were formed in the Platte Lakes and

Little Traverse Lake-Good Harbor areas. The tragedy of the Glen Lake

meeting was that it had such an extreme polarizing effect on the

prospect of a Sleeping Bear park. The opposition became rigid. The

language used to describe the bill became combative. “A federal land

grab” became the mantra in Leelanau County towns. With their dander

up and war chests filled, the opposition left the Glen Lake meeting

ready to hire a battery of lawyers and prepared to launch a public

relations offensive of their own. The battle for the dunes had begun.

[18]

 Traverse City was the next engagement in the struggle. Senator

Hart had arranged for a Senate Committee on Interior and Insular

Affairs field hearing to be held November 13, 1961. The hearing had

the benefit of bringing Hart to northwest Michigan to speak directly

about the bill. In his testimony before the subcommittee Hart argued

that S.2153 was only a draft of a Sleeping Bear bill and that he fully

expected to make changes. Introducing legislation he lamely

contended was, in his opinion, the best way to spark “discussion.” In

fact the hearings were a good way to find out how angry and

determined people could be when a “discussion” is started with a threat

to take their homes. The opposition was able to turn out an audience of

850 people and dominate the hearing with twenty-six of the thirty-five

witnesses speaking out against the Hart bill. The most important of

these was Congressman Robert P. Griffin. Practically speaking there

could be no Sleeping Bear recreation area without his support. Griffin

had been among the minority of Republicans who had voted to create

the Cape Cod National Seashore and like most members of the

Michigan G.O.P. he was a supporter of conservation measures. He

was, however, more impressed by the sincerity and strength of the

popular out-cry against the bill than by the actual legislation drafted by

Hart and the park service. Responding to the often-made charge that

opponents of S.2153 simply did not understand what Hart was trying to

do, Griffin testified: “I would suggest to the subcommittee that the

problem you are having is because these people do understand the

bill.” That line brought down the house. “My goodness!” exclaimed

Senator Moss as he tried to have his gavel heard amid the storm of

applause. Griffin said he favored a recreation area that avoided the

large inland lakes and the numerous property owners. Hart proposed to

take too much land, in the congressman’s opinion. [19]

 Probably the most important development to come out of the

hearing flowed from the testimony of Secretary of the Interior, Stewart

L. Udall. The former congressman from Arizona was the most

aggressive conservationist to ever occupy that office. Typical of his

optimistic and grand vision was his statement that he intended to

double the size of the National Park System in the next eight years.
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_2d.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:16 AM]

Udall thought big and acted aggressively. In keeping with that style he

told the Senate subcommittee that the only thing wrong with Senator

Hart’s proposal was that it did not go far enough. Hart’s 77,000 acre

recreation area was too small in Udall’s opinion. The Secretary

outlined to the subcommittee a Sleeping Bear park 92,172 acres in

size. New areas to be added included, for the first time in any

proposal, North Manitou Island and Sugarloaf Mountain. Udall’s

mention of North Manitou Island had a significant impact on all

subsequent Sleeping Bear proposals. That island, which failed to

impress the Great Lakes Shoreline Survey and the subsequent park

service study teams, thereafter was destined to become part of the

park. At the time, however, Udall’s testimony had a strongly negative

impact. His contention that a Sleeping Bear park needed to be bigger

in the face of strong public opposition made the bureaucracy seem

insensitive to the popular will. Furthermore, for the Department of the

Interior to move from recommending first a 26,000 acre park, to a

77,000 acre area, to now a 92,172 area gave the impression of a

capricious planning process. For his contribution Udall had the honor

of joining Philip Hart in being hung in effigy in Traverse City. [20]

 The Traverse City hearing marked an effective end to S.2153. It

was a poor bill—vague and imprecise--very poorly presented. Neither

the National Park Service nor Senator Philip Hart had done the

research in Leelanau and Benzie counties necessary to anticipate the

needs and concerns of the local community. The partnership also had

floundered with S.2152, their attempt to create a Pictured Rocks

National Recreation Area. There the local community was supportive

of the park plan but the bill ran into the buzz saw of corporate timber

interests. Both bills were a product of haste and good intentions. For

Sleeping Bear Dunes the legacy of these mistakes was lasting divisions,

bad feelings, and a decade of delay.

NEXT> New Approches, Old Problems

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_2e.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:20 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Chapter Two

New Approches, Old Problems

 Senator Hart’s characteristic doggedness, his unwillingness to

surrender a principled point was demonstrated by his willingness to

follow S.2153 with a new bill in July 1962. The legislative initiatives

which followed that ill-fated first bill all were the result of a much

higher degree of personal involvement, if not by the Senator himself,

then by Hart’s staff. The Senator was much less inclined to trust the

National Park Service. He told the press that he was “as much on the

side of the original bill’s critics as a defender of the Park Service.”

Hart wanted less involvement by Conrad Wirth and Stewart Udall and

more by William Welsh, his highly respected principal aide.[21]

 But like it or not Hart and the park service were joined at the hip

and warily they worked together to make another attempt at creating a

park. Hart’s staff, understandably, was concerned with finding a

formula to mollify the inland lake property owners. While the park

service was open to doing this they were constantly concerned about

setting a precedent that might affect other national seashore projects

such as Point Reyes and Padre Island. Neither the agency or Hart’s

office wanted to swap land for peace, by reducing the acreage of the

proposed lakeshore. But William Welsh did propose creating a narrow

zone composed of the built-up sections of shoreline which would be

fully exempt from the park so long as adequate zoning was in force.

People in these zones would be totally outside the control of the

Secretary of the Interior. In Welsh’s view such a provision might have

the effect of “cracking off” a portion of the solid phalanx of opposition

arrayed before them, by “causing jealousy and resentment on the part

of homeowners not included in one of the zones.” The concept of a

private exclusionary zone within the park, in effect, promised most

inland lakeshore property owners there would be no condemnation

acquisitions. Hart also added to the bill a twenty-five year moratorium

on public access to the inland lakes from lands acquired from willing

sellers. With these provisions they hoped to remove the image of Glen

Lake crowded with unwashed urban masses as well as the unpopular

specter of a federal land grab. [22]

 The fruit of their cooperation was Senate Bill 3528, but before

Senator Hart introduced the bill in July 1962, his office and the park

service’s Allen Edmunds embarked on a careful campaign of preparing

the people in the local area. Edmunds in particular was heartened by

the first signs of popular support for the park he found budding beneath

the winter snows. With the majority of their influential “summer

neighbors” back home in the cities to the south a number of influential

people in northwest Michigan began to emerge as supporters of a

Sleeping Bear park. All of them agreed that the original bill had been
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_2e.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:20 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

badly bungled but that the basic idea was one that could attract local

support. Organizations like the Motel Association of Traverse City

naturally were open in their support of the project, but Edmunds found

that the Traverse City Chamber of Commerce was not immune to the

lure of national park dollars either. Judge Ormond S. Danford, wellconnected in Traverse City political circles, assured Edmunds in

February 1961, that if a “referendum were held today 95% of the

people of the Grand Traverse region would favor a park—not

necessarily this proposal, but some form of park.” In Benzie County

Edmunds found the same signs of an emerging pro-park leadership.

Max Goin, chair of the Benzie County Board, told Edmunds that he

had voted to reject the park plan out of sensitivity to his constituents,

but that he was personally in favor of a dunes park and was sure that a

better bill would win the support of the majority of the board. John

Peterson, editor of the Benzie County Patriot, offered his support in the

up-coming struggle. The strongest thing in favor of the park proposal,

all supporters agreed, was the fact that most people felt that some type

of federal dunes park was now inevitable. This sentiment became all

the stronger in March 1962 when President John F. Kennedy delivered

a special conservation message. Sleeping Bear Dunes was one of ten

new park areas specifically named by the President as necessary to the

nations’ “increased need for additional recreation areas.” [23]

 The changes proposed by Senator Hart in S. 3528 were designed to

throw the opposition Citizens’ Council off-balance and feed the

encouraging signs of growing local support. But Ove Jensen and the

other home owners groups were not so easily outflanked. During the

winter Jensen and his group had worked to promote township zoning in

the areas proposed for park status. It was a divisive, thorny issue that

split the community on economic lines, but by beginning the issue

themselves the Citizens’ Council was able to effectively make the point

to the folks at home that this was not an issue they would want to defer

to the Secretary of the Interior. At the same time, Jensen could argue

to the press that there was no need to have the federal government

come into the Sleeping Bear to save it, because the local people were

already acting to preserve the area. Also, just as Hart’s changes to the

bill were beginning to be circulated, the Citizens’ Council launched

their own public relations drive. Don Gordon, a savvy publicist and a

veteran Republican party activist, authored a scathing article for the

March issue of Michigan Challenge magazine: “Sleeping Bear, A Big

Idea with Little Merit.” He used the forum to attack Hart’s

amendments to the original bill before they could be formally

introduced. Those changes, he argued, “would soften the language of

the bill to some extent, but it still would have sharp teeth and still

would take the same 77,000 acre bite.” Even before S.3528 was

introduced it was painted with the same brush as the earlier bill and the

Citizens’ Council vowed to fight it “every step of the way.” [24]

 Even though the opposition had announced that the new bill was

dead on arrival Allen Edmunds and two Hart staffers lobbied their way

through Leelanau and Benzie counties. People in the area were still

badly uninformed as to the provisions of the original bill, let alone

Senator Hart’s revisions. At public meetings Edmunds demonstrated

patience and willingness to listen that had been sadly lacking in Wirth
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_2e.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:20 AM]

and Udall’s previous attempts to impress local residents. Raised on a

Michigan farm, Edmunds conveyed genuine sympathy for property

owners swept-up in the park controversy. Yet he had personally seen

almost every foot of shoreline on the Great Lakes, and he passionately

believed in the importance of the park. In Edmunds the park service

had at last found an effective advocate in northwest Michigan. But no

matter how effective Edmunds and William Welsh were, opposition to

the park remained high. In fact, based on a survey taken at the time, it

was clear that the more people knew even about the revised bill, the

stronger they were in opposition. Public meetings and private

consultations had the effect of lowering the decibel level of the

dispute, but they could not mute the opposition. [25]

 A small, but significant change made in this second Hart proposal

was the substitution of the phrase “National Seashore” for “National

Recreation Area.” The recreation area tag had been applied to both

Sleeping Bear and Pictured Rocks because they had been identified by

the Shoreline Survey, whose purpose had been, in part, to identify

prime shoreline recreation areas. To the homeowners in the Sleeping

Bear area the term connoted a heavily developed area overrun by

swarms of Chicagoans and Detroiters—the summer-homeless working

class some long-time residents dismissed with the term “fudgies.” Nor

was this characterization far from what many park service staff thought

of as recreation areas. Northeast Regional Director Ronald Lee

admitted, in 1961, that the term “carries an implication of use

development which would increase the activity use pressures on any

area under such a category.” Lee favored the status of “National

Monument” for Sleeping Bear but felt that in the early 1960s there was

too much development within the park area to meet such a standard.

The term “National Seashore” was borrowed from successful oceanfront parks at Cape Hatteras and Cape Cod. These parks embodied a

compromise between recreational development and the preservation of

the natural landscape. The incongruity of referring to the eastern shore

of Lake Michigan as a “Seashore” prompted the coining in 1963 of a

new label for the mixed use shoreline parks of the Great Lakes:

“National Lakeshore.” Defining just what a National Lakeshore was

remained a work-in-progress for the next two decades as legislation

creating such entities in Indiana, Wisconsin, as well as Michigan

sought to devise formulas which balanced the needs of local

communities and unique environments. [26]

 Further contributing to the confusion of terms was the introduction

of a bill to create a Sleeping Bear Dunes National Park by

Congressman Robert P. Griffin in January 1963. Up for reelection, the

Republican congressman needed a way to gain the initiative on the

park controversy in his district. House Resolution 2400 was well

calculated to demonstrate the congressman’s support for a federal park

in his district and still make clear his solidarity with aggrieved

property owners. Griffin dusted off the original park service plan for

Sleeping Bear, a dunes park that omitted the inland lakes and uplands.

With 54,000 acres less than Hart had called for the plan looked a little

light. Griffin solved that ingeniously by adding in his bill the 14,000

acre North Manitou Island, which Secretary Udall had earlier

advocated. That increased the size of Griffin’s proposed park to 37,000
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_2e.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:20 AM]

acres. As a salve to the homeowners in the area Griffin’s bill specified

that none of the nearly one hundred improved properties within his

proposed boundary would be subject to condemnation. Griffin claimed

that his reason for introducing the bill was to bring “this prolonged

Sleeping Bear controversy” to a head during “this session of

Congress.” [27]

 But bringing the issue to a head was the last thing that came from

his new park bill. Hart put up a brave front, saying he was “delighted”

to have Griffin become a Sleeping Bear park supporter. “The

remaining issue is the size of the park,” Hart asserted. But no matter

how the Senator tried to spin the rival bill there were deep ideological

issues dividing his conception of Sleeping Bear from Griffin’s. While

Hart liked to describe his plan as a “moderate alternative” to the large

park proposed by Stewart Udall, the fact was that he envisioned a

major park service presence in northwest Michigan. As he indicated in

a latter press release, “A national park development should include

scenic overlooks, scenic drives, trails, campsites, and unspoiled,

timbered countryside.” Hart was a classic Democratic liberal, unafraid

of a large public expenditure to produce a result of lasting value to

Michigan and the nation. Griffin was a young Republican who was

open to innovative conservation projects but suspicious of federal

efforts to override local autonomy with a massive influx of federal

dollars. In the classic mode of a mainstreet, Midwestern Republican he

was a fiscal conservative conscious of budget deficits. Unabashedly he

lashed out at Hart’s proposal at the Traverse City hearing by saying it

would “contribute needlessly to a weakening of the Nation’s economic

strength at a very critical time in history when we need every ounce of

strength we can muster.” Griffin, who would later work on behalf of

President Richard Nixon’s abortive “New Federalism” which was

designed to return both decision making and money from the federal to

state and local governments, favored a park in which the Department

of the Interior worked cooperatively with the Michigan Department of

Conservation. The idea that Secretary Udall would have control over

local zoning and that a large number of citizens would have their

property rights circumscribed was ideologically abhorrent to Griffin.

The liberal spirit of the 1960s was on Hart’s side, while Griffin’s

position resonated only in northwest Michigan. But the legislative

traditions of the United States Congress lent significance to the young

minority congressman’s opposition because parks generally were not

created over the objections of dissenting representatives. If Sleeping

Bear was going to become a park Hart would have to compromise his

vision of the type of area it would become and Griffin would have to

yield at least a little on his conservative principles.[28]

 Congressman Griffin’s proposal was the first Sleeping Bear bill to

propose the addition of North Manitou Island to the lakeshore park.

Although Secretary Udall had earlier recommended its inclusion

neither the National Park Service nor its supporters in Michigan, such

as Genevieve Gillette, thought the island merited inclusion. “There

wasn’t the scenery on North Manitou—it was largely big woods,” she

later recalled. Nonetheless, North Manitou was pushed by

Congressman Griffin and even more aggressively by local politicians

in northwest Michigan. When Gillette tried to press Traverse City’s
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_2e.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:20 AM]

state senator, William G. Milliken as to why he advocated the island’s

inclusion he coyly answered, “Well, maybe we need it for wilderness.”

North Manitou did offer 14,000 acres of wilderness, but it also was an

opportunity for the island’s owners to exchange a burdensome

responsibility for a large federal buy-out. The island was owned by the

Angell Foundation, the trustees for the estate of William R. Angell,

former President of Continental Motors Corporation. Angell had

operated the island as a retreat and game preserve, but it was an

expensive drain on financial resources. With both Udall and the

Michigan legislators pushing for the inclusion of the island, the

National Park Service sponsored a fly-over for members of the

Michigan Parks Association and representatives of the National

Wildlife Foundation, Audubon Society, and the Wilderness Society. In

spite of low clouds Stewart Brendborg of the Wilderness Society “was

impressed by North Manitou as a wilderness addition to the proposed

Lakeshore.” From that time on North Manitou became part of the park

planned and advocated by the park service, although it did not wish its

additional acreage to come into the plan at the expense of mainland

tracts.[29]

 Senator Hart showed no willingness to compromise on the size of

the mainland unit when in February of 1963 he introduced S.792. The

new bill was roughly identical to S.3528, save for some minor

modifications designed to reduce the period of uncertainty faced by

property-owners should a park be created: all residential owners could

obtain twenty-five-year leases and hardship sellers would have to be

accommodated within one year of authorization. The most important

features of Hart’s plan, however, its 77,000 acres and the inclusion of

the inland lakes remained unchanged. In lieu of Congressman Griffin’s

support Hart could point to a companion bill to S.792 introduced by

Neil Staebler. Congressman Staebler was was a long-time Democratic

party activist from Ann Arbor. Due to its growing population

Michigan was awarded another congressional seat in 1962, but because

the state legislature could not come up with a redistricting plan before

the congressional election it was decided to elect a one-term

congressman-at-large. Staebler won the seat. He could speak for all of

Michigan in the House of Representatives, but he had the liability of

being a lame-duck from the day he arrived since redistricting would

take his seat in two years. Rather than resolve the differences between

his and Griffin’s approaches, Hart grasped at Staebler’s temporary

support and tried to push ahead. The Senator’s influence was such that

he was able to prevail upon the Committee on Interior and Insular

Affairs to hold new hearings on Sleeping Bear, in Washington, D.C. in

March and in the field in July 1963. [30]

 The Washington, D.C. hearings were on Senator Hart’s turf and

were an effective platform from which to demonstrate the progress he

had made toward resolving the vexing Sleeping Bear issue. Both local

citizens and politicians wrote or spoke in favor of S.792. One resort

owner on Crystal Lake wrote that the new bill “gives us the protection

we must have for our natural resources, yet sacrifices none of the

fundamental property rights we have always enjoyed.” Hart could also

point to local newspaper editorials and county-wide public officials

who were now in favor of a Sleeping Bear park. In contrast the
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_2e.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:20 AM]

opposition looked uninspired, and impertinent. They were most

effective when counteracting the park service funded economic

projections for the park, with much more realistic data from their own

studies. They were least effective when their attacks became personal.

Senator Alan Bible, (D) Nevada, twice interrupted the testimony of

W.F. Meinhard of Maple City, Michigan, finally saying: “I am sure

Senator Hart is acting from the highest possible motives. I do not see

where you accomplish one bit in coming before a committee and

impugning his motives.” The hearing closed with a promise by Senator

Bible to visit the Sleeping Bear area that summer [31]

 That visit took place July 3-4, 1963. Senator Bible and three other

members of his subcommittee were on grueling tour that included field

hearings and tours of proposed parks in Oregon, Kansas, Utah, and

Missouri. They flew over the entire proposed lakeshore and enjoyed a

driving tour of the mainland scenic sites. Late in the afternoon of the

Fourth of July a brief field hearing was held in the auditorium of the

Frankfort High School. In spite of the holiday the school was packed

with 1,500 spectators. The legislators entered under a sign that read:

“Welcome Senators—Let Sleeping Bears Sleep.” [32]

 As the sign indicated, the Frankfort hearing was a well-staged peprally for the park proposal opposition. The efforts of Hart’s office and

the involvement of Allen T. Edmunds had lowered rhetoric of the

dispute over the course of the year. There was genuine optimism

among park boosters that the tide of local popular opinion was starting

to turn in their direction. The Frankfort hearing dispelled that delusion

and demonstrated that Ove Jensen and the Citizens’ Council were still

a skilled and formidable force. Jensen had pressed Senator Alan Bible

to visit the area and when the invitation was accepted the former made

sure that the itinerary was not left completely in the hands of the

National Park Service. Jensen personally took the senators out on Glen

Lake in his boat and showed them the summer homes threatened by the

Hart bill. The area was carefully manicured for the visit. Along the

roads obnoxious signs were removed and all trash picked-up. At the

hearings they presented a petition, supported by better than 18,000

signatures, condemning S.792. Organized by a housewife from

Birmingham, Michigan, the petition resonated more in the red, white,

and blue atmosphere of the hearing than Genevieve Gillette’s

presentation of letters of support from conservation groups

representing 750,000 members. The most heartening moment for the

opposition came at the end of the hearing when Senator Milward

Simpson fired a withering concluding broadside at S.792. Simpson

was a colorful and rare species in American politics—an unabashed

1930s Republican. The former governor of Wyoming was dedicated to

opposing big government on all fronts. In another generation he would

have been honored as a sagebrush rebel, but in the 1960s he was

simply a throw-back to a discredited era. “I want to say to you that

I’ve read this bill backwards and forwards,” he proclaimed. “It shrieks

with condemnation, it shrieks with authority....once the Park Service

gets into the area, they’ll take over.....I think it’s a violation of

individual freedom. I think the thing should be stopped. I’m hoping

that Senators Hart and McNamara will withdraw their bill.” A storm

of applause swept over the auditorium.[33] 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_2e.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:20 AM]

 The 1963 hearings were a critical moment in the fight to make a

Sleeping Bear park. The fact-finding and site visit had convinced the

majority of the subcommittee, Senator Simpson not withstanding, that

the time had come to move forward. The marked-up bill that was

reported out of the committee contained many features that are part of

the lakeshore today. The inland lake areas were removed from the

park, eliminating more than 25,000 acres, all but 288 private structures

from the plan, and ending the need for Senator Hart’s complicated

lakeshore zones. To maintain the viability of the park service’s upland

scenic vistas and the park road system, two scenic highway corridors

were cobbled together from the remaining inland acreage. In deference

to people who had improved property in the area since the original

Hart bill, the cut off date for approved structures was advanced to

December 31, 1962. Thus modified S.792 was approved by the full

Senate in December 1963. A solid, reasonable Sleeping Bear bill had

received the strong support of the upper house but because of

Congressman Griffin’s opposition and that of Representative Charlotte

Reid (R—Illinois), who had a home on Crystal Lake, it did not have a

chance to win approval in the lower house. The Sleeping Bear bill was

sent to the over-burdened House Interior and Insular Affairs

Committee, of which Reid was a member, where it languished, without

a hearing, without a reading, without any consideration whatsoever.

Senate Bill 792 lapsed when the Eighty-eighth Congress adjourned at

the end of 1964. [34]

 The unwillingness of Representative Robert Griffin to either support

Hart’s compromises or advance his own still-born park proposal

delayed the creation of a Sleeping Bear Park (which could, perhaps

should, have taken place in 1964-1965) for an unnecessary additional

five years. Those five years, to paraphrase Senator Hart, produced very

little light and a great deal of heat. In northwest Michigan the

Frankfort hearing served to reignite the bitter and vitriolic atmosphere

of the original Hart bill. As Genevieve Gillette left the Frankfort High

School auditorium she was confronted by a group of friends with

homes in the park area. They looked her in the eye and then without

saying a word, as a group, turned their backs on her. Ted Carland, who

operated a lumber and building supply business, suffered an immediate

fall in business when he publicly supported the park bill at the

Frankfort hearing. Such was the climate of opinion that even

customers who stuck with him occasionally requested that when he

delivered building materials that he use an unmarked truck, so that

neighbors would not know they were doing business with a park

supporter. Edward Bradley, a Standard Oil distributor in Benzie

County, supported the park because he thought it would be a shot-inthe-arm for local business. Then he received a call from the corporate

headquarters. “What’s going on up there,” they asked after having

received a flood of cancelled Standard Oil credit cards from irate

former customers. Bradley, like others, had been put on an “enemy

list” by the opposition. [35]

The bitterness and persistence of this opposition stemmed from the

simple and obvious fact that some year-round residents and some

summer home owners would lose their property to the proposed
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_2e.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:20 AM]

national park. As the park plans became clearer and less intrusive that

threat was greatly reduced in fact, but not in perception. People chose

sides on the issue at a very early date and did not change their minds as

Senator Hart’s proposals evolved. The Senator and the National Park

Service did not have credibility in their eyes. Political ideology had a

modest impact on how people perceived the issue. Democrats and

Republicans were on both sides of the dispute. John Daugherty,

Benzie County’s Republican prosecutor, like other younger men was

instinctively in favor of the park, which he saw as a solution to the

area’s chronic sixteen per cent unemployment. The fact that northwest

Michigan was overwhelmingly Republican and Michigan’s two

Democratic senators were sponsoring the legislation, however, made

the fight seem partisan. An attitudinal survey conducted in the area

during the summer and fall of 1962 revealed that eighty-four percent of

Republicans were strongly opposed to the park, while only forty-six

percent of Democrats were strongly opposed. Geography and class

also shaped the conflict. Senators Hart and McNamara were strongly

identified with Democratic dominated Detroit and the influence of the

United Auto Workers (UAW). The powerful union, then at the peak of

its influence in local and national politics, was an enthusiastic

supporter of the expansion of the National Park Service. The UAW

tended to see Sleeping Bear, as a Detroit News editorial characterized

the issue, as a choice: “For All, or a Few?” Summer home owners

from Detroit and Chicago, who tended to be professionals or whitecollar workers, sometimes quipped that the intent of Hart’s bill was to

create a “UAW park.” [36]

NEXT> To Promote or to Preserve?

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_2f.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:25 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Chapter Two

To Promote or to Preserve?

 An important factor in the development of local support for national

park projects at Pictured Rocks, in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula, and at

Apostle Islands, in northern Wisconsin, was the desire of local

communities to profit from the increased tourist traffic that a national

park would draw to their area. The Upper Great Lakes Region

(northern Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota) did not share in the

general prosperity that swept over the United States in the early 1960s.

The poverty and unemployment rates in the region rivaled those of

Appalachia, although the misery of that region was more celebrated in

the national media. Orville L. Freeman, a Minnesota progressive and

President John F. Kennedy’s Secretary of Agriculture, was anxious to

highlight the problems of the region and develop strategies to improve

its economic prospects. In September 1963 he organized a regional

convocation, the “Land and People: Northern Great Lakes Regional

Conference,” with the aim of encouraging the people of the region to

decide for themselves how to “restore and sustain a healthy regional

economy.” At the same time President Kennedy was being pressured

by Secretary of the Interior Udall to jump-start the latter’s plan to

double the size of the National Park System by undertaking a national

conservation tour. The initiatives of the two ambitious cabinet

members came together with the President’s decision to visit the

proposed Apostle Islands National Lakeshore and to open the “Land

and People” conference. Out of the President’s speech, and through the

cooperation of local and national leaders to find a way to immediately

help the area emerged the contradictory conservation strategy to

promote the region through its preservation.[37]

 Greeted by 50,000 enthusiastic citizens in the streets of Duluth,

Minnesota, President Kennedy injected his personal blend of energy

and optimism into the delegates to the “Land and People” conference.

He announced that he was turning the attention of his administration to

the problem of a region whose beautiful shorelines reminded him of his

own beloved Cape Cod. “The economy of a region that should be

prospering,” he said, “has reflected instead a series of economic

setbacks as mines and mills shut down.” What was needed was the

“full employment of both the natural and human resources which this

area still possess in abundance.” To do that Kennedy proposed linking

economic development initiatives to conservation proposals, “this

Region is more and more a major recreation area within easy access of

tens of millions of Americans.” Kennedy advocated new national park

projects in the area and a regional approach to planning.[38]

 The Upper Great Lakes Regional Commission was eventually

created to provide the latter, while new park projects sprouted in the
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_2f.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:25 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

form of the Saint Croix National Scenic Riverway, the Ice Age Trail,

Voyageurs National Park, and Apostle Islands National Lakeshore.

Each of those initiatives were at least in part supported by Wisconsin

and Minnesota communities to foster a stronger tourist industry as well

as to preserve treasured recreational resources. In the Upper Peninsula

Kennedy’s call to promote and preserve was received like a lifeline by

a drowning man. The completion of the Mackinac Bridge in

November, 1957 had not caused quite the tourist renaissance hoped for

by northern Michigan communities, in part because of the opening of a

scenic highway along the north shore of Lake Superior by the Province

of Ontario, which tended to draw tourists farther north. The towns

along Michigan’s Superior shore were anxious for a potential tourist

attractor like the Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore. Lower Michigan,

however, was cool to the call to preserve and promote. The result of

the “Land and People” conference was to give greater impetus to the

Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore as opposed to the stalled Sleeping

Bear proposal. “I certainly didn’t feel that Pictured Rocks was in as

much danger of disappearing as Sleeping Bear,” recalled Genevieve

Gillette, who had been a delegate at the conference. “I presume most

people in the Park Association, thought that Sleeping Bear was much

more of a project and much more important to push strongly than

Pictured Rocks.” That perception changed due to the conference and

Pictured Rocks was seen in light of the new regional strategy. Both

Gillette and Senator Hart’s staff devoted more attention to Pictured

Rocks and in 1966 it was made the first national lakeshore.[39]

 The strong local opposition to Sleeping Bear, both among the

summer home owners, but also among business operators in the area

prevented that project from fitting into the economic development push

of the Kennedy—Johnson years. A considerable liability in trying to

build support for the lakeshore’s economic development potential was

the economic feasibility study prepared for the park service by

Michigan State University. Funded with the last of the Mellon money

from the Great Lakes Shoreline Survey, the report was rushed to

completion in 1961 to support the first Hart bill. The report began by

noting that 20 million people lived within “an easy day’s drive of the

area,” then went on to predict that within five years of the

establishment of the park it would attract “an additional 1.2 million

people” to the area each year. That figure would have given Sleeping

Bear greater attendance than either Grand Canyon or Yosemite. The

report allowed that park land purchases would take valuable land off

the property tax rolls and cost the local school districts a combined

$114,124, but the Institute for Community and Development Services

at Michigan State, which wrote the report, blithely concluded that the

increased sales tax in the area from the million plus visitors would

offset these loses. From a statewide perspective that was true, but it

was little consolation to the local community because sales tax

revenues were distributed throughout Michigan and would not be

available for the local schools. The report particularly angered fruit

farmers in the area by disparaging the prospects for cherry growing,

even though the county agricultural agents (also employed by

Michigan State University) had been telling farmers the opposite for

more than fifteen years. Predictions about how much money a

Sleeping Bear lakeshore would generate were based on studies done at
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_2f.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:25 AM]

much larger and celebrated parks such as Grand Teton and Smokey

Mountains. The hastily assembled study was less a scientific

evaluation that it was a studied effort to boost the National Park

Service’s plans for the area. [40] 

 “That economic feasibility study almost cost the whole park

proposal all creditability,” recalled John Daugherty, a Benzie County

park supporter. The Citizens’ Council hammered away at the wild

predictions of the study during the Washington and Frankfort

hearings. They commissioned a Chicago consulting firm to conduct an

independent study and used its findings to refute the government study

point-by-point. The economic feasibility study was another misstep by

the park service caused by the rush to advance a wide range of park

projects, in too short a time, with a limited staff to manage the

effort.[41]

 Once the National Park Service lost creditability in the Sleeping

Bear area, the agency became the object of vilification, and the project

was subjected to a scrutiny that was always close and probing, that

sometimes bordered on paranoia. Most park opponents regarded the

project as an example of a federal bureaucracy out of control and

overstepping its legitimate mandate. In Ove Jensen’s words, it was “a

fight between small people and a big government.” Others ascribed

deep and dark designs to unseen forces behind the Hart bill. One story,

faithfully told with seemingly genuine quotes and eyewitness

verification, had Lawrence Rockefeller as the power behind the plan.

Supposedly, Rockefeller’s sister, while attending a wedding on Long

Lake, fell in love with Glen Lake. “I have seen all the beautiful lakes

in the world, and Glen Lake is the most beautiful of them all,” she is

reported to have exclaimed. Several years later Lawrence Rockefeller

was reported as having personally inspected the area. The millionaire

heir then promised to put up the money for the National Park Service

to buy it. The story obviously conflated the Rockefeller’s well-known

philanthropy at Grand Teton National Park and Virgin Islands National

Park with the support of Paul Mellon for the Great Lakes Shoreline

Survey. “They don’t want the Sand Dune,” charged Nan Helm, a

lakeshore property owner, “what the Rockefellers want is ‘our lovely

Glen Lake’.” Such stories reveal the deep attachment people had to the

area and their conviction that it was a special place. They also indicate

the bewilderment that people who long regarded themselves as patriotic

citizens felt when they suddenly found themselves at odds with their

government. “I just can’t understand why Mr. Udall wouldn’t want me

to go on growing my petunias,” an elderly women asked at the time of

the Senate subcommittee visit to Glen Lake. [42]

 Inflated arguments by federal officials predicting Sleeping Bear

would be a major tourist attractor only stiffened the opposition by

conjuring images of hordes of tourists and lines of cars jammed in

traffic. People in northwest Michigan enjoyed its seclusion and slow

pace. Some local businessmen, turning the economic development

argument on its head, grouchily complained that more visitors to the

area would force them to hire more staff and expand their operations.

The prospect of “honk-tonk strips” as were found in Gatlinburg and

other communities at national park gateways was repellent to many
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_2f.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:25 AM]

residents. When the House of Representatives finally held its own

hearing on Sleeping Bear in 1965 Congressman Griffin argued that if a

national lakeshore was ever going to be established it needed to be

more committed to preserving the natural beauty and character of the

area, than to its promotion. Griffin went so far as to propose a buffer

zone around the park to restrain ugly commercialization.[43]

 In August 1965, the Senate passed S.936, another Hart Sleeping

Bear bill. This action keyed supporters of the park to lobby for

congressional action. Genevieve Gillette met with Wayne Aspinall (DColorado) the powerful chair of the House Interior Committee and

Republican attorney John Daugherty lobbied Representative Gerald

Ford (R-Michigan). The passage of the Land and Water Conservation

fund in 1964 had made all congressmen more receptive of park

projects. The fund applied monies raised by selling leases for offshore oil drilling to federal and state conservation projects. The bill

made Sleeping Bear’s multimillion dollar price tag much more

palatable to representatives concerned with the growing federal budget

deficit. Another event which gave the Sleeping Bear bill momentum in

the House was the removal of Congressman Robert P. Griffin. Senator

Patrick V. McNamara (D-Michigan), Hart’s silent co-sponsor of the

park bills, died in April of 1966. Michigan’s Republican governor,

George Romney, appointed Griffin to the vacant seat in the Senate. For

the remainder of 1966 northwest Michigan had no congressional

representative and park supporters sought to push the bill through in

the vacuum. [44]

 The Sleeping Bear bill nearly made it out of the House that

summer. Chairman Aspinall aggressively pushed the bill forward in

his committee. It fell to Representative Charlotte Reid (R-Illinois) the

Crystal Lake cottage owner, to try and derail the bill. On August 6,

1966, Reid took advantage of the fact that thirty-two members,

including most of the bill’s supporters, were absent from the

committee. She pressed for consideration of the bill and would have

succeeded in killing it save for the astute maneuvering of John P.

Saylor (R-Pennsylvania). A strong conservationist, Saylor pretended to

oppose the bill because by voting “no” he would be permitted to have

the full committee reconsider the bill at a more favorable time. That

occasion came three days latter when the full committee voted to create

a Sleeping Bear lakeshore. The amended bill differed from the Senate

bill by its inclusion of North Manitou Island and a buffer zone along

M-22. The bill now only needed to be considered by the full house to

be law. But the 89th Congress was one of the most activist in

American history. President Lyndon B. Johnson’s landslide victory in

1964 had sent scores of liberal Democrats to the House on his coattails

and they had spent their terms advancing an avalanche of legislation. It

was the discipline and organization of the House which advanced

Sleeping Bear lakeshore to the brink, even without a local

representative as an advocate, but then the success of the 89th Congress

caught up with the lakeshore plan. There were so many bills reported

out of committee that the House Rules Committee had a formidable

task trying to arrange the schedule for presentation on the floor of the

House. It did not help that the Chairman of the Rules Committee,
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_2f.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:25 AM]

Howard W. Smith (D-Virginia), was a lame-duck bitter over his recent

defeat in a primary by the liberal wing of his own party. Smith resisted

appeals by Democrats and Republicans to have the bill advanced to the

floor of the House. But Smith favored other bills with a place on the

calendar, and the Sleeping Bear compromise, on the brink of passage,

expired buried in the Rules Committee when Congress adjourned in the

fall of 1966.[45]

NEXT> From Economic Necessity to Environmental Amenities

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_2g.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:30 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Chapter Two

From Economic Necessity to Environmental Amenities

 As the Eighty-ninth Congress became history the Sleeping Bear

compromise became a dead bill. Senator Hart could console himself

that the Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore had succeed in becoming

law. Pictured Rocks was created out of the Kennedy-era emphasis on

pairing conservation and economic development. That ambivalent, if

not contradictory, approach to the environment had been successful in

pushing a host of new park programs through a Congress committed to

waging a “War on Poverty” and creating a “Great Society.” During

the two-year run of the Eighty-ninth Congress, twenty-two new areas

were added to the National Park System, including three shoreline

parks, three major new recreation areas, and a large number of new

historic sites and national monuments. But the dubious linkage of

conservation to economic development had outlasted its usefulness by

the late 1960s. A fresh green wave was sweeping across the country

that would transform the old conservation alliance of sportsman, nature

lovers, and the recreation industry, and give birth to a more aggressive,

alarmist environmental movement. [46]

 The new environmentalism was born in an era of social and

political conflict. Late 1960s America was a society wracked by

social, racial, generational, and political conflict. The liberal orthodoxy

of the early 1960s was followed by a deeply critical, often cynical,

analysis of America. Taking its initial inspiration from Rachel

Carson’s The Silent Spring, this new environmentalism focused more

on air and water pollution than public lands. Where older

conservationists were concerned about the number of campsites at

shoreline line parks, the new environmentalists recognized that

pollution, some of it caused by recreation users, was degrading the

waterways, in some places past the point of recovery. In the Great

Lakes region sensational stories aroused the public. Giant algae

blooms washed ashore at Chicago and Milwaukee, rendering beaches

unswimable. The spring die-off of alewives, a small silver fish that

invaded the Great Lakes from the Atlantic in the late 1940s, made it

impossible to even walk along those beaches. The stench from the

thousands of dead fish that washed ashore each day drove people from

the lakefront. Lake Erie was even worse than Lake Michigan.

Scientists testifying at Public Health Service hearings claimed that Erie

was “dying.” As if to punctuate that point emphatically, in 1969, the

heavily polluted Cuyahoga River at Cleveland caught fire. Waters

stinking, lakes dying, and rivers burning were clear signs to

environmentalists that America had put too much emphasis on

economic development and not enough on natural resource protection.

[47]
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_2g.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:30 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

 The new environmentalists borrowed some of their tactics from the

civil rights and anti-war movements. They took an aggressive and

confrontational approach to the problems of the region. There was a

counter-cultural tone to some of their rhetoric, particularly as it applied

to business. Corporate polluters were the first to feel the weight of the

new movement. If housewives had to give up their favorite

dishwashing detergent to reduce phosphate pollution in the Great

Lakes, ordinary citizens had no pity on corporate polluters. This

sentiment spread out from the suburban subdivisions to elected

officials in Washington, D.C. and Lansing. The hard-edged activism

of the new environmentalism was best exemplified by the Sierra Club,

which by 1968 had thrown-off its amateurish, if earnest, origins along

with its not-for-profit status and became an active and effective

political action organization. While involving itself full-time in

legislative activities in Washington, D.C., the Sierra Club also began to

build local chapters all across the country to be prepared to fight

environmental battles in the hinterland. Nationally strict restrictions on

air and water pollution were achieved in the late 1960s and early

1970s. Locally in northern Michigan, concern over what business,

unrestrained, might do to Sleeping Bear attracted the interest of the

newly organized Mackinac Chapter of the Sierra Club. [48]

 The building of subdivisions and summer homes in the Sleeping

Bear area was initially hurt by Senator Hart’s attempt to create a

national lakeshore. But as each of the Senator’s bills, year after year,

met with a stonewall in the House, people in northwest Michigan went

back to the business of development. In 1965, Senator Hart’s proposal,

as modified by the Senate Interior Committee, included 266 private

homes. That number swelled to 436 by 1970. The opposition said that

a National Park was not needed to take care of the area, but as more

and more of the frontage on Glen and Platte lakes came under

development, as neighbors became crowded on the edges of busy lakes

and roads, that claim began to sound a bit hollow. At North Bar Lake,

a secluded pristine embayment set among the dunes just north of the

town of Empire, developers began to lower the level of this popular

swimming area in order to create more frontage to sell. Another

disquieting sign of unrestrained development was the chaos that

descended on the Platte River each fall. In 1965, in an effort to control

alewife populations in the Lake Michigan, the Michigan Department of

Natural Resources had planted Coho Salmon in the Platte. In 1967, the

mature fish returned to the river to spawn. Larger than anything most

Midwestern fisherman had ever caught, the salmon ignited an acute

case of angling fever. The press dubbed the result “coho madness.” To

the manager of Benzie State Park the rush of hundreds of vehicles and

the swarm of anxious anglers did indeed look like madness. An

unsightly concrete block motel, a gas station, and a hastily installed

boat ramp marred the once beautiful mouth of the Platte. A swimming

and picnic area enjoyed by generations of area residents and visitors

had been transformed, almost overnight, into an example of the

inability of local controls to preserve the area.. [49]

 It was, however, the development of a privately owned park on the

dunes that drew the most attention. The park was the work of Pierce

Stocking, a flannel-shirted lumberman of the old do-it-yourself school.
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_2g.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:30 AM]

He was already a considerable property owner in the area when the

National Park Service first nominated the dunes for park status.

Stocking sensed a big payday when the legislation finally passed and

he increased his holdings in the area. What he did not expect was a

decade delay in the authorization of the lakeshore. With most of his

assets tied-up in Sleeping Bear real estate, the failure of Congress to

act on Hart’s proposals left Pierce Stocking economically stymied. But

he was not a man who was temperamentally or financially able to sit

and wait for the folks in Washington to sort things out. He developed a

trout pond on one piece of property and operated a motel on another.

Finally, in 1968, he decided if the park service was not going to open a

dunes park, Stocking intended to open one for himself. He had in the

past sought the cooperation of the Michigan State Parks to operate a

dune tour on state land, but in 1968 he opened his own dune scenic

drive park. To the uninitiated visitor Stocking’s “Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park” had the look of a well-designed, if small, state or even federal

park. From the attractive entrance sign to the “park headquarters

building,” to ten miles of scenic roads—complete with lookouts and

picnic areas—Stocking’s park was an impressive accomplishment

considering it was constructed in six months. Even the National Park

Service team that visited the park in 1968 offered a “favorable

response.” What troubled people was that in developing his park

Stocking closed-off a large area in the middle of the dunes. Visitors

had the option of paying a reasonable fee of five dollars per car to

enter the park, but his effort was a blunt reminder that the fate of the

dunes was, in part, in private hands. “Keep out” signs could just as

easily be placed in the sand as a picnic area.[50] 

In the end it was a curious alliance of environmental activists and

business people in favor of economic development that formed the

local impetus for the Sleeping Bear Lakeshore. Northwest Michigan

began a slow but steady population growth in the 1960s. The terrible

riot that rocked Detroit in July 1967 engendered in many middle-class

Michiganders revulsion with the violence and racial tension of urban

living. A pristine environment and access to nature were amenities that

new residents and summer home owners expected in Leelanau and

Benzie counties. Far-sighted business people realized that controlling

the pace of development was critical to maintaining the quality of life

that attracted residents and businesses to the area in the first place. A

good example of the way in which the pro-development and proenvironment forces cooperated to promote the park plan was the “Save

the Bear Day.”

NEXT> The Birth of a National Lakeshore

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_2h.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:36 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Chapter Two

The Birth of a National Lakeshore

 On June 16, 1969, the car ferry City of Green Bay departed

Frankfort harbor for a cruise up the shore to Sleeping Bear. Aboard the

ship were Senator Philip Hart, James Kellogg, the official

representative of William Milliken, the Governor of Michigan, and

various representatives of state and federal agencies. Jostled together

in uneasy association on the crowded ship were hundreds of people

evenly divided between chamber of commerce members and Sierra

Club supporters, the latter led by their national president. But the

beauty of the scenery and the splendid weather made the media event a

huge success. Television, radio, and newspaper coverage of the fourhour cruise publicized the growing popularity of the Sleeping Bear

proposal, while the “Save the Bear” slogan lent an air of urgency to

their call for action—as if dump trucks were ready to haul the dunes

away to a glass works. In the midst of the voyage local Republicans

telephoned Congressman Guy Vander Jagt (R-Michigan) to let him

know that the event was a big success and admonishing him “not to

miss the boat” on Sleeping Bear.[51]

 By 1969, Congressman Vander Jagt was scrambling to catch up

“with the boat.” The Republican from Luther, Michigan, had gone

from being one of the bitterest opponents of the Sleeping Bear

proposal to a late, but vital proponent. He began his journey in 1965

when as a state senator he testified against both the Hart and the

Griffin bills. He was so against the prospect of a national lakeshore

that a year later he secured passage of a bill that, against all precedent,

required the State of Michigan to sell rather than donate all of its

Sleeping Bear lands in event of federal park. Later he tried to secure

federal funds to expand D.H. Day State Park, thereby removing the

need for a national lakeshore. But even fellow Republicans were cool

to this idea. Vander Jagt, however, began to waiver in his opposition

in 1968. Richard M. Nixon’s victory in the presidential election

returned the executive branch to Republican control for the first time in

eight years. Nixon was a pragmatist determined to direct domestic

policy from the center of the political spectrum. In 1968, it was clear

that environmentalism was an issue with broad public support. Neither

Nixon nor key Republican conservationists in the House, such as John

Saylor (R—Pennsylvania), were going to be caught unprepared on the

issue. While the White House staff focused the bulk of its

environmental energy on the Task Force which paved the way for the

creation of the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of

the Interior continued to support the scores of park proposals generated

during the Udall years. On the local level, Vander Jagt also saw the

GOP getting greener. In 1968, party faithful packed the meeting of the

Benzie County Republican Committee at the Crystal Lake Township
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_2h.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:36 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

Hall and resolved to support a national lakeshore. These shifts in the

dynamics of environmental politics as well as a new set of economic

incentives forced Vander Jagt to move toward a Sleeping Bear

compromise. [52]

 The new economic incentive which stirred Vander Jagt was the

prospect of a four-lane limited access highway. Michigan’s Ninth

Congressional District embraced a long stretch of Lake Michigan’s east

shore, from Holland, Michigan, north to near Traverse City. In 1967,

the Michigan U.S. 31 Corridor Association, an alliance of every

chamber of commerce from the Indiana border to Mackinac, began to

push for such a road in order to attract Michigan-bound Chicagoans to

their part of the state. By dramatically reducing travel times such a

road would greatly increase the rate of development and tourist

spending in the Ninth District. But communities east of the U.S. 31

corridor were not going to sit by and idly wait for the stream of tourists

to be diverted away from them. By 1968, the business community of

Vander Jagt’s hometown of Cadillac, Michigan, realized that the

creation of a Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore could be a

powerful argument that the freeway should indeed be built through

their town and not farther to the east. There were more voters in

Cadillac than Leelanau County, so it did not take long for their

congressman to move from the status of opponent to supporter of

Sleeping Bear lakeshore. As one businessman put it: “We need the

highway, we need the park. Anyone in business opposed to the park

must have rocks in their head.”[53]

 While Congressman Vander Jagt did not have “rocks in his head,”

he did try to make a final effort to protect his constituents in the

Sleeping Bear area. In September 1968, Vander Jagt announced that

he would support a Sleeping Bear bill if two issues could be resolved:

1) The local school districts would be reimbursed for the land

withdrawn from the tax base, and; 2) That the rights of the owners of

unimproved property within the proposed lakeshore, including their

right to a speedy sale, be protected. Although these were not issues the

Department of Interior could itself immediately solve, they were not

deal breakers. From the time Vander Jagt first raised the issue, the

House Interior and Insular Affairs Committee made it abundantly clear

that they would not countenance a provision for the federal government

to make compensatory payments to the Leelanau County public

schools. The committee did alert their colleague to the precedent in

some park areas for the state government to commit itself to take up the

burden. At Vander Jagt’s instigation Governor George Romney and

key members of the state house and senate pledged to make such

payments, if they were needed. The second issue, securing the rights of

the owners of unimproved property proved a bit more complicated.

Vander Jagt proposed setting up a strict time limit in which all land

acquisitions had to take place, so that owners of isolated tracts of land

would not be surrounded by federal holdings and left for years with

little more than the right to pay taxes on land that could not be

developed, until such time as the government decided to make them an

offer for their tract. The National Park Service rejected the very

concept of a strict time limit because it would leave lands unpurchased

by the deadline lost to the park forever, regardless of their importance
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_2h.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:36 AM]

for recreation or preservation purposes. Practically Vander Jagt’s

proposal would put the Sleeping Bear land acquisition priorities, ahead

of all other park development projects in the system, something neither

the agency nor the other members of Congress, with parks in their own

districts, would tolerate. The solution was to place all lands within the

proposed lakeshore into three land-use categories: 1) Public Use and

Development, lands owned outright by the National Park Service; 2)

Environmental Conservation lands, some of these Category II lands

might be owned in fee by the government but others could remain in

private hands subject to a scenic easement; 3) Private Use and

Development, included all private lands within the lakeshore which

were protected from condemnation. Vander Jagt also extracted a

promise from the park service that at least fifty percent of the land

acquisition funds would be expended within two years of authorization.

[54]

 A howl of protest was let loose from the Sleeping Bear area when

word of Congressman Vander Jagt’s change of policy was received.

The concessions achieved by their representative were of no

consolation to the core of an opposition that was unilaterally opposed

to any type of national park in their area. But by June of 1969 there

were four separate Sleeping Bear bills before the House Interior and

Insular Affairs Committee and every member of the Michigan

congressional delegation, Republican and Democrat alike, had signed

on to the project. The days when Citizens’ Council could stop a

Sleeping Bear park were at an end. Nonetheless, Muriel Ferris who

had handled Sleeping Bear for Senator Hart’s office for nine years

confided to a friend, “we are all treading as though on eggs until we

see the bill through the House.”[55]

 At a final hearing on the proposed lakeshore, held in Washington,

D.C. in June of 1970, the Council was clearly dispirited and on the

defensive. “Now I feel sort of like the Indians felt 100 years ago,” their

spokesman observed. Stanley Ball, the Citizens’ Council’s Executive

Secretary, tried to outline how state and private initiatives alone were

sufficient to preserve the area and that a federalization of the area was

“just plain wrong.” Congressman John Saylor’s (R—Pennsylvania)

heated response to that sentiment indicated how far the pendulum had

swung since the evening when Conrad Wirth was assailed eight years

before. “I can tell you that you are like a good many other people,”

Saylor lectured. “It is all right to establish a national park as long as it

does not affect you. This seems to be the attitude of a good many

people in that area. They would like a national park in Wyoming, they

would like a national park in California, they would like a national park

in Key Biscayne in Florida, in Texas, but they do not want one in

Sleeping Bear, Mich. In other words, ‘because that is my home.’”

Other members of the committee joined in to push Ball to explain why

it was “plain wrong” to condemn land for national parks, when

Leelanau County itself condemned land for schools and roads and

benefited from the practice of condemning land to create parks in other

parts of the country. Ball finally shook his head and resignedly said, “I

am not too sure now what I did mean, after you fellows get through

with me.” Congressman Saylor concluded the exchange by declaring:

“what I have an inclination to do right now, I will introduce a bill
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_2h.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:36 AM]

instead of taking 77,000 acres it will probably take about 277,000 acres

up in that area, and then I will compromise it down to 177,000 acres,

and those who oppose it will think they have won a great victory and I

would have won a bigger one, and the American people a few

generations from now will look around and say, ‘Gee, we are sorry

Saylor was not able to get 277,000 acres instead of 177,000.’” [56]

 In spite of such contentious exchanges the hearing did establish a

broad common ground concerning the Sleeping Bear area. The

testimony of the Citizens’ Council, the Sierra Club’s endorsement, and

the advocacy of the chamber of commerce boosters all shared a

concern about maintaining the area in its current condition. Dayton

Willard, who chaired the Platte Lakes Area Association, concluded his

testimony before the House committee by putting new lyrics to the then

popular “Hamm’s” northwoods beer jingle:

A beer is a beer, is a beer.

A bear is a bear, is a bear,

Until you have seen our Sleeping Bear

Preserve our Bear, yes

Protect our Bear, yes,

Save our Bear, save our Bear, save our Bear from what?

Federal exploitation as a national recreation area,

A glorified camp ground,

Don’t fence her in with bottles and rubbish cans,

Just let her stay there,

Majestic, silent, serene.

We who live in the area do care.

James Dorsey of Empire, Michigan, was one of those local people who

cared. “Every man of good conscience agrees this should be done,” he

wrote, “the quarrrel is over the method whereby it is achieved.” To

many people in northwest Michigan the issue had come down to

“either turning our backs and going home and watching the area go to

pot, or making sure that steps are taken to curtail development in the

area with a view to preserving it in a manner consistent with the

interests and needs of those residing in the area, those owning property

in the area, those using the area and those visiting the area, both now

and in the foreseeable future.” Put in those terms the difference

between the supporters and the opposition to the lakeshore seemed less

one of principle and more one merely of degree. With every member

of the Michigan congressional delegation in favor of a Sleeping Bear

lakeshore, the House committee chose to accept those areas of

agreement at face value and ignore the very real differences of method

between the two sides. [57]

 While the hearings in June of 1970 may have established the

desirability of a federal lakeshore in northwest Michigan, Interior

Committee Chair Wayne Aspinall was faced with two competing bills

to protect Sleeping Bear. House Democrats supported the bill

introduced by James G. O’Hara of Michigan’s Twelfth Congressional

District. O’Hara had been a tireless advocate of the Sleeping Bear bill

and a close ally of Senator Philip Hart. Since 1967 he had championed

the lakeshore in the House. Michigan’s Republican representatives had
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_2h.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:36 AM]

signed on to Congressman Vander Jagt’s bill. The differences between

the two bills were slight, and Chairman Aspinall requested a

consolidated bill that everyone was prepared to support. Since Vander

Jagt’s support had been the critical breakthrough, it made sense for his

bill to be the basis of the consolidation. For Congressman O’Hara, who

had carried the torch for Sleeping Bear for so long, it was a bitter pill

to be deprived of authorship of the final bill. The wisdom of the

compromise was made manifest, however, when the bill moved to the

Rules Committee. Charlotte Reid (R—Illinois), the Crystal Lake

cottage owner who made herself the champion of the local property

owners, used her influence to stymie the bill in that committee. Only

when Vander Jagt came before the committee and in secret session

argued his right to speak as the genuine representative of the people of

northwest Michigan was Reid’s influence overcome. The Sleeping

Bear bill, H.R. 18776 then went to the House floor where it passed via

a voice vote on September 22, 1970.[58]

 

 A final attempt to trap the bear was sprung in the Senate. Senator

Robert Griffin had never been reconciled to Philip Hart’s vision of a

Sleeping Bear lakeshore that embraced inland as well as shoreline

acreage. In a last minute attempt to monkey-wrench the compromise

Senator Griffin attempted to replace his own Sleeping Bear bill, one

based on his 1963 bill for a 37,000 acre park, for Senator Hart’s 60,

600 acre bill. Senator Griffin had communicated his support for the

compromise to the Senate subcommittee in June 1970, yet he had also

remained largely aloof of the issue during his Senate career. To try and

destroy Hart’s bill at this point seems a contradictory and gratuitous

gesture. Perhaps it was merely a play to the disgruntled property

owners in Leelanau and Benzie counties. Robert Griffin argued his

was the “better” bill, yet in seven years in the Congress he had done

nothing to advance it toward passage. The majority, however, were

with Senator Hart. He was one of the most respected members of the

majority party. Griffin’s maneuver, that would have robbed Hart of the

fruits of victory after the latter had labored with such determination for

so long, did not have a chance. After a brief debate the Sleeping Bear

bill was approved by acclamation. President Richard M. Nixon signed

the lakeshore into law on October 21, 1970.

 At the conclusion of the long divisive legislative incubation Senator

Philip A. Hart was justly hailed as the "father” of Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore. “Stick to your guns, & remember you’ve got

millions of us little guys on your side,” a supporter of the lakeshore

wrote him back in 1962. Hart did stick to his guns and the fact that a

large portion of the Lake Michigan shore in northwest Michigan is now

open to use by people who could not afford the price of lake frontage

is the result of his effort. That property owners on Glen and Platte

lakes do not today enjoy the privacy or serenity of a generation ago is

the cost they pay for the exclusion of the inland lakes from the national

lakeshore. The long fight to secure Sleeping Bear exacted its price in

the development of the area. In 1970, Genevieve Gillette lamented “its

already pretty late....Sleeping Bear was already being eroded beyond

sensible thinking.” Yet if it had not been for the less than perfect bill
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_2h.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:36 AM]

that was finally passed in 1970 there would be even less of a wonderful

landscape left to enjoy today.[59]

 If Philip Hart was the “father” of the Sleeping Bear Dunes then

Muriel Ferris and E. Genevieve Gillette were the midwives. They

crafted the basic concept and made the necessary compromises to make

the lakeshore possible. Gillette not only built the coalition of

environmentalists and state officials who made up the backbone of the

bill’s Michigan support, she was single handedly responsible for the

inclusion of a significant portion of the lower end of the park within

the original proposal. In the later years of the fight her role was less

prominent in part because of her heavy involvement on several White

House commissions as well as her role securing the Sylvannia National

Recreation Area, the McCormick Experimental Forest, and Pictured

Rocks National Lakeshore. By 1970 travel became more difficult for

the seventy-two year old dynamo but she still contributed her “knowhow and energy.” After passage Hart sent Gillette a copy of that day’s

account in the Congressional Record along with the sentiment, “You

deserve these historic pages.” Muriel Ferris was Gillette’s friend and

associate during the long struggle. As Hart’s legislative assistant it was

she, not the Senator, who arranged the testimony for each of the

hearings and attended the meetings and negotiations that made the

lakeshore a reality.[60]

 “Phil Hart is the father of the park; I might be the uncle or

something like that,” joked Guy Vander Jagt. The congressman from

Cadillac, Michigan, had to make the hardest decisions regarding the

Sleeping Bear proposal. His heart was with the people trying to keep

the federal government out of their backyard. His proposal for federal

funding of a state managed “Sleeping Bear Dunes U.S.A.” recreation

area was literally laughed out of Congress in 1968, fifteen years later

amid the “Reagan Revolution” the Department of the Interior was itself

making such proposals. In a climate of rising concern with

environmental abuse, with opportunities for economic development at

stake, Vander Jagt made the pragmatic decision to get the best deal he

could for all of his constituents. It was fitting that when all of the

rhetoric concerning the constitutional rights of property owners and the

need to save the environment for future generations had been spent, the

Sleeping Bear Lakeshore came into existence the same way most bills

are born, swaddled in a blanket shorn from high principle and bundled

in the basket of compromise.

NEXT> Chapter 3: Changes on the Land: The Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3b.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:43 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Chapter Three

Starting From Scratch

 “So far we have not had one cent of federal money to buy land,”

Julius Martinek said one year after the creation of the national

lakeshore, “and yet we have had people coming from all over the

country who have heard that Congress created a new park here and

expect it to be ready for use—instantly and magically, I presume.”

Martinek was the first superintendent of Sleeping Bear Dunes and like

the head of any new entity he had more problems than staff, higher

public expectations than budget lines, as well as the added burden of a

local population that was, in large part, committed to opposing the

lakeshore. Nothing came easy in the early years at Sleeping Bear

Dunes.[2]

 Allen T. Edmunds carefully chose Julius A. Martinek for the

difficult assignment. Although Martinek had been born in Cleveland in

1922, he had grown up in Traverse City, Michigan. His family had a

cottage on Long Lake and his first experiences hiking and camping

were in the forests in and around the Sleeping Bear Dunes. Edmunds

had attended the World Congress on Conservation with Martinek and

had taken to the latter’s straitforward style. Edmunds also liked

Martinek’s broad experience within the agency. The forty-nine year

old had started with the park service in 1949 after military service in

the Navy during World War II and college at Michigan State

University. The forestry graduate put in stints as a back country ranger

at Mount Rainier National Park and Sequoia National Park before

moving to Washington, D.C. and working as a planner in the office of

the director. Martinek was on the “fast-track” within the agency. In

1967, he headed a National Park Service team seconded to the United

Republic of Tanzania to plan Mount Kilimanjaro National Park. His

administrative experience included serving as Assistant Superintendent

at Yellowstone National Park and, just prior to coming to Sleeping

Bear, as Director of the National Capital Parks. Martinek had followed

Philip Hart’s tortuous attempt to create a Sleeping Bear park and he

had long desired to take on the challenge of building a new park “from

scratch.”[3]

 Martinek was well suited to the inevitable challenge of trying to

build a new park with few resources. He had a “hands-on” style of

leadership and a flair for “do-it-yourself” solutions. When he was a

ranger at Mount Rainier, he once resolved his frustration with budget

cuts that removed funding for a picnic area near a backcountry trail by

building the site himself, tables, outhouses and all, with little more than

a chainsaw. Many times during the lakeshore’s early days Martinek

would grab a shovel or hammer or saw and pitch-in to whatever job

needed to be done. Conversely, Martinek could also be a good
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3b.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:43 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

listener. This was critical for the first superintendent because there was

a real need for property owners in the area to vent their frustration with

the federal government in the early 1970s. A lot of people who

opposed the park had never had a chance to participate in the

congressional hearings and the superintendent was the one on whom

they “unloaded.” A considerable portion of Martinek’s time that first

year was spent at meetings to explain what was going to happen to

local stakeholders. No other member of the National Park Service,

save perhaps Allen Edmunds, exterted as much influence over the type

of park Sleeping Bear evolved into than Julius Martinek. This was not

only because he was the first superintendent but because of his

particular energy and vision. Twenty years after his term as

superintendent ended Martinek’s stamp was clearly visible on the

lakeshore.[4]

 The first lakeshore headquarters was in Frankfort, Michigan, at the

site of the former State Savings Bank, a terra cotta trimmed

commercial building located on Main Street. Martinek, a former

Traverse City resident, would have preferred that location as a

temporary headquarters. But the park service had already committed

itself to Frankfort, besides, Benzie County had a number of long-time

supporters of the project and Martinek was informed they were

offering space in the bank for free. The space had to be thoroughly

renovated, teller cages removed and carpets put in, and ended up

costing the agency $700 dollars a month in rent. Of greater assistance

to the lakeshore was Ted Carland’s offer to the superintendent to

publish in the Benzie County Patriot a series of columns (eventually

titled “Bear Facts”) to explain park service policy and give readers an

update on the development of the lakeshore. Some Leelanau County

residents resented the headquarters location in Frankfort because the

lakeshore “directly affects the affairs and property of far more

Leelanau County residents than Benzie County residents.” Martinek

was appointed in May and by early summer he was at work in the

lakeshore. The bulk of the park service staff in Frankfort that first year

were land acquisition specialists who did not report to the

superintendent. Martinek spent the bulk of his time familiarizing

himself with the park resources and developing liaison with local

governments, organizations, and meeting property owners. Although

he had next-to-nothing as a budget and little land to manage, the

problems immediately placed before him were intimidating. The gull

nesting ground on South Manitou island was reported to be suffering a

sudden and severe population decline, the Coast Guard station at

Sleeping Bear Bay was suffering structural damage from years of

neglect, and the State of Michigan proposed to build a modern boat

harbor at the mouth of the Platte River. On top of that throngs of

tourists anxious to see the newly legislated park had so packed D.H.

Day State Park on Memorial Day as to back-up traffic on Highway

109, and last but not least, his office was packed with landowners,

some anxious to sell their land, others making it clear that the park

service would have it only over their dead bodies.[5]

NEXT> Land Acquisition
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3b.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:43 AM]

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3c.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:47 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Chapter Three

Land Acquisition

 For the majority of the new national parks created in the 1960s and

1970s the process of land acquisition was a bitter, often protracted,

prelude to the agency’s normal job of presenting and protecting natural

and cultural resources to the public. Historically Americans have loved

their national parks. The National Park Service, as the protectors and

presenters of the parks historically enjoyed public esteem. But unlike

the western parks carved out of the public domain during the early

years of the century, condemnation of private property was necessary

to create all of the national lakeshores. It was the land acquisition

officer, not a friendly ranger in a “Smokey the Bear” hat that provided

many local people with their first exposure to the personnel of the

National Park Service. At Sleeping Bear the inevitable sense of loss

experienced by people moved out of the park area was unfortunately

underscored with a feeling of resentment based on the perception that

they had not been dealt with fairly. The reasons for the lingering

atmosphere of resentment, which is still palpable a generation after the

creation of the lakeshore, are a combination of procedure, personality,

and circumstance.

 Land Acquisition Officers came into an unenviable situation in

1971. Ten years of opposition to the concept of a national park had

resulted in the demonization of federal employees. New federal

procedures for land acquisition restricted the freedom of action of

federal employees in real estate negotiations. The Uniform Relocation

Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 was

designed to ensure uniform and fair treatment of people forced to leave

their homes due to federal projects. On the positive side it provided for

moving costs and replacement housing. It also mandated that the

government would not pay less than the fair market value of a

property, as determined by an independent appraisal. The effect of the

law was to remove flexibility and discretion from the acquisition

officer and make the independent appraisal all-important. Because of

the law sellers found government buyers almost totally unwilling to

negotiate and they felt they were left with “like it or lump it offers” for

their property. This accentuated the personal dynamics of the

acquisition program. None of the land acquisition staff had long

experience with the National Park Service and most were not

committed to living in the project area. The tone set by James E.

Williamson; the chief Land Acquisition Officer was unsympathetic,

unsmiling, and unrelenting. [6]

 Williamson was a large, gruff, bear of a man. He dominated a room

by his physical presence and his aggressively blunt manner. He came

to the National Park Service, like most of the men involved in the
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3c.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:47 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

Sleeping Bear Dunes land acquisition program, from the United States

Army Corps of Engineers. Immediately before coming to Frankfort he

had been stationed at the Apostle Islands. Land acquisition is a difficult

business under any circumstances. As John F. Pattie, one of

Williamson’s assistants, joked “I’ve been cussed at, kicked downstairs,

and had dogs sicced on me, but I have never been insulted!” Being

thick-skinned was a necessary characteristic for a lands officer. Yet

the men who came to Sleeping Bear Dunes from the Corps of

Engineers brought with them a tough, uncompromising style. John

Pattie recalled that Williamson and his staff were “hard riding, hard

shooting kind of people.” Williamson was particularly efficient at his

job, “but he did not care about making a good impression.” The

original chief of land acquisition for the project had been Donald

Campbell who bought a home in Frankfurt and settled his family in the

community. But Campbell was summarily removed from the project

after less than a year because he took too deliberate an approach to the

project. Where Campbell had been open and friendly, Williamson was

terse and uncommunicative, but the latter style got results. A former

bomber pilot, Williamson spoke with a slight southern drawl that

marked him as an outsider in northern Michigan. He expected to be

resented by people and he was. “You can see from history,” he told a

journalist, “the great lengths people will go to get land. So when you

take their land you touch a sensitive nerve.” He steeled himself to

complaints with the consolation, “I’m just carrying out Congressional

orders.” [7]

 After setting up the office, acquiring the necessary title information,

and mapping the project area the lands program began the process of

appraisal. All appraisals were done on a contract basis by independent

Michigan-based real estate specialists. The first purchases, as was

legislatively mandated, were the “hardship” cases. These were owners

who due to their financial or personal circumstances needed to

immediately know what they were going to be offered by the

government for their land. Some of these were willing sellers, others

were elderly people, or the executors of the estate of deceased

individuals. Originally the number of “hardship” cases was about

fifty. By summer of 1971 it climbed to 100 and by January 1972 over

150 tracts claimed “hardship” status. The effect of this was to slow up

the overall program and to fragment into widely dispersed tracts the

land that came into park service control. Williamson and the land

acquisition staff would have preferred to have moved to acquire whole

subdivisions at one time. That way, mapping, acquisition of title

evidence, and appraisal could have been done jointly for all tracts in

the area. Superintendent Martinek’s job was rendered more difficult

because he became responsible for the management of non-contiguous

tracts often time-consuming to locate and always difficult to protect.

[8]

 Uncertainty on the part of property owners increased public anxiety

over land acquisition issues. Although all owners of property within

the lakeshore boundaries were notified of the existence of the park

project immediately after the passage of Public Law 91-479, they were

generally at sea concerning how it would affect them. Property owners

had to come down to Frankfort and discover what classification their
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3c.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:47 AM]

tracts had been assigned. If their land was projected for public use it

was rated “Category I” and it was doomed to be lost to the

government. These lands included all Lake Michigan beaches and their

accessways. “Category II” lands, so-called “environmental

conservation areas,” were a new category to the park service and the

source of considerable confusion to everyone concerned. These lands

were seen as a backdrop to the public use areas. They had scenic

values that needed to be protected but no public access to them was

planned. Some of the Category II lands were earmarked for fee simple

purchase, while others, less environmentally sensitive, were eligible to

remain in private hands, subject to easements or use and development

restrictions. Just what those restrictions might be even Superintendent

Martinek did not know for more than a year. Owners of such property

found themselves in limbo. They were unsure whether they could

build on their tracts, and they were inhibited from selling because the

value of the land was uncertain. Category III lands, “private use and

development area,” were more clearly destined to remain open to

businesses and vacation homes, although they also were notified that

they needed to obtain the National Park Service’s approval before they

undertook any improvements or modifications to their property.

Finally, in November 1972 the National Park Service’s Northeast

Regional Office, after a review of the lakeshore’s legislative history,

determined that all Category II lands would be closed to new

construction. Owners who objected to such restrictions could sell

scenic easements to the government. Of course, once the opportunity

to build a vacation house on many of those lands was removed, few

tracts retained much value. The cost of such an easement would be so

near the price of full value that from a management point-of-view it

made more sense to simply undertake fee acquisition. This in turn

gave the public the impression that while the park service talked about

cooperation with landowners all they were really interested in was

acquisition. [9]

 Another source of uncertainty was the scenic corridors. Until the

exact route of those proposed park drives were laid out several hundred

land owners would not know if their land was going to be classified

Category I or Category III. Superintendent Martinek made the

completion of a centerline survey of the roadway an early priority, but

delays in funding dragged out the process. Even more tenuous was the

status of people who owned property developed after the December 31,

1964 cut-off date for improved properties to avoid condemnation.

Some of these people deserved little sympathy. They had gambled that

the lakeshore would never be authorized or that if it were they would

be “grandfathered” in through another extension of the cut-off date.

There were, however, people who were caught unawares by the

prospect of condemnation. Some real estate agents and developers in

the area sold property developed after 1964 without ever informing the

buyer of the risk they might lose their new summer home. These

unfortunates joined the hundreds of other lakeshore property owners, in

the words of the Grand Rapids Press, “on pins and needles waiting to

see if their land will be needed, or if they can remain.” Under the land

acquisition plan such owners were offered the option of a five-year

retention of use and occupancy. The idea was to give a little time to

enjoy their property and the opportunity to make “a transition to a new
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3c.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:47 AM]

location.”[10]

 According to the lakeshore’s organic act owners of improved

property built before the 1964 cut-off date were not required to sell

their holdings during their lifetime. Land acquisition staff, however,

did approach these property-owners with the option to sell their land

and retain either a twenty-five year lease or a lifetime lease on the

holding. In such cases a normal purchase price was arrived at, $50,000

for example, which would then be reduced by one percent per year of

the total price for twenty-five years, ($12,500) to pay for the

leaseback. Many cottage owners leapt at these offers that gave them a

large cash payment up front ($37,500 in the above example) and still

left them twenty-five years to enjoy their summer homes tax-free. In

the case of a lifetime lease the terms were based on an estimate of the

individual’s life expectancy. The deal, however, did not look as good

in 1998 or 1999 when the leases expired. In the 1970s waterfront

property had a market value of between $250 and $300 per lakefront

foot, twenty-five years later the value had climbed to between $2,500

and $3,000 per foot. The early purchase and leaseback properties were

the best buy the land acquisition program made. That alone was reason

enough for many property owners who did not want to sell in the first

place to resent the program. [11]

 In a situation beset by suspicion and uncertainty the dissemination

of accurate information was the best way for the park service to calm

property owners and begin to build local confidence in the agency.

Superintendent Martinek tried to fulfill that role through newspaper

columns, participation in public meetings, and one-on-one meetings

with land owners. His efforts were, however, undermined to some

extent by the almost secretive approach to land acquisition undertaken

by James C. Williamson. The chief of land acquisition was closemouthed about his management of the Sleeping Bear Project. Even the

lands specialists working directly under him were kept in the dark as to

the overall direction of the program. They were left having to compare

notes with each other, or on more than one occasion, going through

their boss’s desk after hours. Julius Martinek was more than content to

remain aloof to the unpleasant details of the land acquisition program,

but he did need to have periodic updates as to how much land was

nearing acquisition so as to plan site clearance and land protection. As

superintendent he needed to provide the public with accurate

information on how much land remained to be bought. In May 1973,

Martinek tried to improve communication between park operations and

land acquisition. After several informal attempts were rebuffed he was

forced to send a formal memo to Williamson, even though they worked

in offices only a few feet apart. But Williamson was not disposed to

communicate with anyone but Eugene Little, who supervised National

Park Service land purchases in the Great Lakes region from a field

office in Duluth. At Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore the necessary

division of authority between land buyers and management was in

place, but the superintendent, Hugh Beattie and the chief of

acquisition, Brooks Hamilton, liked and respected each other and

worked together to avoid “checkerboard-mishmashes land acquisition.”

The absence of such rapport led to occasional but bitter clashes

between Williamson and Martinek. The loser in such exchanges was
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3c.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:47 AM]

the overall land protection program as well as the relationship between

the agency and the landowners. [12]

 Chief Land Acquisition Officer Williamson was not on the job more

than a few weeks before his tight-lipped approach and icy disposition

was the subject of public controversy. In January 1972, at his first

appearance before the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Citizens Advisory Commission Williamson angered commission

members by refusing to tell them the number of tracts which his staff

had purchased to date. He reported that a total of 1400 tracts were

going to be bought and that he hoped to have between 600 and 700

acquired by the fall of 1973 and that he hoped to close on the

remaining number by the end of 1974. Aside from those projections,

however, Williamson stonewalled virtually every question from the

commission. Some commission members took Williamson’s studied

silence as an expression of thinly veiled contempt. In reaction they

resolved that at every future meeting an exact accounting of the

number of tracts purchased be made public. Williamson responded by

rarely ever attending another Commission meeting. The fallout from

the confrontation eventually made its way to Washington, D.C.

Senator Philip A. Hart complained directly to Secretary of the Interior

Rogers B. Morton that Williamson was “non-cooperative.” “It is indeed

unfortunate that this situation has to arise,” commented a commission

member. “We are all living in a particularly sensitive area as far as the

lakeshore is concerned and it seems to me we need every bit of

cooperation, credibility and good public and personal relations we can

possibly muster up.” [13]

 The distrust engendered by Williamson’s manner did nothing to

inspire landowner’s confidence in the probity of the process he

headed. By contracting out all appraisals to independent, nongovernment real estate specialists the park service hoped to

demonstrate the fairness of the process. Yet the large number of

different appraisers produced widely different evaluations of similarly

situated properties. There was an internal check on this problem. An

appraiser in the Frankfort office reviewed all independent appraisals. If

he thought an appraisal was incorrect, it was reviewed at the regional

field office in Duluth. Only if that appraiser agreed that the initial

valuation was wrong would a second independent appraisal be

ordered. By the winter of 1972-1973 property owners were

complaining in the press and to each other that the government was

frequently undervaluing their land. John Stanz, a Glen Arbor resident

appointed as one of Leelanau County’s representatives on the advisory

commission, complained that on one 2,000-foot stretch of Lake

Michigan appraisals varied between $132 per foot to $158 per foot, in

spite of the fact the tracts were nearly identical to one another.

Charges were also made that park service land acquisition staff were

using “high pressure tactics to force quick acceptance of their

appraisals.” Property owners countered that they “are entitled to a

reasonable time to check comparables after you receive the government

appraisal.” The fact was, however, Williamson did not care what

comparables property owners came up with. Federal law said he could

not pay less than the price set by an independent appraisal, but once

that official appraisal was done he did not intend to pay more than that
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3c.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:47 AM]

value. “As it is now, the park service makes an offer based on one

appraiser’s opinion which may differ with the opinion of another

appraiser—and won’t even discuss it,” complained John Stanz in

1973. “That’s probably the biggest problem—the ‘take-it-or-leave-it’

attitude of the land acquisition program.” [14] 

 The inflexibility of the federal land acquisition guidelines was

exasperated by the rapid rise in real estate values in the Sleeping Bear

area during the early and mid 1970s. Improved property soared in

value as the “halo” of national park status raised the profile of the dune

country and the prospect of the lakeshore froze development to those

sites built upon by December 1964. “Some land values have gone up

300 to 400 per cent since we’ve been here,” commented Superintendent

Martinek in late 1975. There were several results of such an explosive

increase in value—all of them negative for the park service. Because

the real estate market was volatile the lag between appraisal and

purchase often led to disputes between the agency and landowners over

the true value of the property. Even people who were willing sellers to

the agency, or hardship cases who sold early, later adopted the position

that they had been cheated out of their land because of the sharp

increase in land values during the 1970s. People complained that the

park service had picked up a lot of its early lands on the cheap. In

reality the agency was in the unenviable position of inflating the very

market in which it conducted land acquisitions. The farther the

program advanced toward completion the dearer and dearer

recreational property within the Sleeping Bear Lakeshore became. The

general inflationary condition of the United States economy in the

1970s, when the rapid rise in oil prices and deficit spending spurred by

the war in Vietnam caused sharp annual increases in the overall costof-living, further distorted estimated land values. [15]

 Soaring land values soon outstripped the $19.8 million dollars

authorized for Sleeping Bear by Congress. By July 1974, the agency

had acquired only 639 tracts of the more than 1,400 needed to

complete land acquisition. A new congressional authorization was

required before the program could go forward. Two months later

Senator Philip Hart continued his strong support for the park by

pushing through the Senate Interior Committee a whopping $38 million

dollar increase in the Sleeping Bear land acquisition ceiling.

Unfortunately, funding efforts stalled at the authorization stage. The

receipt of actual land acquisition funds was held up in the U.S. House

Appropriations Committee. Here the vast expansion of the park

service in the late 1960s and the runaway inflation of the 1970s

created a log jam of new park areas all requiring more funds to

continue land acquisition. At a September 1974 meeting of the

Midwest Regional Advisory Committee, appointed by the Secretary of

the Interior to counsel the park service in the ten state heartland, one of

the members complained that the delayed land acquisition programs in

the region had “severely damaged” the credibility of the agency “and

ridicule is evident.” The lakeshore’s old enemies were revived by the

difficulties. “Hart’s Fiasco should have been discarded as a waste of

taxpayers money years ago,” the Leelanau Enterprise editorialized.

Hope was even rekindled that the whole project might be abandoned.

Superintendent Martinek advised the regional office “many people
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3c.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:47 AM]

think we are folding up.” [16]

 The shortage of land acquisition funds definitely hurt the lakeshore,

but far from “folding up” there was serious consideration in late 1973

and early 1974 of expanding the Sleeping Bear park. In June 1973,

Lynn Dillin the sole private landowner on South Fox Island was killed

while attempting to land a plane on that island. At the time Dillin was

involved in discussions with Congressman Vander Jagt and the State of

Michigan regarding the sale of his island. South Fox Island is located

twenty miles north of North Manitou Island and was never considered

for inclusion in the lakeshore by Allen Edmunds’ Great Lakes

Shoreline Survey. Yet the island possessed the same combination of

wild dunes and isolated beaches that made the Manitous a recreation

asset. Sleeping Bear Advisory Board members Louis Twardzik and

Mrs. Peter Williams proposed that the Nature Conservancy be enlisted

to buy the island from Dillin’s estate. Following an amendment of the

Sleeping Bear organic act, the National Park Service could then

repurchase the island for the lakeshore. From a long-term

environmental perspective the plan was highly desirable. The problem,

however, was the short-run problem that the National Park Service did

not have money enough to buy lands within the existing park. Bold

leadership within the agency might have seen an opportunity, not an

obstacle in that the lakeshore would have to go to Congress to have its

acquisition ceiling increased. But bold thinking was lacking.

Superintendent Martinek was cool to the idea due to the potential

management problems of operating another island. The Northeast

Region Office recommended that the South Fox Island proposal not be

encouraged by the park service because of the existing shortage of

acquisition funds throughout the agency. [17]

 The first hope of ending the budget impasse came in the spring of

1975,when President Gerald Ford included a $5.4 million dollar

appropriation request in his 1976 budget. That plus some supplemental

monies jump-started the stalled land acquisition program late in 1975.

By that time frustration was running very high among landowners in

the lakeshore area. Particularly disgusted were people who owned

undeveloped property in portions of the park designated for public use.

Many had purchased their tracts to build vacation or retirement homes.

The creation of the lakeshore foreclosed that possibility. But their

assets, in some cases life savings, were frozen in the unusable property

until the park service could buy the land. They were locked in a

position of paying increasingly high taxes on land they could neither

use nor sell. In desperation, thirty-one property owners launched a

class action suit to win a refund on their property taxes. Five years

after the lakeshore had been created over their strenuous objections the

worst fears of many landowners had been realized. [18]

 The shortcomings of the lands program directly affected the land

that was destined to become part of the lakeshore. People upset about

the park service’s non-negotiable offers or the delays in actual

acquisition often reacted by opening their lands to logging. For some it

was an economic necessity, for others a final gesture of defiance.

Superintendent Martinek warned the public that clear-cut tracts would

be purchased at a lower price than forested holdings. In June of 1972
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3c.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:47 AM]

the Advisory Commission debated the subject and requested supporting

information from land acquisition so that Martinek could dissuade

people from denuding their holdings. Not until a year later did

Williamson bother to inform the superintendent that because of the

small second growth timber on Benzie and Leelanau tracts, real estate

in the lakeshore area had too little timber value to effect the final sale

price. Of course, this determination undermined Martinek’s public

creditability. It was also another example of how the federal

government’s no negotiation acquisition policy worked to the longterm detriment of the lakeshore by actually encouraging people to have

their lands clear-cut for pulpwood before accepting a park service

offer. Local residents concerned with the beauty of the Sleeping Bear

landscape could justly complain that park service policies were having

a negative impact. Many denuded tracts came under lakeshore control

littered with the slashings of a hasty logging job, devoid of aesthetic

value and real fire hazards. [19]

 Typical of the frustrations sparked by the land acquisition process

were the negotiations with Pierce Stocking. The former lumberman

owned one of the largest and most important tracts of private land

within the lakeshore. Unlike many small property owners Stocking

was in favor of the lakeshore. He even had made many of his

purchases with the view of eventually selling to the National Park

Service. What he had not bargained on was the protracted battle to

create the lakeshore. The long legislative fight had prompted Stocking

to seek alternate means to profit from his land, so in 1967 he opened

his own dunes park. Sleeping Bear Dunes Park was popular with

visitors. His scenic road offered people the only drive-up access to the

dunes. Stocking had no intention of standing in the way of the

lakeshore but he had made improvements on the land and wanted to be

compensated for them. He had waited since 1961 to sell to the

government, now that they were willing to buy he intended to get his

price—after all, they could not have a viable lakeshore without his

property. When the land acquisition staff approached Stocking with a

take it, or leave it, offer of $2.8 million he was angered and dismayed.

“The government is taking advantage of every possible hardship,” the

gray-haired, lumberman in his late sixties complained, “including the

strain of years in order to pick up land at discount prices.” Unlike

ordinary summer homeowners Stocking had the clout to arrange a

personal meeting with National Park Service Director Hartzog, but the

solution they arrived at, to arrange alternate appraisals, fell through.

The National Park Service took the veteran lumberman into federal

court where he insisted his 2,976 acres were worth $4.3 million. The

case incensed many people who wanted to sell their lands to the

government but who were told that acquisition funds had run out. For

better part of a year the issue was in the hands of the U.S. District

Court of Judge Noel Fox. Finally, a settlement was reached in the fall

of 1976. Stocking received about $3 million for his lands, the day after

the payment was delivered he died of a heart attack. [20]

 Nothing came easy at Sleeping Bear, not even the transfer of state

lands to the new lakeshore. From the beginning the Michigan

Department of Natural Resources had supported the establishment of

the park. But during the legislative fight the issue of state park lands
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3c.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:47 AM]

and the fears of Sleeping Bear communities about the loss of a tax base

for public education had become merged. To help break the log jam

that prevented action on the lakeshore issue the Michigan state

legislature broke with precedent and pledged to provide temporary

payments to the effected communities, beginning when the state park

lands were transferred to the park service. While the legislature was

nearly unanimous when the tax reimbursements were purely

hypothetical, opposition arose in 1973 and 1974 when attempts were

made to transfer state lands to the lakeshore. Governor William G.

Milliken refused to let the legislature back-out of its commitment to

the dune communities and he opposed any land transfer until the tax

reimbursement was granted. Finally, in December 1974 the state

Senate passed a bill providing a total payment of $2.5 million, to be

portioned out over a ten-year period. But no sooner was that problem

removed than another issue arose. The original grant of land for the

creation of D.H. Day State Park had contained a reversionary clause

returning the lands to Day’s heirs if the State ever ceased to use them

for a state park. Fortunately a suit by the Citizens Council and

Leelanau County to trigger the reversion clause was rejected by Federal

District Court as well as the Court of Appeals. A last ditch suit to

permanently enjoin the State of Michigan from transferring the state

park was thrown out by Leelanau County District Court in December

1974. Nonetheless, a suit by the heirs of D.H. Day remained active

until 1981. Another issue that had to be settled was oil and mineral

rights. To guarantee no future offshore oil drilling the Michigan

Department of Natural Resources also agreed to turn over 10,360 acres

of bottomlands to the National Park Service. With that final stumbling

block removed the State of Michigan, fittingly on April 1, 1975,

formally deeded its dune park lands to the national lakeshore. The

acquisition brought the size of the lakeshore to over 20,000 acres,

about one third of the lands mandated by Congress. [21] 

 The slow pace of land acquisition at Sleeping Bear Dunes was

shared by scores of other national park units planned or created during

Secretary of the Interior Stewart Udall’s expansive administration.

Udall had wanted to double the size of the National Park system during

his time in office, fifteen years later there were nearly a hundred more

park units than when he had taken office. Although Udall’s tenure

ended in 1968 the park expansion machinery he set in motion kept on

running. Between 1973 and 1976 alone there were twenty-three new

national park units created. Congress, however, displayed less alacrity

when it came to appropriating the funds to allow the parks to actually

be established. In 1976, National Park Service Director Gary

Everhardt complained that the agency suffered from a land acquisition

backlog, which approached the $500 million mark. While Sleeping

Bear had been granted permission to spend an additional $38 million

on lands, it received actual appropriations in annual drips of $3 million

or $5 million, funds which were exhausted in three or four months. At

almost any time in the mid-1970s Jim Williamson’s land acquisition

staff had more than a million dollars worth of transactions ready to go

but for the actual funds to seal the deal. When the lakeshore had been

created, the National Park Service promised local stakeholders that

they would be dealt with fairly and promptly. “Well, here it is six

years later,” Superintendent Martinek ruefully observed to a Herald
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3c.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:47 AM]

Washington reporter, “and we’re still promising them the same things

we were then.” [22]

 The obvious solution to the crisis was for Congress to find more

funds for the National Park Service. In 1976 both the House and the

Senate passed separate bills designed to increase the Land and Water

Conservation Fund. Federal off-shore oil leases, which provided the

bulk of the money for the fund had burgeoned in value following the

OPEC oil embargo in 1973. Since the oil embargo had been a prime

catalyst in the national fourteen percent inflation rate that was playing

havoc with land acquisition planning, it made sense to many legislators

to increase the amount of federal revenues dedicated to conservation.

President Gerald Ford, however, understood that runaway federal

deficits were a spur to inflation and he insisted that off-shore oil

revenues be directed to push the budget more in balance. Fortunately

for the National Park Service 1976 was an election year. A

compromise was reached between Ford’s Office of Management and

Budget and the Congress to expand the Land and Water Conservation

Fund. The former Eagle Scout and the first President from Michigan,

announced the Bicentennial Land Heritage Act in September of 1976,

which proposed increasing the fund. The agreement buoyed hopes

among the land acquisition staff that they would be able to complete

their purchases by the end of 1978. Like every other expression of

optimism about land acquisition it was far from accurate. [23]

 North Manitou Island was a microcosm of the protracted land

acquisition program. North Manitou Island was not purchased until

1984, when it could have and probably should have been purchased a

decade sooner. The island had been somewhat reluctantly accepted as

part of the lakeshore by conservationists and the park service during

the highly politicized legislative process. It was largely owned by the

William R. Angell Foundation which donated revenues generated from

its management of the island’s forest and game to a number of small

Michigan colleges. The management of the foundation would have

been vastly simplified if their title to the remote island could have been

turned into several million dollars of endowment investments. Yet like

other willing sellers the foundation directors held a much higher

estimate of the value of the island than did the National Park Service’s

contract appraisers. In 1977, the land acquisition staff offered $4.5

million for the 15,000-acre island, an offer the directors termed an

“insult.” Like many other land owners the director’s assumed that

since “the park service made its first offer of purchase,” it would be a

“matter of negotiations” to close the deal. But no negotiations

followed and the purchase hung in abeyance until condemnation

proceedings were initiated. A three-judge federal land commission

heard testimony from Angell Foundation witnesses that the island was

worth as much as $20 million. When the commission finally presented

its report to Judge Noel Fox it was clear that the park service

appraisers had under-valued the island. In 1979, the National Park

Service agreed to an interim settlement with the Angell Foundation in

which the foundation ceased their activities on the island in exchange

for a $3.2 million down payment on their holdings. A final settlement

was expected shortly. Instead it was six more years before the purchase

was finalized. During that time North Manitou was managed as what
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3c.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:47 AM]

one former island resident called a “no man’s land.” Most private

dwellings on the island were closed, it was off-limits to lakeshore

visitors and, save for the foundation’s caretakers, devoid of human

activity. Finally in August of 1984, the Angell Foundation and the

park service came to terms and the island was sold for $12.5 million.

[24]

 A generation after the bulk of the land acquisition took place a

blanket of bitterness still covers the Sleeping Bear area. Stories of

people being forced off their land linger in the conversations of those

who continue to live, work, or vacation in the area. These stories are a

very real part of the National Park Service’s legacy in northwest

Michigan. “If you do not come forward and sell us your meadows,” a

land acquisition officer is reported to have said to an elderly school

teacher, “we’re going to take all of your property and you’re not going

to have a place to go to. And your going to take very little money for it

because we’re going to take what we feel when we get you in

condemnation court.” The woman in question, Leone Adair stood her

ground and retained a portion of her land. Others were intimidated by

the government land buyers and accepted offers that later seemed

criminally low, especially in light of the escalation of property values.

[25]

 The fate of the Joanne and Everett Kittendorf’s Lake Michigan

summer home is an example of the combination of motives that drove

previously satisfied cottage owners to sell to the National Park

Service. “A big tall man did come to the door, with a dark suit and

sunglasses,” Joanne Kittendorf remembered. The acquisition officer

threatened, “We’ll get your land one way or the other.” That demeanor

intimidated the couple. “Then we read an article in the paper that said

300,000 people would come up here for the summer. We decided that if

the park developed there...it wouldn’t be a good place to stay. So we

sold to the government.” They sold the house they had built in 1959

and 400 feet of Lake Michigan beach land for $60,000. [26]

 Fear was an important factor which drove Sleeping Bear land

acquisition. Williamson and his buyers used the threat of

condemnation to “buffalo” some buyers into accepting the

government’s price. But the climate of fear in which the land sales

took place was not all of Williamson’s making. The scare tactics of

those who opposed the creation of the lakeshore worked so well that

hundreds of property owners convinced themselves that they did not

want to stay in the area after the establishment of the park. The

protections for property owners within the lakeshore so carefully

planned by Senator Philip Hart were ignored by some land owners who

feared the “feds” were going to take their land one way or another.

Fear that their lands were going to be overrun by millions of tourists

from Detroit griped some cottage owners. Fear that the park would

lead to a rapid escalation in property taxes drove some farmers to sell.

Most of the fear-mongers were sincere in their dire predictions for

local property owners, although in any real-estate panic unscrupulous

dealers can profit from hastily sold assets. One fear easily forgotten

today was the fear of losing your summer home to Lake Michigan.

The period from the late 1960s to the late 1980s was one of high water
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3c.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:47 AM]

levels on the Great Lakes. Scores of lakefront homes literally tumbled

into the lake during the 1970s. One antidote to fear of the future was a

guaranteed government check. For elderly people or farmers in a

marginal situation uncertainty about the future was a constant factor.

To sell your property to the government was an alternative that walked

right up to the door and made itself available. [27]

 In the popular memory of the Sleeping Bear country the park

service looms large as an agent of dispossession, an alien force

severing people’s roots in the land. Yet the truth of that memory must

be balanced by the fact that hundreds of property owners were willing

sellers. National Park Service personnel have their own selective

memory of land acquisition that requires balance. “It seems that some

of the land-acquisition people never understood the principles behind

the Park Service,” a lakeshore official explained to a journalist in

1990. The lands staff are usually described as “a breed apart” not of

the “real park service,”—as if by disassociating the people who made

the land purchases from the national lakeshore, the park could be

spared the divisiveness of its origins. Yet, the fuzzy and warm park

service that gives fireside nature talks and protects bald eagle nestings

exists because the Jim Williamsons of the agency acquired the

resource. The essence of Sleeping Bear lakeshore is the happy tourists

who gather to enjoy spectacular sunsets along Pierce Stocking Drive

and the solitary backpackers exploring North Manitou Island’s dunes

and forests. But just as surely it is also a nationalized landscape made

available to the many through the sacrifice of the sacred property rights

of an unfortunate few. Taking the land is as much a part of what the

National Park Service is as is managing the land. [28]

 By the spring of 1977 lakeshore land buyers had managed to secure

the bulk of the small private land holdings within the park. Closings

had been made on 27,000 acres of land. These acquisitions and the

transfer of state holdings brought the total of lakeshore lands to more

than half of the 70,000 acres mandated by Congress. This threshold

marked a major turning point in the lakeshore’s history. With half of

the land base under park service administration the way was cleared for

the official dedication of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore in

October 1977. Jim Williamson’s name was not mentioned at the

dedication ceremony, let alone were he or any of his staff formally

thanked or invited to sit with the dignitaries on the stage. No sooner

was the dedication completed than the land acquisition officers went

back to their tract books and appraisals, the dirty job of making a park

continued .

NEXT> A Sense of Place: The Beginning of Historic Site Management

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3c.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:47 AM]
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3d.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:51 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Chapter Three

A Sense of Place: The Beginning of Historic Site Management

 When Superintendent Martinek first arrived at Sleeping Bear

Dunes, the only resource he had to manage were the United States

Coast Guard Station buildings at Glen Haven. The buildings had gone

surplus after World War II. During the long legislative wrangle over

the lakeshore, Martinek would often visit the site while on summer

vacation. The picturesque buildings, the glorious swimming beach,

and the broad sweep of Sleeping Bear Bay were the images he held of

the lakeshore while working at Yellowstone and in Washington, D.C.

Unfortunately, by the time the park was created in 1970 the station

buildings were in serious disrepair. With no caretaker the grounds had

become overgrown and the structures were ravaged by vandals,

scroungers, and beer-blasting teenagers. In the fall of 1971, when the

lakeshore received its first park ranger, thirty-one year old Dean C.

Einwalter, Martinek settled him and his family into a house adjacent to

the station, and the ranger began the demanding task of restoring the

run-down complex. The station became the lakeshore’s interim contact

station for visitors to the new area in part because it was picturesque, in

part because it was situated in a highly visible location, but also

because it was one of the few buildings owned by the park service at

Sleeping Bear.[29]

 At an early date historical resources took on a significant role at

Sleeping Bear Dunes for the same blend of reasons, timing and

circumstance, that had led to the Coast Guard station being selected as

the first visitor contact station. Like all of the seashores and lakeshores

created in 1960s and 1970s Sleeping Bear fell heir to the lighthouses,

life-saving stations, and coast guard facilities that had constituted the

first federal presence on the nation’s coastal waterways. Unlike other

more remote national lakeshores such as Pictured Rocks and Apostle

Islands, Sleeping Bear was located astride what was historically one of

the busiest marine passage ways in the United States. During the

nineteenth century the majority of vessels bound out of, or into, Lake

Michigan had to make their way through the channel between Sleeping

Bear Dune and the Manitou Islands. It was not unusual to have more

than 100 schooners or steam propellers pass through the Manitou

Passage in the course of a day. This legacy, with its tangible remnants

of shipwreck sites and lighthouses, was barely alluded to in the early

1960s studies that recommend the creation of the lakeshore. The

interim master plan for the lakeshore, however, did at least call for a

maritime museum. By the time the lakeshore had been created by

Congress in 1970, however, both the public and the National Park

Service were more attuned to cultural resources. The National Historic

Preservation Act of 1966, which evolved out of the same national

desire to save what was best of the American landscape as the
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3d.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:51 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

lakeshore parks, gave the National Park Service an important new

leadership role in the preservation of historic sites. Superintendent

Martinek’s personality also played a role. He was a hands-on manager

with little to manage in the first years of land acquisition. He was a

doer, sensitive to criticism that the park service was moving too slow in

developing the lakeshore. Martinek was familiar with the outstanding

job of preservation and interpretation that had been done with

lighthouses and life-saving stations at the first national seashore, Cape

Hatteras. He grasped the opportunities for historical interpretation

offered by the park’s setting and the National Historic Preservation Act

and made a long-term commitment to historical resources.[30]

 Martinek’s inclination to make an early commitment to historical

resources in part emanated from the Sleeping Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore Advisory Commission. Preservation, historic and otherwise,

was on the minds of the men appointed to represent Leelanau and

Benzie counties on the commission. The greatest fear of local residents

was that a national park would leave their roads clogged with out-ofstate cars and the landscape transformed into tourist honky-tonk strips.

One of the first substantive motions passed by the new advisory

commission reflected their desire for the park service to use historic

preservation to maintain the character of the landscape. At a June 1971

meeting commission members pressed Superintendent Martinek

concerning the fate of the buildings on lands purchased for inclusion in

the lakeshore. “There are some of the loveliest old barns up in this part

of the world that you’ve ever seen in your life,” advised Charles A.

Boyer of Manistee. “To me it would be a catastrophe to bulldoze those

things down or burn them down.” Boyer advocated at least saving the

boards from some of the old structures as they were made with planks

cut from the hearts of old growth trees, the size of which no longer

existed in Michigan. He also encouraged the superintendent to solicit

local citizens for artifacts that might be used to interpret the history of

the area. Others commented on the value of saving the old Coast

Guard and lighthouse structures. At the urging of Leelanau County’s

Noble Travis the Commission fashioned a motion “that all areas of

historic value be preserved such as a farm.” The Commission Chair,

Carl T. Johnson of the Michigan Department of Natural Resources,

clarified the motion for the members: “It means to protect all or as

much as is possible of the historical value of the Sleeping Bear.” When

the motion carried on a voice vote Johnson commented: “That’s one of

the first motions this commission has passed.”[31]

 Superintendent Martinek wasted little time in acting upon the

motion. He enlisted Gordon Charles a writer for the Traverse City

Record-Eagle to help encourage the donation of artifacts and funds for

historical exhibits. Funds and materials came in slowly, but it was not

the amount or volume which mattered most. In undertaking the effort

the lakeshore was carrying out the suggestions of the Advisory

Commission and it was for the first time developing a positive

relationship with the communities which had so bitterly opposed the

park, yet with whom the National Park Service was inextricably bound.

The effort struck gold when Martinek identified the Frederickson

collection. This was a very large assemblage of photographs,

documents, and artifacts largely collected in the Manitou Passage area
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3d.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:51 AM]

by Arthur Frederickson, a Frankfort resident. For several years he and

his wife exhibited the materials locally in a converted barn. After

Arthur Frederickson died the upkeep of the collection became too

much for his widow who sold the entire inventory to the Great Lakes

Research Center at Bowling Green State University in Ohio. Many

people committed to the local history regretted the loss of the

collection to an out of state institution. Martinek discovered that

Professor Richard C. Wright, Director of the Center, was more

interested in the photographs and printed materials than he was in the

artifacts, which soon became a storage problem for the university.

Wright offered to sell the artifact collection to the lakeshore for

$12,000. The Frederickson artifacts were outstanding, including the

nameplates of ships renowned in Lake Michigan history, navigation

equipment, and life-saving technology indispensable in interpreting the

history of the lakeshore’s historic maritime buildings. Although the

National Park Service had four new national lakeshores in the region,

each of which had to interpret the Great Lake’s maritime history, they

would not come up with the acquisition funds. Public donations,

although encouraging, were not enough to make an offer for the

collection. Fortunately, in September of 1972 the Spencer family of

Traverse City, in memory of their father who had grown up near Point

Betsie, presented Martinek with a check for the full amount. Within a

matter of months a portion of the collection was on display within the

renovated Glen Haven Coast Guard station visitor’s center.[32]

 Nor did Martinek stop there. He successfully solicited the donation

of a reconstruction of a nineteenth century U.S. Life Saving Service

surf boat. Then, while perusing a list of surplus federal equipment, he

discovered a thirty-two foot, self-bailing, motorized Coast Guard

lifeboat. At first the regional office was cool to the idea allowing

Martinek to put a claim on the boat. “We got two Coast Guard

stations, one on the island and one on the mainland,” Martinek

reasoned. “There is nothing but old ladders and boxes in there.

Wouldn’t it be great if someone peeked on the window and saw a

boat?” That logic secured permission to claim the boat but the

lakeshore had no budget to transport it from the surplus depot in

Toledo to Grand Haven. Again fortune favored the lakeshore. The

Michigan Department of Natural Resources also tried to put a claim on

the boat, but all they wanted was its motor. Martinek promised to give

them the motor if they would deliver the boat to the lakeshore. In this

manner with donations from the public and artifacts salvaged from the

scrap heap the lakeshore, at a very early date in its development, built

an outstanding maritime history collection.[33]

 Although only open a portion of the season, the Glen Haven Visitor

Center recorded over 7,000 visitors in 1972. The early efforts to

preserve and restore for use the Coast Guard stations at Glen Haven

and South Manitou Island gave the park service a positive presence in

the area. The aggressive collection of maritime history artifacts in a

small but significant way helped to bond the intruding federal agency

to the isolated communities of northwest Michigan. At the October 27,

1972 meeting of the advisory commission members endorsed

Martinek’s actions and called for an even more extensive history

program. Citing the legislative mandate for the lakeshore to protect
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3d.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:51 AM]

“scenic, scientific, and historic features contributing to public

enjoyment,” two Leelanau County commission members proposed a

motion that “money be made available to acquire tools, equipment,

buildings and such other facilities as may be needed to set up within

the confines of the Lakeshore, an old time farm, a sugar bush, an old

saw mill, a lumber camp, and fishing boats and gear for public display

and education. The motion carried and the lakeshore collected, as

donations were made, items that related to those eras. Among the most

significant of these were a personal collection of farm equipment and

personal items documenting the early history of South Manitou Island.

William Herd, a seasonal interpreter, provided what momentum

remained after 1973 in the historical collection effort with a

background in environmental education and a passion for history.

Herd devoted considerable attention to maintaining and expanding the

small boat collection begun by Martinek.[34]

 During the first two years of the lakeshore’s existence historic

preservation and interpretation played a large role in management

activities. Superintendent Martinek’s commitment to the lakeshore’s

maritime history resources laid the foundation for a major outlay of

financial resources to maintain a collection of buildings suffering from

a generation of neglect and deferred maintenance. The acquisition of

the Frederickson collection determined the emphasis of the

interpretation program for years to come. Yet while there was a desire

among local residents for an even more expansive history program

within the lakeshore, the fact was that during the remainder of the

decade of the 1970s the National Park Service was strained to meet its

most basic land management responsibilities. Dreams of historical and

environmental education centers remained just that, and awaited

another day.

NEXT> Interpreting and Managing the Lakeshore

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3e.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:55 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Chapter Three

Interpreting and Managing the Lakeshore

 The man who was given the task of preparing the Frederickson

collection for public display was Charles R. Parkinson. The New

Jersey native was a mid-career park naturalist who in June of 1972

began from scratch the lakeshore’s interpretation program. Parkinson

had a Master’s degree in Geology, which proved useful in interpreting

the park’s complex glacial history. More important, Parkinson was a

resourceful and independent worker. After joining the park in May

1972 he immediately set to work readying the Glen Haven station as an

interim visitors center. Pretty much on their own he and Paul “Pete”

LaValley, the lakeshore’s first seasonal maintenance staff, swept out

the decades of bird dung and broken glass to make the building useful.

Then they improvised a small set of exhibits, utilizing a small part of

the Frederickson collection. So crude was the contact station that when

it first opened it even lacked toilet facilities. For two seasons the Glen

Haven visitor’s center was manned by the first of the lakeshore’s

seasonal interpreters, Joseph Jackson, a retired public relations man

from Empire, Michigan.[35]

 During that first off-season Parkinson began the lakeshore’s

environmental education programs with local schools. Yet hostility

toward the lakeshore still ran high among the teachers, who felt that

the park service threatened the overall quality of their schools by

compromising the area tax base. It took years of frustrating work to

build a network of teachers who would be involved with the park on a

continuing basis. He also expanded the historical program by initiating

a series of oral history interviews with individuals knowledgeable of

the local history and began a collection of historical photographs of the

park area.[36]

 The quality of the interpretation program picked up considerably in

1973 when Parkinson was able to open a new visitor’s center in a twostory house overlooking Glen Lake. The house had been acquired as

part of the lands program and with minor alterations it was made into a

very serviceable visitor center. Parkinson and Martinek purchased a

stock of defective hollow-core doors and used them as highly effective

exhibit panels. The first floor exhibits presented visitors with a view

of the kind of park the lakeshore was planned to be as well as with an

introduction to the area’s glacial history. The second floor was

devoted to the Frederickson collection and included the best of the ship

name boards and a stunning Fresnel lighthouse lens. Visitation at the

new center more than doubled what the interim Glen Haven facility

had been able to handle. One of the nicest features of the new center

was that it was surrounded by lakeshore land, which allowed Parkinson

to make use of a closed road to lay out a one-mile nature trail. During
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3e.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:55 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

the winter the trail was converted into a popular cross-country ski trail.

This made the visitor center a busy location not only during the

summer months but also during any weekend during ski season.[37]

 The location of the park’s interim headquarters in Frankfort, well

south of the lakeshore, was a source of frustration to all of the early

employees. While Martinek, of necessity, made his home in Frankfort,

he advocated the settlement of the other full-time park staff closer to

the resource. There was, nonetheless, a lot of time wasted by the staff

“dead-heading” from Frankfort to the more remote Leelanau portions

of the park. Dean Einwalter, the first park ranger, particularly felt the

logistical problems and isolation. Settled in a rental house near the

Glen Haven Coast Guard station, Einwalter and his family were

viewed by many locals as unwanted outsiders. His two daughters bore

the brunt of hostility at the Glen Arbor school while he had the

unenviable task of trying to head-off conflicts between lakefront

property owners and visitors asserting the right to stroll on “public”

beaches. As more and more properties were purchased Einwalter had

to develop a regular inspection patrol to protect against vandalism and

unlawful entry. While Einwalter functioned for a time as a Ranger

Division of one, he also served as the first maintenance supervisor.

Sometimes trying to do too much too fast came at a high cost. With the

help of seasonal staff Einwalter took on the task of personally

reinstalling over 400 broken window panes at the Coast Guard station.

The job was completed, but not before Einwalter had to be hospitalized

for inhaling toxic fumes from the torch he used to strip paint from the

old windows.[38]

 The anger of many local residents toward park personnel blighted

the early years of the lakeshore. Petty harassment in the form of

graffiti or intemperate letters was frequent. “The animosity was fierce,”

recalled Toni Perfect of Leelanau County, “People were just terrified.”

For some, acceptance of the lakeshore developed quickly after they

understood they would not be overwhelmed by thousands of tourists.

Others stoked the fires of resentment for years. Raymond Kimpel, the

lakeshore’s first Chief Ranger, witnessed an extreme example of this

bitterness. He and another park employee stopped to admire a tree on

the property of an elderly resident. The man rushed to his garage, took

out a chainsaw and cut down the tree. Fortunately, most local people

adopted the attitude of a Glen Arbor store owner, “You can’t carry

bitterness and rancor forever. It’s here [the lakeshore], so the best thing

to do is build upon it and not make it an albatross upon our necks.”[39]

 One of the nagging problems facing Superintendent Martinek and

his staff was the lack of development funds for historic preservation,

transportation, interpretation, and resource protection. In 1972 some

$242,000 of planning and development money earmarked for Sleeping

Bear was lost through across-the-board budget cuts. Martinek’s

solution was “bootstrapping,” a determination to go forward regardless

of the lack of staff or budget. The renovation of the Coast Guard

station was a case in point. Martinek had no maintenance staff to order

to clean out the buildings or clear away some small cedar trees and

brush that had grown up between the structures. Instead Martinek

grabbed a chainsaw and with the volunteered help of a land acquisition
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3e.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:55 AM]

officer he cut down the brush himself. He kept up pressure on the

agency to properly fund the lakeshore, but the scores of new parks in

the region made each request a hard fight. In 1972, Martinek asked the

regional office for a full-time maintenance man, only to be greeted

with the question: “What do you need a maintenance man for?” The

superintendent, who knew how to make a point emphatically, shot

back: “What the hell—what do you need a maintenance man for?” At

first the park suffered from a lack of equipment. The lakeshore office

had a single typewriter mounted on a borrowed typing stand. When

the Frankfort Chamber-of-Commerce needed their typing stand back,

the lakeshore had no where to put their only piece of office equipment.

For more than a year the park staff had to use their personal vehicles

for much of the lakeshore business. Tired of the lack of cooperation he

received from the General Services Administration Motor Pool,

Martinek set up his own motor pool. He combed the inventories of

federal surplus centers in southern Michigan and Ohio. Army surplus

jeeps became a temporary means of transportation. Martinek regularly

led Parkinson and Einwalter on foraging expeditions to the surplus

warehouses and returning with trailers filled with desks, office

equipment, shovels, and tents—“anything you could possibly need in

setting-up a park”—pulled by a surplus jeep or truck. So successful

was Martinek at building his park with surplus equipment that

superintendents at Apostle Islands and Saint Croix National Scenic

Riverway sought his advice on how to fill their needs.[40]

 Day-to-day operations in the early days of the lakeshore were

dominated by the delicate job of managing a transition from private to

public ownership. All structures which were purchased through land

acquisition had to be boarded up. A small number were converted to

temporary staff housing, while most were sold to the highest bidder for

removal or salvage. Access roads to such properties as well as many

of the “two-track” roads improvised over the years by hunters or

fisherman had to be closed off to regulate access to park holdings. Offroad vehicles, especially dirt-bikes and snowmobiles, were particularly

hard to stop. In December 1974, Superintendent Martinek, citing the

Congressional mandate to “preserve” the area, banned snowmobiles

from the lakeshore completely. Signage was the best way to warn

users of the restriction as well as to deter visitors from camping on

private land or driving up to private residences. Some local residents

were quite prickly about tourists who strayed on to private land. One

fellow planted his own sign at the head of his drive: “Caution! This

farm does not belong to the Federal Gov’t yet, it is privately owned.

Anyone caught trespassin’ will be shot! Try me & see.”[41]

 One example of the lakeshore trying to do too much too soon was

the establishment of a branch of the International Youth Hostel at

Sleeping Bear in 1974. Superintendent Martinek issued a special use

permit to the American Youth Hostel in November of 1973 for their

use of an almost new six unit motel near Glen Lake. The relationship,

however, got off to a rocky start. Both the Grand Rapids and Detroit

chapters alternated between trying to “take charge” of the facility and

ignoring it. Further problems were encountered do to the

unsatisfactory management of the hostel’s initial managers or “house

parents.” Card carrying members of the International Youth Hostel
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3e.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:55 AM]

were denied access to the facility in favor of friends of the local

managers. Nor was the hostel well received in Leelanau County.

Martinek received numerous complaints that the American Youth

Hostel was being favored with use of an excellent facility over other

groups, more locally based involved with promoting outdoor recreation.

Over time, through the involvement of the National Hostel Director,

the Sleeping Bear Hostel was placed on a solid footing. Nonetheless, it

continued to be a source of problems to the lakeshore management.

The hostel was surrounded by large tracks of private land. The

Sleeping Bear hostel was popular with cross-country skiers who

regularly ignored posted warnings and skied on to private holdings.

Pierce Stocking became particularly angry at the way his lands were

seemingly being used as a public recreation area at the very time the

government was fighting him in court over the true value of his

holdings. The fact was the lakeshore had too small a staff and too

small of a land base to accommodate the hostel in the mid-1970s. In

1976, the permit of the American Youth Hostel expired and was not

renewed.[42]

 The first resource management crisis for the lakeshore was the

status of the gull colony on South Manitou Island. The nesting

grounds of the herring and ring-billed gulls had been noted in the

original Great Lakes Shoreline Survey as one of the reasons for

including South Manitou Island in the lakeshore proposal. The colony

was believed to have been created in the 1920s with its population

swelling in the early 1960s. By the time the lakeshore was created gull

populations throughout the Great Lakes region were in decline.

Nonetheless, the initial Sleeping Bear Dunes master plan called for the

Sea Gull Point area of the island to be a “public use and development

area,” which alarmed knowledgeable people that the nesting area might

be over-run by tourists. Closer inspection of the problem revealed

there was a particularly high mortality rate among juvenile gulls.

Initially this was blamed on the presence of motorized vehicles in the

area of the nesting grounds. An inspection of the area by the Regional

Biologist Max Holden led to an end of the use of cannon nets to

capture gull chicks for banding, and a less intrusive approach even by

scientists. After acquiring the property at Sea Gull Point in the summer

of 1973, the lakeshore commissioned a multi-year study of the nesting

grounds. The study, conducted by Professor William E. Southern of

Northern Illinois University, did lead to plans to provide more isolation

from visitors for the colony. The study also indicated that a large part

of the colony’s decline was from natural predator action. Nocturnal

raids by the island’s foxes devastated the gull chick population. The

study indicated the complexity managing the isolated islands and that

management decisions needed to be based on broad based scientific

knowledge.[43]

 While natural forces were at work on the Gull colony, there was no

doubt, however, that human action was at the heart of the major

resource management crisis on North Manitou Island. The Angell

Foundation had managed the island as a fishing and hunting preserve

for years. As many as 1,500 deer browsed on the island. The only way
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3e.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:55 AM]

the 15,000 acre island could support such a heavy population was

through the maintenance of feed lots. The foundation’s gamekeepers

spent over $20,000 annually to bring in eighty tons of deer feed. The

result was a phenomenal hunting ground with as many as 500 deer

harvested each fall. Trouble arose in 1979 when the Angell Foundation

accepted a down-payment from the park service for the island and

suspended all management activities. The National Park Service was

under the impression that the foundation had gradually reduced the

deer herd through increased hunting and reduced feeding. That was a

course of action agreed to by the foundation managers but whereas the

park service thought there were only a hundred or so deer on the island

there may have been ten times that number. Between 1978 and 1984,

when the island’s purchase hung in limbo, the deer herd was left to

fend for itself. The result was a severe reduction in all understory plant

life as the starving animals desperately searched for any source of

nutrition. Each year hundreds perished from starvation. “There were

dead deer everywhere,” commented a 1978 visitor to the island. Critics

complained that the National Park Service would have been more

humane and less wasteful if they had allowed a special hunt to reduce

the herd. But the agency had been down that road at Pictured Rocks

National Lakeshore in 1977. The attempt to organize a special hunt in

the former Beaver Basin game preserve had led to lawsuits,

confrontations with local hunters, a legacy of bitterness with the

community, and a raft of bad publicity. Sleeping Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore printed permits for a special hunt on the island in 1980 but

at the last minute the foundation refused permission. After that the

lakeshore had to content itself with monitoring the situation. A

National Park Service contract with the University of Michigan studied

the herd between 1980 and 1983, but there was no intervention. The

pathetic details of their report which included finding dead deer in

abandoned cottages, where in their last extremities they sought refuge

from the winter, and starving deer foraging on piles of dead alewives,

were not broadly publicized. Doing nothing on North Manitou became

the policy because technically the agency did yet own the island and

the plight of the animals was less visible than at Pictured Rocks

because the island was all but closed to human intrusion. The result,

however, was the same in each instance for the deer—starvation.[44]

 What the park service called “letting nature take its course,” critics

sneered was a policy of doing nothing. A prominent example of this

dynamic in action was seen between 1972 and 1974, when abnormally

high water levels in the Great Lakes caused an alarming amount of

shoreline erosion. Warm winters and strong storms combined with the

high water to threaten the Sleeping Bear shore by reducing the ice

barriers that naturally fortified the base of the dunes. By 1973 the level

of Lake Michigan was on an average five feet higher than in 1964.

One particularly strong winter storm drove a family from their Sleeping

Bear Point home when the waves surged over one hundred feet of

beach and washed around the house. “We used to like to lie here at

night and listen to the lake pounding on the beach,” one Empire

resident remarked, “but when there’s no beach , it’s a horse of a

different color.” All along the shore of the park property owners

scrambled to devise means to hold back the water. One desperate

homeowner in Arcadia, Michigan (outside the lakeshore) dumped
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3e.htm[7/11/2012 10:14:55 AM]

several junk cars over the face of the dune to buffer the waves.

Superintendent Martinek made clear that such actions would not be

tolerated within the park. “We feel that the highs and lows in the Great

Lakes water levels are natural and are part of what originally formed

the dune country,” he advised land owners. The lakeshore allowed

people to take limited protective action. Temporary wooden

breakwaters, known as groins, were allowed. The lakeshore itself

repaired groins built by the Coast Guard to protect the severely

threatened lighthouse on South Manitou Island. By the late 1970s the

high water levels had begun to abate and calls for breakwaters and

house relocations within the lakeshore receded as well.[45]

 The two most important and persistent resource management

question to bedevil the lakeshore in its early years were the Michigan

Department of Natural Resources’ plan to modify the mouth of the

Platte River and the attempt to determine which lakeshore lands should

be managed as wilderness.

NEXT> The Platte River Controversy

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3f.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:01 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Chapter Three

The Platte River Controversy

 The chain of events which led to the controversy over the mouth of

the Platte River, was set in motion during the mid-1960s when

thousands of small, shiny fish called alewives began to wash-up on the

shores of Lake Michigan. Originally a salt-water fish, the alewife is

subject to periodic die-off on the Great Lakes. Such die-offs were

extreme during the 1960s. Lakefront property owners either avoided

the shoreline because of the stench of decaying fish or they took-on the

laborious task of raking the alewife’s into large piles and burning them

with kerosene. The Michigan Department of Conservation’s solution

was to introduce a predator voracious enough to eliminate the alewives

before they could become a nuisance. Pacific Salmon, particularly

Coho and Chinook were the answer. Beginning in March of 1966 Coho

Salmon fingerlings were annually placed in the upper Platte River at

Honor, Michigan. Unlike other fish introduced into the lakes the

salmon could not explode out-of-control because it was difficult for

them to breed naturally in Michigan streams. More than 10 million

salmon fingerlings were introduced into Michigan waters between

1966 and 1970. In 1969, the Department of Conservation opened the

Platte River Anadromous Fish Hatchery at Honor. The location of the

hatchery determined that the Platte River would be one of the best

fishing spots in Michigan when the salmon matured and returned to the

river to try and spawn. Beginning in 1967 “Coho fever” swarmed over

the mouth of the little Platte River. The Coho planting program was a

great success. It helped to stem the tide of dead alewives and it

produced an exciting new sports fishing attraction.[46]

 The Coho program was undertaken at the same time that the

Sleeping Bear Dunes lakeshore plan was twisting in the congressional

wind. The unsightly scene of unplanned development and mobs of

fishermen at the Platte helped to convince many Benzie County

residents that the lakeshore might be a necessary means to control the

pace of change. The need for someone to take firm control was

established when seven fishermen participating in the 1967 Coho run

drowned in Platte Bay when their boat overturned in heavy seas.

National Park Service Director George B. Hartzog agreed with the

Michigan Department of Conservation that it was “imperative that a

facility be made available to fishermen and boaters.” When the

lakeshore was created in 1970, the State of Michigan was granted the

right to retain a 300 acre tract near the mouth of the Platte in order to

develop facilities to manage the sport fishery. By the time Martinek

arrived at the newly created lakeshore the Michigan Waterways

Commission and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers had developed a

$2 million plan to create a major sport fishing marina on the Platte.

The river would be straitened and dredged more than a half mile inland
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3f.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:01 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

and a breakwater would extend 1,000 feet into the lake. The rolling

dunes and pine trees at the mouth were to be replaced by a huge paved

parking lot.[47]

 Environmentalists watched apprehensively but patiently while the

harbor plans were being made. They did not want to do anything that

would disrupt the coalition in favor of the Sleeping Bear lakeshore bill,

so they held their peace until after 1970. Nor was there universal

support for the large-scale project within the newly created Department

of Natural Resources, which had been formed out of a merger of the

Department of Conservation with a number of smaller agencies,

including the Michigan Waterways Commission. The staff of the old

Conservation Department who opposed the Platte project, however,

had to proceed cautiously to avoid setting off a civil war within the

newly created agency. Superintendent Martinek also proceeded

cautiously. Cooperation with the Department of Natural Resources,

which inherited D.H. Day and Benzie state parks, was essential to a

smooth transition at Sleeping Bear. The sport fishing and visitor safety

issues the harbor proposal sought to address were legitimate concerns

for the new lakeshore and had been specifically supported by Director

Hartzog. Yet, since the Director had made his comments the

lakeshore’s mandate, as reflected in the bill passed by Congress, had

changed from being a recreation oriented park to one with a greater

emphasis on preservation. The lakeshore’s draft master plan called for

the Platte to be managed as a natural area. The Platte River was one of

the few natural river mouths on the entire Lake Michigan shore. The

action of river current, lake waves, and sand at the Platte was an

example in miniature of what the Chicago River and the Kalamazoo

River and the Grand River looked like before harbor improvements

prepared the way for urban development. The lakeshore had been

created in the first place to preserve what was unique and special about

the dune country and the Platte River mouth was clearly one of those

features. The new superintendent, however, was caught between

Director Hartzog’s commitment of the agency to some type of harbor

and the congressional mandate to protect the landscape. Little wonder

Martinek took a position, which was guarded, but cooperative toward

the plans of the Michigan Waterways Commission.[48]

 It was the Sierra Club which took the first decisive stand against the

Platte River project. While the National Park Service appeared to be

waffling on both sides of the issue, the Mackinac Chapter of the Sierra

Club, in December 1970, testified before the Michigan Natural

Resources Commission that the Platte Harbor proposal threatened the

integrity of the new lakeshore. Some of the groups that in the past had

been supporters of a strong Sleeping Bear park showed much less

resolve. The Michigan United Conservation Clubs was initially split

among those who saw the harbor as a boon to sportsmen and those who

saw it as an environmental disaster. Ironically, the Sierra Club found

itself in unintended alliance with many of the same people who had

opposed the creation of the lakeshore and who now wanted to control

its development. In June 1971, John Stanz, a Leelanau County

representative on the Sleeping Bear National Lakeshore Advisory

Commission pointedly challenged his fellow commission members to

“stand up for something.” Those members representing the Department
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3f.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:01 AM]

of Natural Resources and the Michigan Waterways Commission must

have squirmed in their seats when he said “if we’re going to have a

National Park, let’s have a National Park.” What he did not

understand was how “the first thing you are going to do is turn around

and make a development in the heart of it.” [49] 

 The hopeless division over the Platte River harbor between

overlapping state and federal agencies made a decisive stand by the

National Park Service all the more important to the resolution of the

controversy. State officials hoped that the National Park Service, with

its national prestige in recreation planning would serve as a “catalyst”

to bring the disparate interest groups--boaters, fishermen, and

environmentalists--together. A hearing by Michigan’s Environmental

Quality Council blasted the harbor plan and chided the National Park

Service’s “demonstrated evasiveness, fluctuating thought of mind,

timidity of public reaction and lack of dedication to the current concept

at this public meeting.” In June 1971, Governor William G. Milliken,

who had serious reservations concerning the harbor, wrote to Secretary

of the Interior Rogers B. Morton requesting that the park service take a

clear stand, for or against the Platte project. Northeast Regional

Director Chester L. Brooks drafted a response for the Secretary which

expressed the sentiment that it would be “regrettable” to destroy the

natural mouth of the Platte when a less sensitive site could be selected

in Good Harbor or Sleeping Bear bays. This tepid response did allow

Superintendent Martinek to formally express reservations regarding the

proposed harbor. Following Martinek’s objections to the waterways

commission plan, the focus temporarily shifted to the study of an

alternate Platte Bay site, away from the mouth of the river. That

seemed to be the solution to a controversy that had already dragged on

for four years.[50]

 But the Platte harbor plan would simply not go away. Keith E.

Wilson, the Director of the Waterways Commission, was an absolute

bulldog when it came to the project. The opposition of the Secretary of

the Interior and the Governor of Michigan did not deter him. In July

1973, he advised the Michigan Natural Resources Commission that

after studying alternate sites his engineers concluded that they must

“either build the harbor and marina in the mouth of the Platte or not

build it at all.” There was no support from the Washington, D.C. office

of the park service for stoping the project. The Acting Director,

Raymond L. Freeman warned the Northeast Regional Office that while

the agency was not pleased with the harbor proposal, there would be no

official action against it, “the State has decisions to make, and that if

the State decides to complete its development at the site we will accept

it.” On the local level, however, the need for park service leadership

was acute. The reaction of Noble Travis, an Advisory Commission

member from Leland, was typical of many people involved with the

Sleeping Bear project. “Let’s stop piddling around with this Platte

River harbor thing...We have already gone on record as opposing it at

the mouth of the Platte.”[51]

 The Platte River harbor controversy was a case study of the way

issues became entwined and positions entrenched in the Sleeping Bear

Country. At its heart it was a conflict between the old style of
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3f.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:01 AM]

conservation based on outdoor sports and the new environmentalism

focused on slow growth and ecological quality. Either the National

Park Service or the Department of Natural Resources could have

completely killed the ill-advised scheme. The environmental review

process and the waterways commission’s need for federal funds gave

the park service a virtual veto, even if it did not control all the land at

the mouth of the river; nor was the Department of Natural Resources

going to stand up to Governor Milliken’s opposition. Yet, both

agencies were also on the record as in favor of some type of facility for

public safety and to provide access to the lakeshore’s island units. The

1969 Master Plan for the lakeshore called for a marina/boat launch

facility near or within the park. Before the creation of the lakeshore the

commercial boats that took visitors and mail to North and South

Manitou were based in Leland harbor. But at a public meeting in the

summer of 1971 residents of Leland “emphatically” made it clear that

they did not want the congestion the ferry service would bring to their

town. Wilson and the waterways commission were also in conflict with

the village of Leland. In 1969, the waterways commission expanded

Leland’s little river mouth port into a formal harbor of refuge by

adding a large stone breakwater. Over the years they added a paved

parking lot and a boat ramp for sport fishermen. By the time the Platte

River controversy was reaching its climax, a number of Leland

residents took the waterways commission to court to stop any further

expansion of the Leland harbor. Faced with this road block Keith

Wilson’s temporary stop-gap was to plan a boat launch at Good Harbor

Bay, an area the park service had planned as a roadless, walk-in

beach. The Platte River issue drove the Leland harbor issue, and vice

versa. The result was probably the best that could be expected, nothing

was done at Platte River, within the lakeshore, or in Leland.[52]

 The Michigan Waterways Commission was loathe to give up the

ghost of the Platte marina and their plans continued to be debated in

public into the mid-1970s. Long before that, however, Superintendent

Martinek and the Department of Conservation had worked out a

temporary management solution to the issues at the Platte. A drag-line

was brought in each fall during the salmon run to keep the mouth of

the Platte deep enough for the launching of small fishing boats. Toilet

facilities and parking conditions were gradually improved by the

National Park Service and through cooperation between the state and

township authorities. The National Park Service bought out and closed

a restaurant, motel, and hot dog stand located on lakeshore lands

adjacent to the Platte. The adhoc solution became permanent when

“Coho fever” slackened in the 1980s. Salmon and Steelhead runs

became popular all along the Lake Michigan shore as the hatcheries

expanded their release locations. Although the mouth of the Platte

remained one of the busiest locations in the lakeshore, it was also one

of the most beautiful.[53]

NEXT> Planning a Wilderness

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3f.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:01 AM]

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3g.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:08 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Chapter Three

Planning a Wilderness

 Like the controversy over the Platte River harbor the issue of

wilderness designation at Sleeping Bear Dunes was another case of the

National Park Service lagging behind the public’s environmental

consciousness. The wilderness designation process at the lakeshore

presents a history similar to that which took place at scores of other

park service units during the early 1970s, with the agency taking a

timid approach to designating lands as “wilderness” and the public

forcing the park service to greatly expand its initial proposals to nearly

double the protected acreage. The wilderness designation process also

became another line of battle in the struggle between the National Park

Service and a core of local stakeholders. Having failed to stop the

creation of the lakeshore, opposition groups looked to wilderness

restrictions as a way to control the pace of change brought by the new

lakeshore.[54]

 In 1964, after a generation of agitation by a progressive coalition of

conservationists, Congress passed the Wilderness Act. This act created

a means to designate and protect from intrusion large tracts of roadless

land. It specifically ordered the Secretary of the Interior, within ten

years of the act, to review every roadless area in the National Park

System of at least 5,000 acres in size for possible inclusion in the

National Wilderness Preservation System. Public Law 91-479, which

created the lakeshore park, specifically set a four-year deadline for the

Secretary to evaluate the Sleeping Bear area for eligible wilderness

areas. Undertaking that review was one of the first and most important

planning initiatives of the new lakeshore park.

 The wilderness review took place within the context of a

preliminary effort to revise the lakeshore’s master plan. In 1968, when

passage of a bill authorizing a Sleeping Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore was still very much in doubt, the National Park Service

prepared a master plan for the proposed project. The goal of the plan

was to “preserve this portion of Lake Michigan shoreline for the

inspiration, education, recreational use and enjoyment of the public,

while at the same time stabilizing private development within the

area.” The plan was a throwback to the “can-do” Kennedy-era with

large campgrounds and a wide variety of recreational developments to

facilitate: “touring or driving for pleasure, bicycling, hiking, riding,

nature walks, dunemobile riding, canoeing, and snowmobiling.”

Environmentalists in favor of the proposed lakeshore were very

concerned that the “heavy use” called for in the plan would threaten

“fragile land like sand dunes.” “Well, let’s be still about it,” counseled

Genevieve Gillette, “and see how we come out.” Heedless of such

concerns park planners went on and designed beach facilities at Good
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3g.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:08 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

Harbor Bay and Glen Haven that would have included bathhouses,

locker rooms, and food concessions. There was no mention of

wilderness areas within the lakeshore, save perhaps for the plan to

encourage “primitive camping” on North Manitou Island. But even in

the case of that island the plan was heavy handed with the provision to

improve the island’s landing strip to accommodate small commercial

aircraft. “Many points noted in the plan are still valid,” Superintendent

Martinek noted in 1976, “but experience and events have changed

some of the original thinking.” More than anything else the wilderness

review revealed the shortcomings of the master plan.[55]

 Superintendent Martinek began the wilderness review in 1972.

Initially he was dubious of the process. Like most National Park

Service staff, Martinek’s understanding of wilderness was shaped by

his years of working in the vast open spaces of the mountain west. “As

we see it we have no area that will qualify as wilderness,” he confided

to the Northeast Regional Office. “Both the islands and the mainland

have been extensively logged by man." Also discouraging to the

Sleeping Bear staff were the wilderness planning guidelines prepared

by Assistant Secretary of the Interior Nathaniel Reed. He warned the

park service not to create wilderness areas “at the expense of losing the

essential management prerogatives that are necessary to fulfill the

purposes for which the areas were originally intended.” This caused a

bit of a dilemma for the lakeshore, for although it had originally been

envisioned as a recreational park, the final bill that passed Congress

placed a greater emphasis on preservation of the Sleeping Bear Dunes

area. Wilderness designation was a clear-cut way to try to prevent

large areas of the lakeshore from being changed by recreational use.

The risk that park planners feared, however, was that if too large a

portion of the park was managed as an undeveloped wilderness then

the thousands of peak-season visitors to the lakeshore would all be

funneled into the few remaining non-wilderness areas, creating

congestion and a heavy impact on a small area. In the end the

lakeshore staff, with help from the Denver Service Center, sorted out

the proper way to define wilderness and how to envision a low-impact

park. The lakeshore’s wilderness study team identified six areas, North

and South Manitou Islands, the Platte River area, the Otter Creek area,

the Sleeping Bear Plateau, and the Pyramid Point—Good Harbor Bay

area, as all having a high potential of being wilderness units.[56]

 The potential wilderness areas totaled more than 35,000 acres, better

than half of the lakeshore. Within the agency it was debated that this

might be too much wilderness for such a high-traffic area. When the

preliminary recommendations were made the proposal was pared down

to three areas, North and South Manitou Island and Otter Creek, a total

of 26,060 acres. As mandated under the Wilderness Act a public

hearing was held to solicit a public response to the preliminary

recommendation. The hearing was held on July 12, 1974 at the Beulah

Veterans of Foreign Wars hall. John C. Preston, a veteran National

Park Service manager, served as the hearing officer. Better than 200

people attended the hearing and, not unexpectedly, the overwhelming

majority was in favor of including a much larger proportion of the

lakeshore in the wilderness proposal. What was surprising at the

hearing, however, was the way in which the antagonists in the long
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3g.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:08 AM]

fight over the creation of the lakeshore found themselves in reversed

roles. The Citizens Council, which had for nearly a decade argued that

no federal protections were needed in the Sleeping Bear area, put forth

a plan for all six of the potential wilderness areas to be recommended

to Congress for designation. On the other hand E. Genevieve Gillette,

the emterius President of the Michigan Parks Association and the

tireless crusader for federal protection of the dunes since 1961,

opposed the inclusion of the Platte River area as wilderness. Instead

she favored a nature center at the mouth of the river and the use of the

area for environmental education. The Michigan Department of

Natural Resources and the Michigan United Conservation Clubs, also

consistent supporters of National Park Service management of the

Sleeping Bear, opposed the wilderness plan. Instead they supported

designating only South Manitou Island as wilderness. Among other

things, they were concerned that wilderness status would prevent the

artificial maintenance of the deer herd on North Manitou Island. These

old-line conservationists were, however, out of step with the majority

of individuals and organizations responding to the wilderness

proposal. Out of 479 total responses 419 called for more, not less

wilderness protection.[57]

 In spite of the overwhelming response at the public hearing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore Advisory Commission voted

to recommend only three areas for wilderness designation: the Manitou

islands and the Otter Creek area. Particularly incensed by this rejection

of the popular will was Mrs. Peter Williams of Traverse City, the only

woman on the commission. She strongly favored all six potential

wilderness areas be designated. Williams took the fight to the

Michigan Natural Resources Commission, which was scheduled to hold

a public meeting in August 1974 adjacent to the lakeshore at the Sugar

Loaf Resort. The meeting was a chance for environmentalists, led by

the Sierra Club, to lambast the Department of Natural Resources

recommendation that only South Manitou Island be designated a

wilderness. “Frankly we were dumfounded that DNR would

recommend less wilderness than the National Park Service,”

complained the Sierra Club’s spokesperson. Expressing the fervor for

wilderness that was typical at the meeting was an Ann Arbor man who

predicted that “those areas designated wilderness now may well be the

only such shorelines in Michigan open to the public by the year

2000.”[58]

 Behind the boom for a largely wilderness park was a conscious

desire on the part of Leelanau County residents to constrain the

development of a lakeshore recreation area. The Leelanau EnterpriseTribune encouraged support for a broader wilderness designation by

reminding its readers “the main idea behind additional wilderness area

[sic] is to preserve some of the most lovely and fragile areas of the

Lakeshore against recreational use and use by campers.” Mrs.

Williams blatantly based her support for more wilderness on the

grounds of preventing a “huge mass of visitors” from ruining the area.

What was not appreciated by these pragmatic supporters of wilderness

was that in order for some of the mainland wilderness areas, such as

the Pyramid Point-Good Harbor unit, to be designated wilderness the

National Park Service’s condemnation authority would have to be
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3g.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:08 AM]

extended to purchase the non-federal lands within the units. Only with

a solid block of federal land ownership would it be possible to close

private access two-tracks and make the area truly roadless. With this

proviso the National Park Service recommended to Congress that six

wilderness units, totaling 35,060 acres be designated at Sleeping Bear.

The process ended more in a whimper than a clear-cut result because at

the time the National Park Service did not yet own most of the land in

question and neither the executive nor the legislative branch was

disposed to move quickly on the recommendation. Nonetheless, the

most important and far-reaching management decision that would ever

be made at Sleeping Bear had taken place.[59]

NEXT> Master Plan Revisions

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3h.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:14 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Chapter Three

Master Plan Revisions

 “I believe that decisions on wilderness designation should not be

made in isolation,” wrote Congressman Guy Vander Jagt, “but should

reflect the overall management plan and development program for the

Lakeshore.” The congressman very succinctly summarized the lesson

that Superintendent Martinek drew from the controversy over the

mouth of the Platte and the wilderness designation process. The

Sleeping Bear master plan was badly in need of revision. Instead of

acting as a guide to important long-range policy decisions it was

largely superfluous because it did not reflect the type of park the public

wanted and Congress authorized. South Manitou Island was a good

example of how out of touch the 1968 report seemed in the mid1970s. During the wilderness debate all parties agreed on only one part

of the lakeshore being designated a wilderness, South Manitou Island.

Yet, the master plan called for a lodge to be built there and visitors to

be carted about the island on roving minibuses. At the Michigan

Natural Resources Commission hearing on wilderness Commissioner

Carl T. Johnson (also a member of the lakeshore Advisory

Commission) called for the outdated plan to be changed. In the autumn

of 1974 the lakeshore began the process of revising its master

plan.[60]

 A master plan development contract was established with the

National Park Service’s Denver Service Center to spearhead the

creation of a new document. On September 20, 1974 lakeshore staff

and representatives of the Denver Service Center held a public meeting

at the Beulah VFW hall. The goal of the meeting was to gather public

responses prior to drafting a planning directive for a new plan. “The

original Master Plan needs to be scrapped entirely,” was a common

refrain from the public. Three issues dominated the discussion, the

stalled land acquisition program, the wilderness proposal, and the

location of the legislatively mandated “scenic parkway.” Wilderness

continued to be touted as a way to prevent “a high density recreation

area.” But it was the scenic parkway proposal that clearly emerged as

the most important unresolved issue. Objections were raised as to both

the need for the parkway as well as its proposed location.[61]

 The scenic parkway had been added to the Sleeping Bear proposal

in the wake of Senator Hart’s initial proposal to include large portions

of the inland lake district adjacent and south of the dunes in the

national lakeshore. The idea of the parkway was to provide vistas and

corridors from which the natural history of the area could be

interpreted to visitors, as well as to control the anticipated flood of

summer visitors to the lakeshore. The exact right-of-way of the scenic

roadway was not made clear for several years after the authorization of
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3h.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:14 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

the lakeshore. Finally, in August of 1973 the Federal Highway

Administration began an on the ground survey to stake-out the center

line for the new road. Unfortunately, before the surveyors could

complete the northern portion of the parkway they exhausted the

survey budget. It was several years before the exact route of the

parkway was determined but even then there were no land acquisition

funds allocated to bring the right-of-way into federal ownership. For

years the scenic road existed as a question mark, in the worried minds

of landowners along its right-of-way and on the optimistic planning

maps of the National Park Service.[62]

 The scenic parkway was one of several proposed lakeshore

developments which promised a major impact on the nearby Benzie

and Leelanau County communities. In 1972, those counties’ planning

commissions contracted with Chicago-based consulting firm Wilbur

Smith & Associates to prepare a report to help local governments

develop the zoning and planning necessary to absorb the environmental

and economic impacts of the new lakeshore. The National Park

Service contributed $25,000 to the study and while not bound by its

findings, neither could the lakeshore easily ignore the results. The heart

of the Wilbur Smith study, which was completed in April of 1974, was

zoning recommendations for the neighboring communities. The report

did, however, critique several features of the lakeshore master plan,

especially the location of the visitor center off the scenic parkway in

the highlands south of Glen Lake. The Wilbur Smith study also

questioned the desirability of undertaking major road building effort

like the new parkway, with all of its attended damage to the

environment, until it was clear that lakeshore traffic patterns

necessitated a new circulation system. The consultants also advised

that if the traffic became heavy it might make better sense to adopt a

mass transit solution to lakeshore circulation. These recommendations

had an important long-range impact on the lakeshore. In the short run

the Wilbur Smith study gave momentum to calls for a heavily revised

master plan and the need for some new thinking at Sleeping Bear.[63]

 The promise of a new master plan conditioned almost every policy

statement made by Superintendent Martinek between 1974 and 1977.

Questions about the scenic road, the fate of South Manitou Island, the

wilderness recommendations, the location of the permanent visitor’s

center all were qualified with the statement that those issues were

being “reviewed and reconsidered” by the National Park Service. The

fact was, however, that for three years the master plan revision was

stuck on “hold” by a shortage of funds. The scores of new national

parks created in the 1960s and 1970s were all competing for scarce

development funds. At Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore their

revised master plan gathered dust because of an almost complete

absence of funds to carry out its grand designs. The Sleeping Bear

master plan did not advance beyond the very preliminary Planning

Directive stage. Part of the problem was that the lakeshore’s much

delayed land acquisition program had still not completed its work and

Superintendent Martinek was constrained by the small amount of actual

acreage under his control from leveraging planning and development

funds. Those requests he did send to Philadelphia encountered another

problem. As the nation prepared to celebrate the Bicentennial of
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3h.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:14 AM]

American Independence the Northeast Region of the National Park

Service naturally had to undertake significant capital expeditures to

prepare its large number of historic parks for the anticipated surge of

visitors. Even though Sleeping Bear Dunes had been shifted to the

Midwest Region in 1974 it and other newly created lakeshores had to

wait for additional resources and a change of priorities. “I do not

really hold too much hope that a new master plan will be done soon,”

confided Fred Kass, the chief of the park service’s Planning and

Development Division. [64]

 The very public slowdown in lakeshore planning and development,

coming on the heels of the protracted land acquisition process dealt

another blow to the National Park Service’s tarnished image in

northwestern Michigan. Yet behind the scenes Superintendent

Martinek did a very good job keeping the lakeshore moving forward by

putting together several of the internal documents that would form the

foundation for a new master plan. In February of 1976, the lakeshore

completed its new Statement For Management, a summary of the

objectives, planning requirements, legal constraints and influences on

the management of the lakeshore. Charles Parkinson completed an

Interpretive Prospectus, which laid out a visitor use plan for the

lakeshore. This document recommended several important changes in

visitor planning including removing the location of the proposed

Maritime Museum from South Manitou Island to the Glen Haven

Coast Guard Station. Yet such draft documents were no substitute for

having an approved plan that managers could use as a blueprint for

actions which effected the entire lakeshore. Besides, by 1975 the

Sleeping Bear staff was fully engaged with the day-to-day challenges

of trying to meet the needs of more than 700,000 annual visitors.

NEXT> Taking Charge

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3i.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:21 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Chapter Three

Taking Charge

 The pace of the National Park Service’s management of Sleeping

Bear Dunes picked up appreciably between 1975 and 1976. The

transfer of state park holdings in April of 1975 and the acquisition of

the Stocking lands in the fall of 1976 at last gave to the lakeshore staff

large blocks of recreational land to manage. Emergency development

funds allowed the park service to undertake some modest

improvements to the campgrounds at D.H. Day and Platte River. But

the shortage of regular development monies and the lack of a viable

master plan ensured that any improvements were minimal. Even picnic

tables had to be borrowed from the state for the first season of park

service ownership. The Stocking tract posed several problems, the most

persistent of which was controlling vehicle access. The old

lumberman’s lands were criss-crossed with dirt two-track trails favored

by hunters and off-road vehicle users. The closing of these roads and

the park service’s attempt to restrict access to unofficial camping

grounds near Aral and Good Harbor Bay were unpopular with some

local residents. Complaints also arose from campers when the park

service, in keeping with system-wide standards, removed the electric

outlets at the lakeshore campgrounds. Holiday weekends, particularly

Memorial Day, found the lakeshore unprepared for the flood of visitors

and the frequency of incidents related to alcohol, drugs, and attendant

disorderly conduct. It was several years before the ranger division was

able to manage the campgrounds without the assistance of local

sheriff’s departments. The inadequate size of the lakeshore staff and

development budget irked local residents already opposed to the

lakeshore. In May 1977, Congressmen Elford A. Cederberg and Guy

Vander Jagt prodded Assistant Secretary of the Interior Robert Herbst

to accelerate the flow of resources to Sleeping Bear. Within a week

$150,000 was found to improve the roads at the Platte River

campground.[65]

 When the agency acquired the state and Stocking lands it also

acquired several popular visitor service concessions. With no viable

master plan and little in the way of a development budget Martinek

was loath to eliminate any existing visitor services. The most

longstanding of these park businesses was the Dunesmobile Ride,

which had been offered to visitors continuously since 1935. Louis

Warnes, son-in-law to D.H. Day, the grand patriarch of Glen Haven,

had founded the business. His thirteen Ford pickup trucks had been

modified to carry fourteen passengers on a thirty-five minute tour from

Glen Haven to the crest of the dunes. Between 50,000 and 55,000

visitors annually availed themselves of the ride. The problem with the

dunesmobile ride was the clay and gravel road, which Warnes had

designed and maintained to get his vehicles across the deep sand of the
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3i.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:21 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

dune. The dune vehicles were also a visual intrusion for hikers.

Martinek liked Warnes and felt he ran a “class operation.” From 1975

through 1978 Warnes continued the dunesmobiles as a concession on a

special use permit. Also continued on that basis was a snack shop and

souvenir store at the base of the dune climb operated by the Warnes

family. “We are quite certain that long-range planning will not include

the dune climb concession,” Martinek confided to the regional office,

but this site was also continued on a special use permit with only a

slight reduction in the scale of the souvenir shop. The dunesmobile

ride and the concession stand were popular and profitable businesses

and were long an established part of the Sleeping Bear summer season

experience. Many of the junior members of the lakeshore staff wanted

the National Park Service to move decisively to close the ride.

Martinek, however, moved cautiously, so as to avoid “rocking the

boat” and causing “local area and public relations problems for the

National Park Service.”[66]

 The concession on South Manitou Island was both less profitable

and less visible than those at the mainland dunes. It was a small

commercial marina with a restaurant and a small grocery store. A

commercial vehicle tour also operated on the island. In 1974, the

lakeshore acquired the marina property. For several years the shadow

of uncertainty hung over the future of the marina. If the master plan

was going to be implemented as it was originally conceived, with a

lodge and motorized tours on South Manitou then the marina

development was a long-term asset. On the other hand, if Congress

accepted the wilderness proposal then a commercial marina might not

be needed in the long term. While these issues were undecided

Superintendent Martinek attempted to keep the marina concession

operating on a special use permit. The marina on the remote island was

a marginal operation at best and attempts on the part of the contractor

to expand the range of their operations were met by the

superintendent’s reminder “the island is scheduled for wilderness,

therefore we do not desire to build up the public usage.” In 1976,

because it looked likely that the wilderness plan would prevail and

Martinek granted what he anticipated would be a final three-year

extension of the special use permit. However, in 1979, the lakeshore

management elected not only to issue another permit but also to

rehabilitate the entire marina-restaurant complex for use by day

trippers to the island. Even the motorized island tour was expanded

through the use of dunesmobiles from the defunct Warnes

concession.[67]

 Pierce Stocking’s Sleeping Bear Park presented another type of

management challenge. The scenic drive that Stocking had laid out

through the woods and out to the top of the dune was very popular

with visitors. Initially Superintendent Martinek opposed keeping the

Stocking road open after the lakeshore acquired the tract in the fall of

1976. At public hearings environmental groups had persuaded the park

service to include this land in a wilderness zone, which of course

meant the road had to be closed. When the ramifications of the

wilderness policy were announced to the Sleeping Bear Advisory

Commission the local members exploded in outrage. They thought

Stocking’s park had been one of the highlights of the area and a “key
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3i.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:21 AM]

to the future.” It was the easiest way for senior citizens and others

unable to get out and hike on the dune to and see the best views of

both Sleeping Bear and Glen Lake. Commissioner John Stahlin,

speaking with great emotion, accused the park service of once more

“throwing the people out.” Superintendent Martinek, however, was

critical of the Stocking’s road, which he thought was too steep and laid

out over fragile dune terrain. Martinek eventually settled for a

compromise. He closed several portions of the road, including a loop,

which went out over the dune. The blacktop road was then patched

and opened to the public. The lakeshore was influenced in this

decision by the desire of the Washington office of the National Park

Service to have a marquee feature of the park named in memorial of

Sleeping Bear’s legislative founder. That political imperative settled

the future of the scenic drive that was then opened to the public as the

Philip A. Hart Trail. The opening of the road without Stocking’s

former $5.00 per car charge was a huge boost to the park service’s

image in northwestern Michigan.[68]

 Another image boost, as well as a much needed helping hand to the

lakeshore’s strained maintenance staff, was the Youth Conservation

Corps (YCC). The program was a Great Society throwback to the New

Deal’s renowned Civilian Conservation Corps. Operated on a much

more modest budget and administered through colleges and universities

rather than the Department of Defense, the YCC played a quiet but

important role in the new national parks of the 1960s and 1970s. At a

time when staffing and development were severely constrained the

YCC undertook vital, if mundane, tasks at parks like Pictured Rocks,

Cuyahoga Valley, Indiana Dunes, and Saint Croix National Scenic

Riverway. Superintendent Martinek, whose youth on the streets of

Cleveland was turned around by summers in the Sleeping Bear area,

was especially supportive of the YCC concept. In the summer of 1976

the YCC program at Sleeping Bear was initiated by moving a

contingent of fourteen enrollees into the former motel that had been

used as the American Youth Hostel. A second YCC camp was

operated on South Manitou Island where a former warehouse had been

converted into a dormitory. The YCC program was responsible for a

variety of important tasks, not the least of which was the assembly of

400 picnic tables and the scraping of the lakeshore’s historic Coast

Guard lifeboat. On South Manitou Island the YCC rebuilt an historic

boardwalk, removed barbed wire and fence posts from abandoned

farms, and cleared the old settlers cemetery of overgrown vegetation.

Among the least pleasant tasks performed by the YCC was the cleanup

of beaches fouled by alewives. An added bonus of the YCC program

was to boost the image of the lakeshore in Benzie and Leelanau

counties. The program enrolled exclusively boys and girls from

northwestern Michigan.[69]

NEXT> The Advisory Commission

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3i.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:21 AM]
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3j.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:28 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Chapter Three

The Advisory Commission

 Public Law 91-479, the lakeshore’s organic act, specified the

formation of a citizen’s advisory commission to counsel the National

Park Service on the management of Sleeping Bear Dunes. The first

such advisory commission was created in 1961 as part of the Cape Cod

National Seashore, and citizen's commissions became a feature of all of

the shoreline recreation areas created during the 1960s and 1970s. Like

these other commissions the Sleeping Bear Advisory Commission was

a purely consultative body and had no decision-making authority. It

was composed of individuals appointed by the State of Michigan,

Leelanau County, and Benzie County. There was no compensation for

service on the commission. The commission met for the first time with

National Park Service Director George Hartzog on March 9, 1971 in

Washington, D.C. After that virtually all meetings were held near the

lakeshore on a quarterly basis.[70]

 The most important function of the commission was to serve as a

forum to inform the public of issues before the lakeshore management

team, and to allow for comment on park service actions by individuals

with roots in Michigan and the communities adjacent to the park. The

commission fulfilled this function well on an issue like the preservation

of the Sleeping Bear area. The commission usually advised the

National Park Service to move forcefully to protect the lakeshore from

outside intrusions such as the Platte River harbor, which the

commission strongly opposed. The commission offered very farsighted

advice to Superintendent Martinek regarding historic agricultural

resources within the lakeshore. With inholders like John D. Stanz and

Frank C. MacFarlane among the original commission members, the

park service was guaranteed that the commission would serve as a

vehicle by which the land acquisition program would be critiqued and

monitored. In 1974 and 1975, when the lakeshore had run out of land

acquisition funds, the commission played a substantive role by

lobbying the Michigan congressional delegation to raise the acquisition

ceiling and to shake loose appropriations. Again in 1977, direct

lobbying by commission members led to a critical increase in

development funds for the lakeshore.[71]

 Although no Sleeping Bear superintendent ever said as much, the

Advisory Commission could occasionally be a thorn in the side. At the

October 24, 1975 meeting of the commission Superintendent Martinek

was forced, for better than two hours, into the familiar bureaucratic

posture of “flak-catcher.” Noble Travis of Leland served as chair of

the commission at the time. The lack of action on land acquisition had

strained relations between the lakeshore and the commission.

Chairman Travis repeatedly “rebuked” Martinek, demanding a date
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3j.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:28 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

when the new acquisition funds would be released and threatening “if

they had to pull the information out of him, they would do it.” At one

point, “Chairman Travis told Mr. Martinek he had done a lousy job of

management.” Several commission members congratulated Travis for

his “great speeches.” The tenor of the meeting changed completely,

however, when Carl T. Johnson, a member of the Michigan Natural

Resources Commission, arrived late. While no rubber stamp, Johnson

understood the practical problems with managing a conservation

project. He advised the commission that “now was not the time to

irritate the situation anymore than it already was” and he announced

that he had recently been in contact with Congressman Vander Jagt

and that the funds would be arriving soon.[72]

 Most meetings of the commission were not so confrontational and

the mere existence of the forum provided a means by which

disagreements and irritations with the lakeshore could be voiced in a

cordial and cooperative setting. The Frankfort and Leland press

covered the meetings so that the announcements and debates of the

commission meetings were shared with the people of northwestern

Michigan. During the 1970s the Advisory Commission helped to

shape the lakeshore that exists today by its attention and advocacy on

issues such as the Platte River, the scenic parkway, land acquisition,

and wilderness designation. While many of the members made a

distinct contribution to the lakeshore Carl T. Johnson of Cadillac

played a special role. As a member of the Natural Resources

Commission he acted as a very effective liaison between the lakeshore

and the Department of Natural Resources. Johnson was also respected

throughout the state as the leading advocate of sportsmen’s interests.

An enthusiastic hunter himself, Johnson knew how to bring the fish and

game community’s considerable political clout to bear. In 1979, he

used that influence on the lakeshore area’s congressional

representatives to secure funding to improve park campgrounds. He

was an important asset to both Superintendent Martinek and his

successor, Donald R. Brown.

NEXT> Martinek Retires

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3k.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:32 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Chapter Three

Martinek Retires

Martinek Retires

 In 1976, the lakeshore’s permanent staff doubled with the addition

of five new full time positions; a Chief Ranger, a District Ranger,

Facility Manager, Administrative Clerk, and a Maintenance Mechanic.

The park looked like it was finally coming together. The land

acquisition program had finally given the lakeshore staff a resource

they could protect and interpret. Plans were underway for the formal

dedication of the lakeshore in 1977. But despite these optimistic

developments 1977 was a year of frustration and disappointment for

Superintendent Martinek.[73]

 In the spring of 1977, Julius Martinek was relieved of his

responsibilities as lakeshore superintendent. Martinek was suffering

from high-blood pressure. His doctor ordered him to “get away from

the office for awhile.” A hands-on superintendent, Martinek had been

working especially hard in the two years following the turn-over of

state park lands. He liked his staff to show initiative and he could be an

“in your face” administrator if he did not think the results measured up

to his high expectations. He himself had to take considerable abuse in

his dealings with local residents, the Advisory Commission, and the

press. That after getting Sleeping Bear up, off the ground and nearly

thirty years with the agency, Martinek needed a medical leave was not

surprising.[74]

 Unfortunately, Martinek also left Sleeping Bear under the cloud of

an Inspector General’s Office investigation. The roots of this problem

were firmly set in the very “boot-strapping” style that allowed

Martinek to be so successful in establishing Sleeping Bear Lakeshore.

Over the years the lakeshore had acquired a bewildering array of

surplus federal equipment: trucks, jeeps, tents, hand tools, etc. On one

occasion Martinek acquired ten aluminum aircraft wing tanks on the

expectation that someday they might be useful building a floating

dock. In addition to acquiring odd bits of surplus equipment, Martinek

was a master of using the material as trade or barter with non-federal

agencies. With this in mind he sometimes acquired items for which

the lakeshore had no immediate need. In addition to the government

surplus there were also a lot of items salvaged from lakeshore

properties acquired and slated for demolition. Furnaces, refrigerators,

and stoves, while generally removed by previous owners or sold at bid,

were sometimes left for use by the lakeshore to prepare quarters for

seasonal employees. Around the park, in barns, garages, and most

especially at the Empire Air Force base the lakeshore had a large

inventory of surplus items in storage. At the other Great Lakes parks
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3k.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:32 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

and in the Regional Office the word went out with a nod or a wink,

that when you visit Sleeping Bear make sure you get a tour of “all the

neat stuff Marty’s got up in storage.” Martinek’s interest in this

material menagerie was both professional and personal. Unfortunately,

over the years of “bootstrapping” and using his own vehicles, the line

between items he had acquired on his own and those he acquired

through or for the lakeshore became blurred. In the spring of 1976, a

disgruntled member of the lakeshore staff filed a formal complaint

against the Martinek with the Regional Office charging him with

misappropriation of government equipment.[75]

 Superintendent Martinek was veteran employee of the park service

with an outstanding leadership record. He had a lot of friends and

colleagues in the leadership of the agency, however, the staff of the

lakeshore sometimes blanched under the paternalism of his “old park

service” administrative style. The charges against Martinek took on

greater gravity when the issue was referred to the Inspector General’s

office in the Department of the Interior. After being left to make do as

best he could for so many years, Martinek was aggravated by all of the

sudden attention from Omaha and Washington, D.C. In disgust over

the handling of the issue, depressed by personal matters, and beset with

health problems Martinek retired from the National Park Service. Not

for the first time in the history of Sleeping Bear, that which began in

optimism and confidence ended in bitterness.[76]

NEXT> At Long Last: The Dedication of Sleeping Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3l.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:38 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Chapter Three

At Long Last: The Dedication of Sleeping Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

 On a blustery but sun-kissed Saturday morning, October 22, 1977,

Sleeping Bear Dunes was formally dedicated as the nation’s newest

national lakeshore. To the strains of patriotic marches played by the

Frankfort High School Marching Band, dignitaries from Washington,

D.C. and Lansing gathered on a platform at the base of the Dune

Climb. They had come to celebrate a day in the making since 1959,

when Congress first proposed a federal Sleeping Bear park. Typical of

the way things had gone, the Sleeping Bear dedication took place

under a cloud of litigation. The United States District Court had to

brush aside a final attempt to block the transfer of D.H. Day State Park

to the national park. Even a 1976 federal law designed to compensate

local governments for federal land acquisitions in each state, which

should have returned more than $120,000 to Leelanau County, was

challenged in court by township officials who wanted to have the

money disbursed to them instead. No restraining order, however,

prevented Merrill D. Beal, Midwest Regional Director, from taking the

podium as the master-of-ceremonies. William G. Milliken, Michigan’s

popular Republican Governor, gave the principal address.[77]

 The dedication was as much about closing a chapter in the history

of Sleeping Bear as it was honoring the opening of the new lakeshore.

For the property owners who had lost the long fight to prevent the

national lakeshore the dedication was not a day of celebration. Also

missing at the ceremony were two of the people most responsible for

the creation of the lakeshore, Philip A. Hart and Genevieve Gillette.

Gillette had made her last contribution to the lakeshore during the

wilderness hearings. At that time the old warrior for Michigan

conservation found herself in opposition to the Sierra Club’s proposal

to designate the Platte River area as wilderness. Her plan that the area

be managed for natural history education was seen as too “prodevelopment” by the new style environmentalists and it was rejected.

She had fought long enough and successfully enough to suffer the fate

of most long-lived activists—to be passed by their own movements.

Senator Hart’s name was mentioned frequently during the dedication.

Less than a year before he had died of cancer. Governor Milliken, in

his address honored Phil Hart and stated that the creation of the

lakeshore was one of the “two most gratifying projects of his long

governmental career.” Hart rather naively took on the Sleeping Bear

project with little inkling of the difficulties before him. To his credit,

however, he had the perseverance and commitment to stay his course

during the long legislative fight. The dedication ceremony also marked

an end to the work of Allen T. Edmunds. The retired park service

planner had played a crucial role in creating lakeshore parks at Indiana
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_3l.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:38 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

Dunes, Sleeping Bear, Pictured Rocks, and Apostle Islands. The

dedication ceremony marked the end of a process of expanding the role

of the National Park Service in the Great Lakes region begun in 1958

with Edmunds’s Great Lakes Shoreline Survey. Edmunds had the

great satisfaction during his retirement of watching his new parks

grow.[78]

 At the dedication “Marty” Martinek wore his National Park Service

dress uniform for the last time. The autumn wind tousled his thick hair

as he summarized the difficulties encountered in establishing the

lakeshore. Had the park not been created “in 1970 it may never have

been,” he recounted. All the right pieces came to together at that last

moment and the lakeshore was authorized. That moment was now past

and with it an impressive, perhaps even in environmental history terms,

a “heroic” period of national park expansion came to a close. The land

of the Sleeping Bear remained, but the people who had done much to

shape it and who had come to love it now had to leave the dune

country to the stewardship of others.[79]

NEXT> Chapter Four Plans, Programs and Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_4b.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:44 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Chapter Four

The New Superintendent: Part Ranger, Part Academic

 “I just met your new superintendent,” said a sprightly seasonal

employee from the University of Michigan. “He’s a professor at Ann

Arbor.” The small group of full-time staff gathered in conversation

just laughed at her remark and then patiently explained that whoever

was chosen as superintendent would come from within the National

Park Service, certainly not from a university. “Whenever the selection

is made,” the seasonal intern was assured, “we’ll let you know who it

is.” Several days later it was announced that Donald R. Brown, an

adjunct professor at the University of Michigan, would be the

lakeshore’s second superintendent. The appointment was not, however,

as unlikely as it first appeared to be. Brown was a career park ranger

with experience at Rocky Mountain National Park, Sequoia, Olympic,

and Blue Ridge Parkway. During his nineteen years in the park service

Brown had shown a flair for planning and education. He served for a

time at the Albright Training Center before becoming the director of

the University of Michigan’s International Seminar on National Parks,

part of the School of Natural Resources. The forty-four year old was a

native of Michigan and a graduate of Michigan State University. [2]

 Brown first came to Sleeping Bear as the acting superintendent in

June 1977. He officially became the superintendent in October of that

year, after Martinek elected to retire. The two men were in stark

contrast. Martinek was a traditional park ranger, tested through years

of self-sufficient backcountry management. One former colleague

described him as “an old Smokey the Bear type, in the very best sense

of that style.” Brown was more of a team player, anxious to hear from

everyone, open to ideas from outside the service. While his

predecessor was a “take charge guy,” Brown was more low key and

deliberative. The new superintendent was comfortable with ideas and

concepts, disposed to deliberation. He was well-suited to a park that

had a rapidly growing staff and which was about to embark on a

critical strategic planning process. [3]

 While Brown had the academician’s love of the give-and-take of

ideas, he was in his own way a thorough park ranger. He loved the

outdoors and was determined not to let the demands of the job to keep

him locked in the office. He loved to ski and he personally worked

with his staff to lay out more cross-country trails throughout the

lakeshore. “We have to know how to use this park under all

conditions,” he announced to the staff his first winter at Sleeping Bear.

He then led the entire group on a weekend winter camping exercise.

“We thought it was great,” recalled one of the rangers. The outing

taught basic winter survival skills, oriented the staff to how year-round

use of the lakeshore could be promoted, but most important of all, it
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_4b.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:44 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

quickly drew the staff and the superintendent together as a team—a

vital concern as a crucial and trying planning process was underway.

[4]

NEXT> The General Management Plan Process

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_4c.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:47 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Chapter Four

The General Management Plan Process

 Less than a month after the dedication of Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore the park was able to begin the long delayed

development of a new master plan, or to use the new terminology, a

general management plan. Superintendent Brown was optimistic that

the plan would evolve very quickly, in part because there had been

considerable planning underway at the lakeshore. The wilderness study

was completed in 1975. A year later “Marty” Martinek and Charles

Parkinson completed, respectively, the Statement of Management and

Statement of Interpretation which constituted crucial parts of the

general management plan. With the help of the Federal Highway

Administration a scenic road study was also in hand. To pull together

these reports and shape a unified comprehensive plan for the dune park

the regional office enlisted a five man Denver Service Center team:

Frederick K. Babb, Project Manager; James L. Massey, interpretive

planner; Richard G. Schneider, Recreation Planner; John N. Albright,

historian; and John W. Hoesterey, writer/editor. The effort to complete

the general management plan began in November 1977 with a two

informational public meetings, one in Beulah and the other in Glen

Arbor. [5]

 Aside from some brief remarks at the celebratory dedication of the

lakeshore a few weeks earlier the public meeting at Glen Arbor on

November 2, 1977 was Superintendent Brown’s first opportunity to

represent the lakeshore before the public. It was a baptism of fire. A

“sometimes unruly audience of about 300” gathered in the Glen Arbor

Township Hall for a session that served to put the agency on notice of

the strong opposition to the scenic road plan, as well as to provide a

much needed-opportunity for local residents to vent their

dissatisfaction with the National Park Service. “The entire Sleeping

Bear project was born in secrecy,” complained Arthur Huey, the

founder of the Leelanau School. “There has never been a mutual

understanding between us.” Huey went on to accuse the park service of

underestimating “the intelligence and sincerity of our residents.” But

there was little understanding of the lakeshore’s position when

Superintendent Brown clearly stated he was “firmly committed” to the

scenic road corridor. “It was in the orginal act of 1970 and we are

responsible for its acquisition.” That drew complaints that the agency

had already made up its mind and the whole public process was a

farce. “The jeers and catcalls grew louder and more frequent,” one

resident recalled. “The boys in green uniforms were starting to take on

a granite hue.” Less critical observers granted that Brown “knows how

to keep his cool.” Like so many public meetings before the principal

result was to draw a line in the sand between the “bureaucrats” and the

“people.” [6]
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_4c.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:47 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

 The scenic road plan was easily the most controversial issue before

the general management planning team. The road was integral to the

concept of the lakeshore adopted by Congress in 1970. The vistas

offered from the Glen Lake highlands were featured prominently in the

prospectuses developed by the park service to promote the lakeshore

bill. Once local opposition shot down the prospect of including Glen,

Platte, and Little Traverse lakes within the lakeshore the scenic road

was included. The public, which was all but walled off from those

lakes by private ownership, could at least look down on those beautiful

blue lochs. Since park planners projected 3 million visitors annually

the roads were also seen as vital to relieving traffic strain on local

roads. “The 30-mile scenic road,” Secretary of the Interior Walter J.

Hickel declared in 1970, “will unify the lakeshore physically and

provide public access to scenic overlooks.” Although these were all

important planning concerns the proposal also reflected the spirit of

1960s park developments. Scenic drives were popular with the public

and planners alike in a country encouraged by advertisers to “See the

USA in your Chevrolet!” Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore’s organic

act also contained a provision for a scenic road. Although the concept

had much to recommend it, it would also be fair to say that the

provision was also a hold over of “Mission-66” infrastructure oriented

thinking. [7]

 The construction plan proposed by the Federal Highway

Administration reinforced the impression the road would be a heavyhanded intrusion into the bucolic dune country landscape. Particularly

controversial was a plan to bypass the town of Glen Arbor. Influential

local residents had long opposed any attempt to widen the right-ofway of M-22. Large and beautiful pine trees hemmed in the approach

to the town from the south. Rather than bring lakeshore visitors up that

road and into the confines of the town the federal highway planners

proposed skirting south of Glen Arbor. The four-mile bypass would

extend from M-109 to a spot on M-22 northeast of Glen Arbor. This

would entail filling in a small marsh north of Glen Lake and building

an overpass over the intersection of several existing roads, as well as

bridging the Crystal River. Almost the entire bypass would be an

elevated roadway constructed on fill at a cost of $4.3 million. Less

intrusive were the plans to run the scenic road around Glen Lake,

through the uplands, almost a mile east of the lake. Nonetheless, both

segments were unanimously rejected in an informal show of hands at

the Glen Arbor meeting. Much less controversial was the southern

approach to the lakeshore, which would lead along the Crystal

highlands, affording wonderful views of the Crystal Lake embayment,

Platte Lake, and Lake Michigan. [8]

 Benzie County officials strongly supported the southern portion of

the scenic road, as a means of controlling traffic and as a tourist asset

for their area. The problem, not surprisingly, was with the Leelanau

County portions of the proposed road. The idea that the scenic road

would encircle Glen Lake engendered fear in many owners of lake

lots. They worried that having park property on all sides of them—

even if it was several miles away—would bring them under National

Park Service control; perhaps even set the stage for the eventual federal
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_4c.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:47 AM]

acquisition of the whole of Glen Lake. Of course, there were

landowners in the highland area that simply did not want to lose their

property to the 150-foot federal right-of-way. They looked for any

argument to build public support for their cause of stopping “another

grab by big government of private property.” Filling in the wetland

south of Glen Arbor was the very legitimate stick with which to attack

the scenic road plan. “That would be an environmental catastrophe,”

declared a member of the Glen Arbor Township planning committee.

Business owners in the town, faced with seeing thousands of potential

customers shunted around their town responded by proposing parking

plans and road improvements to allow the park drive to proceed

through the town. [9]

 Even before the highway study was completed the scenic road had

been a lightning rod for the discontented. In 1977, property owners in

the proposed road corridor took the National Park Service to court.

They alleged that the government had subjected them to an undue

hardship when it formally notified them their lands would be within the

scenic corridor, but then took no action to acquire the property. Quite

rightly, they wanted “the cloud” lifted from their titles with a clear-cut

decision by the government to buy or not buy their lands. Judge Noel

P. Fox of the Western District of Michigan specifically ordered the

National Park Service to “make up its mind whether it wanted property

within a corridor for a proposed scenic road.” The agency responded

by speeding the road study to completion and committing themselves

to acquiring the right-of-way. [10]

 For his part Superintendent Brown was by no means wedded to the

Federal Highway Administration plan. The litigation before Judge Fox

had forced an affirmative decision on acquisition, Congress had

authorized scenic corridors for the lakeshore and Brown meant to see

that they were acquired. He was open however, to considering whether

the corridors should be motor roads or recreation trails for hiking, bikes

or horseback. Recreational uses of the corridors were part of all park

plans for the scenic road right-of-way. The scenic highway report

recommended that however the scenic corridors were defined during

the general management plan, the National Park Service should

immediately begin to make purchases along the right-of-way in order

to forestall private development and escalating prices. After several

months of articulating this position, Superintendent Brown was forced

into an embarrassing flip-flop. An opinion rendered by the National

Park Service’s legal counsel warned the lakeshore that a strict reading

of the Sleeping Bear organic act indicated that the corridors were

meant for a scenic road and that if an automobile road was not going to

be built, then the agency lacked the authority to purchase private land

along the right-of-way. The Leelanau Enterprise-Tribune noted the

progression in Brown’s pronouncements from “must” to “will” to

“may” and complained that the whole process was being conducted “at

a bureaucrat’s whim.” Only several months into the general

management plan process it was clear that the scenic road issue would

make the effort a long and difficult ordeal. [11]

 Paranoia over a “government land grab” was exacerbated by an illtimed effort to politically reshuffle the membership of the Sleeping
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_4c.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:47 AM]

Bear Dunes Advisory Council. In February 1978, Secretary of the

Interior Cecil B. Andrus selected Walter B. Hart for a place on the

commission. Hart was the twenty-seven year-old son of the late Philip

A. Hart. At the time young Hart was serving as the chairman of the

committee to elect Democrat Dudley Buffa to the Senate seat held by

Robert Griffin of Traverse City. The appointment to the unpaid

commission was an understandable recognition of Senator Hart’s

crucial role in the creation of the lakeshore, but dark motives were read

into the action because of its timing during the planning controversy

and because of Walter Hart’s partisan activities. The Record-Eagle in

Traverse City broadly hinted that the appointment of young Hart, who

favored gun control, was part of a liberal Democratic effort to ban

hunting in the lakeshore. The Leelanau Enterprise-Tribune saw the

action as a classic example of “Tammany Hall politics” by the

administration of President Jimmy Carter. These charges resonated in

heavily Republican northwest Michigan because the inexperienced

young Democrat was tapped to replace Professor Louis F. Twardzik,

Chairman of the Park and Recreation Resources Department at

Michigan State University, the single most experienced member of the

commission. There was, however, no conspiracy behind the

appointment. The Secretary of the Interior had the right to name two

members to the commission. He solicited two names from the

Republican Senator Robert Griffin, and selected one for the

commission. Andrus also solicited two names from Democratic

Senator Donald Riegle, and selected one: Walter Hart. Far from being

a political operative, Walter Hart was like many baby-boomers and

only just then getting over the 1960s. He had recently enrolled as a

freshman at the University of Pennsylvania. The young Democrat

served faithfully on the commission for two years, then lost interest in

making the journey four times a year from his home in Philadelphia.

The commission may have missed Twardzik’s experience, otherwise

the Hart appointment had no real impact. The whole flap revealed that

degree to which every action related to the lakeshore underwent careful

scrutiny. [12]

 While the general management plan process was underway a second

area of controversy regarding the lakeshore emerged. In June 1978,

the Citizens Council of the Sleeping Bear once more demonstrated its

astute sense of timing and helped to organize a legal challenge to the

1964 cutoff date for individuals with property developed after that

date. Public Law 91-479 was perfectly clear that these summer homes

were not eligible for the twenty-five year or life tenancies Congress

allowed to protect the rights of established property owners within the

lakeshore. In 1977, the park service as a matter of convenience had

granted post-1964 property owners five years to enjoy their summer

homes and make a transition to new sites. After 1982 the purchase of

the bulk of the post 1964 properties would be completed and those sites

could be returned to their natural state and opened to public use. The

Citizens Council had long been critical of the federal government’s use

of the 1964 date because the lakeshore had not even been created until

1970. Eventually thirty-six property owners joined together to file suit

in Federal District Court that the Sleeping Bear organic act deprived

them of their constitutional right to equal protection under the law.

They claimed that all property owners of post-1964 structures were not
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_4c.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:47 AM]

treated alike and that the 1964 date was arbitrarily selected. [13]

 The charge of special treatment for some landowners hung by a

slender thread of validity. The National Park Service granted one

owner of a post-1964 home on Glen Lake a life tenancy instead of the

mere five years other post-1964 owners were granted. The exception,

however, was granted only because it offered federal taxpayers a

considerable savings. The property in question was a choice twelveacre tract on the south shore of Glen Lake. The owner offered to donate

eleven acres of his land to the lakeshore if upon selling the remaining

acre and a half, (which contained the permanent dwelling) he could use

the residence for the rest of his life. By agreeing to the deal the

National Park Service acquired a tract appraised at $230,000 for

$71,030. Yet in the language of the suit brought by the other post1964 owners the deal was characterized as “purposefully giving special

treatment to those property owners who express a willingness to waive

their constitutional rights to just compensation....and who make a gift

of their property.” [14]

 On the heels of the announced lawsuit Charles S. Cushman swept

into town. The Citizens Council invited him to Glen Arbor for their

annual meeting. The thirty-four-year-old Lake Tahoe resident was not

yet the national political figure he would be in the 1980s, but he was

well on his way to making himself a thorn in the side of the

Department of the Interior. He was the son of a park ranger and the

owner of a small piece of property in Yosemite National Park.

Cushman resented what he felt was the high-handed treatment of the

National Park Service toward inholders. Only six months before his

visit to Sleeping Bear Cushman had founded the National Park

Landholders’ Association to provide a check on bureaucratic power in

the parks and he quickly recruited more than 2,000 members. “They

have leaned over backwards to accommodate the environmentalists,”

he told the Glen Arbor audience, “and have become arrogant and

cavalier in their dealings with the inholders.” Cushman praised the

Citizens Council for doing “a bang-up job.” [15] 

 The lawsuit of the post-1964 property owners and the Cushman

visit were signals of a sea change in public attitudes toward federal

land management. In the western United States ranchers, loggers, and

mining companies launched a concerted attack on the regulation of

commercial leases on National Forest and Bureau of Land

Management holdings. A well-intentioned, but ill-advised attempt by

the Carter administration to eliminate all inholders in the National

Parks brought the park service into the bull’s eye of the discontent. The

agency quickly tried to backtrack from this position and in 1978

National Park Service Director William J. Whelan ordered a public

review of all agency land acquisition procedures. By 1980 these

embers had been fanned into what became known as the Sagebrush

Rebellion. The Presidential Campaign of Ronald Reagan popularized

the anti-government rhetoric of Cushman and the Sagebrush rebels. In

1981, on the heels of Reagan’s victory, Cushman was appointed to the

National Park System Advisory Board. In Michigan the growing

distrust of federal land managers surfaced in widespread opposition to

the Department of Defense’s plan for a vast, secret submarine
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_4c.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:47 AM]

communication system in the northern part of the state. Even worthy

projects such as the North Country Trail, a hiking corridor from North

Dakota to New England, drew critical scrutiny. That Sleeping Bear

Dunes, long a controversial project, became the focus of property

rights advocates and “wise-use” proponents was no surprise to the

lakeshore staff, but it did not make the job of trying to prepare a

general management plan with public input any easier. [16]

 That point was made emphatically clear when an order from Federal

District Court brought the planning process to a sudden and dramatic

halt. The Sleeping Bear staff and the Denver Service Center planning

team had focused their initial efforts on preparing a series of

management options or scenarios for the future management and

development of the park. To draw the public into the process of

determining which options offered the best future for the lakeshore

they had planned a series of public workshops for July 1978. The

workshops were to be held in Frankfort, Glen Lake, Glen Arbor,

Traverse City, and East Lansing. The small group discussions of the

workshop were designed not only to give people a chance to comment

on the options envisioned by the National Park Service but to afford

individuals a chance to provide their own options. But just the day

before the first of the workshops were to be held Federal Judge Noel

Fox issued a temporary restraining order blocking the public meetings.

Just as stunning as that thunderbolt was the source of the complaint,

Mary Anne Williams of Traverse City, a long-time member of the

Sleeping Bear Advisory Council. It was, in fact, Williams’s long

familiarity with the management of the lakeshore that prompted her

legal action. She was one of the strongest voices on the advisory

council in favor of declaring the bulk of the lakeshore as wilderness.

Beginning in March 1978 she had been concerned about the

relationship between the final wilderness recommendations and the

general management planning process. For several months

Superintendent Brown refused to make available to her a copy of the

final recommendations on wilderness, even though former

Superintendent Martinek had twice let her review the report in his

office. Brown reasoned that these were internal proposals until

approved by the President and Congress. The Director of the National

Park Service actually turned away her Freedom of Information Act

request for the recommendations, claiming they were confidential

recommendations to the President. It was only after threatening legal

action that she was given a copy of the recommendations. By then she

was more determined than ever to see that those proposals were not

diluted by some of the new alternatives under discussion as part of the

general management plan. “It appears that someone in the park service

decided to change the size and boundaries of the proposed acreage, and

the whole wilderness plan was to be started over again at public

expense as a result of the workshops,” she told the press. Mary Anne

Williams called for a complete judicial review of the process. [17]

 For all of the park service’s good intentions toward involving the

public in the planning process, the whole embroilment was a case study

in how big the gap was between rhetoric and genuine cooperation.

There was no reason for the wilderness proposals to be kept secret

from the public, let alone from an advisory commission member. The
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_4c.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:47 AM]

wilderness recommendations emerged from a very public series of

meetings in 1974. The drafting of those recommendations had been

mandated in the lakeshore’s organic act. The same act required the

National Park Service to protect the dune country from “developments

and uses which would destroy the scenic beauty and natural character

of the area.” Yet the general management plan team still saw fit to

propose alternatives that were substantially at odds with the wilderness

recommendations already made to the Secretary of the Interior. After

the Williams suit was initiated Secretary of the Interior Cecil B.

Andrus and the National Park Service sought to have the wilderness

recommendations removed as an obstacle. After languishing in

Washington, D.C. for four years the proposal was suddenly dusted off

in July 1978 by the Office of Management and Budget, reviewed and

rejected as incomplete. The sorry chain of events was finally broken by

two actions. In early August the Midwest Region called Superintendent

Brown and the Denver Service Center team to Omaha to review the

situation. A frank discussion of what everyone involved personally

thought would be best for the future of Sleeping Bear revealed that

there was virtual unanimity supporting the basic thrust of the

wilderness recommendations. It was decided to change the

management alternatives to conform to the wilderness proposal. The

Superintendent then met with Mary Ann Williams and arranged an outof-court settlement of her suit. They agreed that the planning

workshops could be used to refine those elements of the wilderness

plan that had been altered in the past four years. After a month the

restraining order was lifted and the workshops were rescheduled. [18]

 By the summer of 1978 the planning process that Superintendent

Brown began so optimistically nine months before appeared to be in

shreds. This appearance was not lost on the critics of the lakeshore or

the press. In July an Ann Arbor News editorial charged “National park

policy failing in Michigan.” Superintendent Brown was personally

chastised for opposing the wilderness recommendations and

“misguidedly” promoting a “diversity of uses.” Taking a strong

environmentalist position the lakeshore was also criticized by the

newspaper for allowing the Warnes Dunemobiles to operate and for the

old Stocking drive, both of which allowed cars to traverse portions of

the dunes. “The only way to see the dunes the way they really are....is

to climb the dunes and walk the crest and/or walk up to them on the

Lake Michigan shoreline.” Brown was stung by the attack from

environmentalists in the very city in which he had so recently lived.

Less temperate criticism cascaded into the park headquarters. Using

the soap-box of the Leelanau Enterprise-Tribune one of the more

extreme critics charged, “Underneath every green park service uniform

lurks at least a spot of red.....we still know a Commie when we see

one.” [19] 

 The battered planning process got back on track in November 1978.

More than 900 planning alternative workbooks were distributed. The

troublesome issues of wilderness and the scenic road were joined by a

third major concern: should a harbor be built within the lakeshore to

enhance boating opportunities on Lake Michigan and provide access to

the island units of the park. The original master plan had called for the

building of a boat launch and marina on Platte Bay, although it
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_4c.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:47 AM]

envisioned the larger boats needed to take visitors to North and South

Manitou would be based at existing harbors in Frankfort and Leland. In

September the Leelanau County Board voted to “remind” the National

Park Service they were on record as opposing the extra traffic and

congestion brought to Leland by having the island ferry based at their

harbor. [20]

 The heart of the planning workshops was a discussion of planning

alternatives for each of the major divisions of the lakeshore. These

alternatives were presented in a workbook that included maps of the

lakeshore and a space for participants to make comments on the

alternatives presented. The North Manitou Island unit was proposed to

be managed largely as a wilderness. One alternative offered a very

rustic experience with no buildings, roads, or trails maintained on the

island as well as no designated camping or landing areas. The second

alternative was to maintain a small number of buildings for visitor

orientation and support. This plan would also support maintenance of

the deer herd and the building of an all-weather dock. The South

Manitou alternatives posed a similar set of choices. On one hand the

island could be a wilderness camping preserve or some of its historic

buildings could be preserved and interpreted and camping could be

controlled in several designated campgrounds. The Good Harbor

Planning Unit included alternatives, which allowed for the maintenance

of agricultural scenes on the lands south of M-22, hang-gliding at

Pyramid Point, and the building of a nature center on School Lake. The

Empire Unit alternatives contrasted a future of minimal developments

with one that included a nature center at Otter Creek, the interpretation

of agricultural scenes along M-22, and the building a full-scale harbor

at the town of Empire. The widest range of alternatives was offered for

the Glen Lake Unit. The most nature-friendly proposal called for the

abandonment of the scenic road proposal, the allowance of natural

succession to reclaim farmlands, and the closing of the Hart Nature

Trail to automobile traffic. Other options offered the utilization of the

historic buildings in Glen Haven for interpretation purposes and the

maintenance of agricultural fields, and the building of a harbor in

Sleeping Bear Bay. [21]

 The first of the workshops was held in Glen Arbor. Fifty people

assembled at the Leelanau School to review the alternatives presented

in the planning workbooks. After a few general remarks by

Superintendent Brown the audience was divided into small groups for

issue oriented discussion. As one group spokesperson said of her

group’s conclusion, “There was a feeling they wanted to leave what’s

here, now.” This included leaving the dune ride concession open and

opposing the tearing down of homes within the lakeshore. Another

group asked that the historic values of South Manitou be preserved

along with the island’s natural setting. The scenic drive was singled out

as the biggest single threat to “what’s here, now.” Among the few new

construction projects endorsed by the workshop group was the building

of a harbor at Glen Haven, although one participant joked that maybe

the ferries should stay at Leland “so they get a chance to share some of

our troubles.” In a more serious vein, some of the groups called for a

new Glen Haven harbor to provide a base for trailered boats as well as

a commercial tour boat that could give visitors a view of the dunes
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_4c.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:47 AM]

from the lake. [22]

 The Benzie County workshop was held at Benzie Central High

School. Surprisingly the people who participated in the small group

discussions disagreed with the county planners who generally

supported the scenic road through the Crystal Highlands. While some

liked the idea that even if the road was not built the corridor might

make an excellent hiking or biking trail, others complained that

“visitors could not be trusted to stay within the boundaries of the

corridor but would likely stray onto private property.” The Benzie

audience also responded very favorably to the alternative of building a

new harbor at Glen Haven. [23]

 The best attended of the workshops was that held in Lansing,

Michigan, which offered summer residents and environmentalists an

opportunity to comment on the alternatives. If there was a common

theme that emerged from all of the workshops, it was the genuine

public concern to preserve what was best about the Sleeping Bear

environment. The scenic corridor was roundly disparaged. One

participant noted: “It is unthinkable to me that the National Park

Service, which I always thought was dedicated to preserving the beauty

of the country, would plan and promote a project which would cut a

mammoth scar across the beautiful hills on the north shore of Crystal

Lake.” On the other hand, there were those who saw the acquisition of

the corridor, without building the road as “beneficial for resource

protection and recreation.” Workshop participants tried to find the

right balance between development and preservation. For the island

units the public did not favor the alternatives which offered sparse or

no development, rather they wanted the bulk of the islands to be

managed as wilderness but for the park service to promote visitor

access via trails, docks, and camping controls. At Glen Lake, where

existing recreational developments were most intense, the public

favored the least development-oriented alternatives. Similarly the

public opposed turning the Platte River into a haven for large

motorized boats. There were, of course, contradictions in the public’s

choice of alternatives. The majority of people addressing the issue of

access to the islands favored moving the transportation docks to a new

location, in deference to Leland’s complaints of congestion. Yet the

respondents also opposed increasing visitor activities in the already

crowded Glen Arbor-Glen Haven area—the most logical site of an

alternative harbor. Also ambiguous was the public response to

motorized access to the dunes. Outright removal of Warnes’s dune

ride was advocated by forty-seven percent of the respondents, while

another forty-seven percent favored keeping, perhaps in a reduced

fashion, the ride. The Hart Nature Trail, the only scenic drive in the

lakeshore, was overwhelming favored for retention by the very same

workshop attendees who opposed building the Glen Lake Highlands

scenic drive. Nonetheless, the workshops were a success. They were a

rare occasion for the National Park Service to engage with stakeholders

in a non-confrontational manner; providing a much-needed chance for

a genuine exchange of ideas about the future of the Sleeping Bear

country. [24]

 An offshoot of the planning process was a groundswell of local
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_4c.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:47 AM]

support to change the name of the Hart Nature Trail. The idea first

surfaced at a public meeting in Glen Arbor, perhaps as a backlash to

the appointment of young Walter Hart to the Sleeping Bear Advisory

Council. Certainly there was no love of the memory of Senator Philip

A. Hart in the hearts of many Sleeping Bear property owners.

Kathleen Stocking, the daughter of Pierce Stocking and a respected

regional author, put a more positive spin on the issue by suggesting that

the change would be a matter of “giving credit where credit is due.”

She suggested that “Since my father designed and made those scenic

trails and lookouts, it would seem only right that they be named after

him.” Superintendent Brown approached the family of the late Senator

concerning the issue. The family graciously and unanimously

approved the name change, with Walter Hart himself making a formal

resolution to that effect through the advisory commission. “Our family

does understand the many sacrifices people have made for this park,”

commented Walter Hart. The name change was a well-timed olive

branch to the people of Leelanau County. [25]

 Through the winter and spring of 1978-1979 the planning team

reviewed the results of the workshops and drafted the general

management plan. That plan was strongly influenced by the workshop

process. The balance between public access and wilderness requested

by the public for the islands and mainland units was well incorporated

into the plan. The vexing issue of establishing a harbor for recreational

boaters and the island ferry was deferred to a special study to be given

the lakeshore’s “highest priority” and to be completed within three

years. Most important of all, however, was the decision to abandon the

scenic road in Leelanau County. The draft plan did continue to call for

the acquisition of 1,125 acres of land in Benzie County to make

possible a scenic drive along the Crystal Highlands as well as the

purchase of 2,140 acres in the Miller Hill and Bow Lakes area of

Leelanau County. The plan called for legislative action to allow the

lakeshore to make the latter purchase in order to: “protect the

significant natural features and scenic vistas and backdrops for Glen

Lake.” Bold plans were presented for the lakeshore’s historic resources

with “as many structures as feasible” preserved and interpreted on

South Manitou Island and in the Port Oneida area, and the village of

Glen Haven was to be closed off from automobile traffic and

adaptively reused for visitor services. Empire was selected as the site

of a combined park headquarters and “interpretive facility.” [26]

 “The Park Service has responded clearly and creatively to the public

input received during the recent planning process,” was Mary Anne

Williams’s response to the draft. The lakeshore critic who had to file

suit in federal court to stall the beginning of the planning greeted the

draft with “relief and pleasure.” The plan committed the lakeshore to

maintaining five areas in the park as wilderness zones. A sixth zone,

part of the original wilderness proposal sent to Washington, D.C. in

1975, was dropped from wilderness consideration with the concurrence

of environmentalists. The Sleeping Bear Plateau could not be

considered a wilderness area once it was determined that the Pierce

Stocking/Hart Scenic Road would remain in place and open to vehicle

use. The draft general management plan had the solid backing to

Michigan’s environmental community, but it was not as well-received
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_4c.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:47 AM]

by the landowners of Leelanau County. [27]

 During the summer of 1979 the draft plan was distributed to the

public and a series of hearings were scheduled to air comments and

critiques. The later were quick in coming at the Glen Arbor hearing.

The Citizens Council of the Sleeping Bear Area denounced the called

for acquisition of Miller Hill and Bow Lakes lands as “a complete

surprise and blatant land grab.” Fortunately the mood at the hearing

lacked the confrontational tone of previous public meetings, but Robert

Knowles, leader of the Citizens Council, made clear that his group

would strongly oppose any effort to change the lakeshore’s legislation

to in order to allow it to acquire more land. County and township

officials supported this position. With great suspicion the Council

regarded the effort to preserve sensitive lands as a covert park service

scheme to encircle Glen Lake. Having failed to get the scenic drive

approved as a unit the agency was seen as trying to acquire the

highlands on the installment plan, piece by piece. At the August 14th

meeting at Glen Arbor Superintendent Brown and planning team leader

Fred Babb attempted to defuse such paranoia by responding favorably

to Citizens Council suggestions that zoning be encouraged to protect

vulnerable upland tracts. Brown and Babb also agreed that Section 12

of the lakeshore’s organic act be changed to forever remove the

authorization for the scenic road in Leelanau County. Further they

agreed that there would be “no authority to condemn lands for any

purpose outside the existing National Lakeshore boundaries.” “This is

no land grab,” Brown contended and he pledged himself to work with

the Citizens Council “to make the scenic corridor issue one of the

past.” [28]

 But Superintendent Brown’s support of the Citizens Council’s

objections to the draft plan was premature. Neither he nor Fred Babb

had cleared such a change with the regional office in Omaha. What

appeared like an agreement on the plan in August, fell to the ground

like an autumn leaf that fall. Insulated from local complaints and

anxious to protect the validity of planning process, James L. Dunning,

Director of the Midwest Regional Office, refused to back away from

the proposed acquisition of Miller Hill lands and the Bow Lakes. The

General Management Plan approved by Director Dunning included the

acquisition of new lands. It was an embarrassing flip-flop for the park

superintendent. It seemed to validate the quip of one critic, “he talks a

good game, but when you come right down to it he’s a puppet.”

Furious, the Citizens Council accused Dunning of ignoring the

“opposing voices of the public, their elected township and county

officials, and your own Lakeshore Advisory Commission. You even

overruled your own Project Manager and your Park Superintendent.”

In a full-page public letter printed in the Traverse City Record-Eagle

the park critics predicted “We successfully fought your effort to

encircle Glen Lake in one huge corridor bite. We will continue to fight

any effort to encircle us by a series of little bites, acre by acre, year by

year.” [29]

 Meanwhile, back in Omaha the Sleeping Bear General Management

Plan was accepted. On November 12, 1980, Regional Director

Dunning announced that the plan would move to the implementation
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_4c.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:47 AM]

stage. Due to the extensive public involvement in the preparation of

the plan it was decided that no environmental impact statement would

be required. Sleeping Bear finally had a blueprint for its future, even if

major issues, such as the location of the harbor and the fate of the post1964 inholders remained an open question. Superintendent Brown, the

planning team, and the lakeshore staff were successful at bringing the

dune country’s stakeholders into the process. In the areas of wilderness

designation and the scenic road corridor the public had a decisive

impact on the new general management plan. Nonetheless, the new

plan left the park service in the familiar position of remaining locked in

disagreement about the issue of land acquisition. Rather than serving as

a vehicle for ending conflict with the local community the planning

process served to muffle and transmute those disputes. The tone

became more civil but it would take congressional action to resolve the

impasse over land acquisitions. [30]

NEXT> New Bosses, In Frankfort and in Washington, D.C.

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_4d.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:50 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Chapter Four

New Bosses, In Frankfort and In Washington, D.C.

 Superintendent Brown, in the words of one associate, “thrived on

the tension, the give and take of the public meetings.” While he had

made several missteps during the general management planning

process, notably offering a compromise over the Miller Hill and Bow

Lakes acquisitions before clearing such a policy with Omaha, every

one involved agreed he had done a good job. Even his opponents

granted that he “made an effort to be more responsive to the needs of

the community.” In July 1980, Brown was rewarded with the position

of Superintendent of Isle Royale National Park by the regional office.

He had played an important transitional role at Sleeping Bear. “He

brought us into the National Park Service,” recalled one staff member

after the hardscrabble, under-funded days of the lakeshore’s

beginning. In addition to good morale and a new management plan,

Brown left behind one other legacy.[31]

 As visitors approaches the entrance to Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore they are greeted by a sky blue and sandy brown

sign accented with weathered nautical mooring posts. This design

became the official signage for the lakeshore, repeated at every park

attraction or facility. Superintendent Brown understood the importance

of such design features in setting the right tone for visitors and he

devoted considerable time to choosing the arrangement and color

scheme. When the colors of the sky, water, and sand were finally

chosen he insisted that they be used uniformly. So common was the

use of the sandy brown paint at the lakeshore that years after the

superintendent had left the paint was still known to the maintenance

crew as “Brown brown.”[32]

 The new superintendent was Richard R. Peterson, a thirty-seven

year old career ranger who came to the lakeshore after only a year as

the Assistant Superintendent at the new Cuyahoga National Recreation

Area. It would be Peterson’s responsibility to execute the plans made

during the Brown years.

 Richard Peterson came to Sleeping Bear when the park at last

seemed to have a clear sense of its future direction. He told the

Advisory Commission he was excited to be at the lakeshore at that

time because the park was clearly “ready to go forward.” Land

Acquisition was nearly complete and a new master plan was in place.

But no sooner was that plan approved than the money needed to

implement it began to dry up. In 1980 Congress had the first of what

became for almost twenty years, an annual fight with the executive

branch over the federal budget. For a large part of the year the

lakeshore operated on the basis of a continuing resolution because
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_4d.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:50 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

Congress was unable to agree on an appropriations bill for 1981.

During the Martinek and Brown years the lakeshore had enjoyed

annual budget increases which allowed the park to gradually add staff

and increase its programs of protection and interpretation. After 1980

the growth of the lakeshore’s budget would be much more uneven and

financial austerity became a management necessity. Typical of the

times was National Park Service Director William J. Whelan’s plan to

raise private capital to fund long delayed improvements at Yosemite

and other “crown jewel” parks.[33]

 National economic and social trends effected the lakeshore in

important ways during the early 1980s. Slow growth and high inflation

beset the national economy during the late 1970s and early 1980s. The

Arab oil embargo in 1973 and the stranglehold of the Organization of

Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) on oil production led to a

sudden and severe increase in energy costs in the United States. This

combined with high federal spending levels led to a debilitating

inflation problem. “The silent thief,” as inflation was known, shot up

from six percent in 1976 to fourteen percent in 1979. Michigan was

particularly hard hit as inflation spurred high interest rates, which made

the purchase of automobiles difficult for average citizens. The high

cost of gasoline led to decreases in motor tourism. Nationally, family

incomes, which rose steadily through the 1960s, stagnated and declined

during the 1970s. Visitation to the lakeshore declined three percent in

1979 and six percent in 1980. In that year Ronald Reagan was elected

to the presidency on a platform of “getting government off the back of

the American people.” He vowed to fight inflation by curbing

government spending and stimulate the economy by deregulating

business and cutting taxes.[34]

 The election of Ronald Reagan brought the “sagebrush rebellion” to

Washington, D.C. In 1981, developers, timber companies, and

ranchers who opposed federal land management restrictions were

overjoyed by the appointment of James G. Watt to the post of

Secretary of the Interior. Reagan eschewed the advice of conservative

environmentalists who had helped him during his campaign, such as

Nathaniel Reed, former Assistant Secretary for National Parks, and

appointed people committed to changing policy. James Watt fit that

bill. He had been the director of the Mountain States Legal

Foundation, an organization dedicated to mounting court challenges to

federal land management regulations. He proudly told reporters at his

confirmation hearing that he found the Grand Canyon boring and had

no interest in outdoor activities such as hiking or paddling. Bright,

brash, and outspoken to a fault, Watt had a brief but stormy two years

as Secretary of the Interior. Sleeping Bear Dunes would feel the heat

from Secretary Watt’s administration in the form of budget cuts and

investigations.[35]

NEXT> Land Acquisition

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_4d.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:50 AM]

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_4e.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:54 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Chapter Four

Land Acquisition

 In 1980, the Land Acquisition Office in Frankfort was closed. Out

of more than 1,400 tracts the National Park Service had succeeded in

purchasing all but 143. By the fall of 1980 most of those 143 were on

the way to being settled, including ninety-nine that were under

condemnation. The biggest block of unpurchased land lay within the

Crystal Highlands corridor. With the closing of the Frankfort lands

office all acquisitions for the lakeshore were assigned to the lands

office of Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore.[36]

 James Williamson, the lakeshore’s controversial land buyer, retired

in 1980. Unfortunately the wounds caused by the building of the

lakeshore park remained behind—open and raw. Three land acquisition

questions dominated the attention of the park staff during the early

1980s: 1) The future of the canoe livery businesses within the

lakeshore; 2) The future of the properties within the lakeshore that

were developed after 1964; and 3) The proposed acquisition of

environmentally sensitive areas within the Glen Lake Highlands scenic

corridor. 

 Secretary Watt, however, called into question the lakeshore’s ability

to deal fairly with each of these issues. On May 13, 1981 Secretary

Watt announced that he was ordering an investigation into alleged

improprieties in land acquisition at Sleeping Bear Dunes. According to

an Associated Press account Watt wanted “to see why park boundaries

have been drawn the way they have been, to see whose properties have

been protected and whose have been taken.” Among the other parks

under investigation were Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation

Area, Cuyahoga Valley National Recreation Area, Fire Island National

Seashore, and Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore. The announcement

had particularly ominous implications because only a week earlier an

in-house memorandum had been leaked from the Department of the

Interior to the press which listed Sleeping Bear and the abovementioned parks for federal deauthorization. Now it appeared like Watt

was looking to build a case for returning the parks to state control. The

Secretary’s office denied both reports only to have Watt admit to the

land acquisition investigation when a New York Times journalist

produced an audiotape of an interview. The staff of the lakeshore were

caught completely off-guard. Regional Director James Dunning

released a statement quoting Watt that “there is no National Park hit

list.” Dunning admitted, however, that the Secretary of the Interior was

opposed to certain types of parks “from a philosophical point of

view.” All speculation ended on May 19th when agents from the

Inspector General’s Office appeared to seal the Sleeping Bear land

files.[37]
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_4e.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:54 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

 The investigation, which followed, was predicated on the fallacious

assumption that gross mismanagement if not corrupt practice had been

rife in the land acquisition office. But even the lakeshore’s opponents

had never charged such wrongdoing. “We think the boundaries were

stupidly drawn,” commented Dale Rhoades, a Grand Rapids attorney

who represented aggrieved lakeshore property owners, “but I wouldn’t

say there was fraud or misrepresentation.” At a Congressional

subcommittee hearing on the investigation Assistant Secretary of the

Interior G. Ray Arnett made clear that the probe was the result of “a

large volume of complaints,” and that he was determined to find out if

they were spurred by criminal irregularities or “merely imprudent”

policies. The National Park Service spokesman, however, refused to

back-up the official story. “It puts us in a spot somewhat,” explained

John Vosburgh of the Washington, D.C. office, “but we can’t say there

are complaints when there aren’t.” [38]

 Driving the probe was the National Inholder Association. Charles

Cushman, the organization’s founder, had been appointed by President

Reagan to the National Park System Advisory Board. Cushman had

kept in close touch with the Citizens Council of the Sleeping Bear Area

and even attended its 1980 annual meeting. Cushman’s former

assistant Ric Davidge was made a Special Assistant in the office of

Assistant Secretary Arnett. Together they had successfully convinced

Secretary Watt to freeze all land acquisition funding and place a

temporary nation-wide ban on the purchase of inholdings. It was

Davidge who drafted the controversial “hit list” memorandum for

Watt.[39]

 Federal investigators visited the lakeshore during the summer of

1981. Although there were no charges of illegality leveled, the

investigators found no shortage of critics of park service land

acquisition policies to interview. In particular investigators were

interested in charges of intimidation by Lands Officer James

Williamson and his staff. The Inspector General’s investigators, as

possible examples of favoritism, closely scrutinized two of the park’s

boundaries. A notch of private land west of Little Glen Lake, near M22 and the dune climb, seemed to have been suspiciously exempted

from the park. The other tract was the site of the Homestead Resort, a

choice property at the mouth of the Crystal River. This latter tract had

been left out of every plan for the proposed park going back to 1961,

in part because the site was part of the Leelanau Schools, a private

institution that had managed the area sensitively since 1929. Only

much later was the land sold and developed into a major resort

complex. [40]

 In July 1981, the Senate subcommittee on Energy and National

Parks held a hearing on public land acquisition issues. Inholders

dominated the discussion with Sleeping Bear property owner Kathleen

Stocklen playing a prominent role.

 The investigation by the Department of the Interior’s Inspector

General’s Office was followed by a less widely reported review of the

Sleeping Bear land acquisition program by the Government Accounting
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_4e.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:54 AM]

Office. Neither report found gross irregularities. The Government

Accounting Office report, however, was critical of the way in which

the Sleeping Bear acquisition was carried out. The National Park

Service was admonished for the way James Williamson’s staff

threatened property owners with condemnation. The Government

Accounting Office also leveled two spurious charges against the park

service. First, that the land acquisition team incorrectly had the owners

of Category III lands sign, for no compensation, “prohibitive

agreements.” This charge referred to the agreements made between the

park service and property owners in the “private use and development”

zone. Contrary to the General Accounting Office, however, the

Department of the Interior Office of the Solicitor ruled that these

agreements did not constitute an uncompensated taking. Not only were

they valid, they were positively mandated by Congress in Public Law

91-479 (the law which created the lakeshore). The second charge

alleged that the National Park Service was managing the lakeshore

incorrectly. Congress, the General Accounting Office report claimed,

wanted the agency to “stabilize” development in the Sleeping Bear

area, not return land to wilderness. This allegation conveniently

ignored those provisions of the Sleeping Bear organic act that

mandated a wilderness review. That review was a public process, held

according to provisions of the 1964 Wilderness Act, with local

stakeholders prevailing upon the National Park Service to manage more

land as wilderness than the agency originally planned. More telling was

the criticism that the lakeshore management had not engaged with local

officials to establish a zoning regime that might limit the need for fee

simple acquisition. Nonetheless, even the most committed opponents

of the lakeshore found that the much-publicized investigations yielded

a very thin gruel. By the end of his first full year in office Secretary

Watt, and by extension Special Assistant Ric Davidge, retreated from

their bold talk of “deauthorization.” Sleeping Bear was, in Watt’s

words, “a great area—it should be continued.”[41]

 A more important critique of the land acquisition program emerged

from the Federal District Court in Grand Rapids, Michigan. In 1977,

sixteen property owners challenged the valuation of their lands by the

National Park Service. The case eventually landed in Judge Noel

Fox’s Western District court. The property owners were successful in

proving the substantially greater value of their land. A compromise

settlement resulted in the National Park Service paying $2.7 million

more for the property. Critics of the land acquisition program charged

that the settlement clearly proved that the Sleeping Bear acquisition

program had been mismanaged. Certainly the property owners had

been twice victimized, once by the low government appraisals and

again having to wait five years for their just payments. Congressman

Vander Jagt complained the case illustrated “one of the most

reprehensible aspects of the land acquisition process.” [42]

 Among those most disappointed with the inconclusive results of the

federal land acquisition probes were Kathleen and Thomas Stocklen.

They were deeply involved with the National Inholders Association

and sorely disenchanted with their relationship with the National Park

Service. In 1969, the Stocklen’s moved from Florida to Michigan.

They purchased Riverside Canoe Livery on the banks of the Platte
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_4e.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:54 AM]

River. Two other canoe rental operations also were in business on the

river. As visitation to the Sleeping Bear area increased in the mid1970s the number of people renting canoes soared. The Platte River

became very congested with watercraft and the area where M-22

crossed the Platte River became snarled with automobiles. There were

busy canoe liveries on three of the four corners of the intersection of

the river and M-22, as well as unsightly boat storage buildings, cabins,

a donut shop, and a miniature golf course. A commercial campground

was located nearby. The park service initially regarded the canoe

liveries as appropriate business activities to be located in the lakeshore,

as they facilitated just the type of recreation activity Sleeping Bear was

created to promote. Excessive, unregulated use, however, seemed to

threaten the resource. During the General Management Plan process it

was determined to consolidate through purchase all three canoe liveries

and then operate a single business on the basis of a concession

contract. While this plan was based on the National Park Service’s

duty to manage recreational opportunities “consistent with the

maximum protection of the natural environment within the area,” it was

also a change in policy that was regarded by some of the Platte River

businesses as a breach of trust. Condemnation proceedings were

initiated on all three canoe rental companies.[43]

 The lakeshore’s plan to consolidate all three business, however, was

stopped in its tracks when Thomas and Kathleen Stocklen produced a

“Certificate Prohibiting Condemnation.” The certificate was drafted by

Stocklen’s lawyer, John Daugherty and issued in December 1971. It

originated in the spring of that year when the Stocklen’s were

negotiating to purchase Riverside Canoe Livery. They approached the

Northeast Regional Office to determine if the Riverside property was

designated for acquisition by the lakeshore. They did not want to

move from North Carolina and begin a new career if the canoe livery

was slated for government purchase only a few years down the line.

The regional office, at that early phase of the project could not assure

the Stocklens how the property would be rated: Category I, II, or III.

Regional Director Henry Schmidt did clearly state that because

Riverside Canoe Livery was in operation before 1964 “we cannot

acquire it without the owner’s consent.” The Stocklens, however,

wanted more than the regional office’s hesitant assurances. Their

attorney, John Daugherty, had played a significant role in the creation

of the lakeshore and was serving as an inaugural member of the

Advisory Commission. Based on his intimate knowledge of Public

Law 91-479 and the park service’s plans for the lakeshore Daugherty

drafted the certificate and Superintendent Martinek, with the

concurrence of the initial head of the land acquisition program, Donald

C. Campbell, signed it. Campbell and Martinek regarded the document

as a “firm commitment” and consistent with pledges they made to a

couple of other anxious owners of businesses engaged in performing

vital visitor services. By drafting the certificate Daugherty provided his

client with a tangible assurance of the park service’s intentions toward

Riverside, but the certificate was worded carefully to preserve the

agency’s long-term flexibility. The certificate was subject to

“termination” if Riverside Canoe ceased to be a commercial property

and “at any time the Secretary of the Interior determines the use of said

property would not further the purpose of said Public Law 91-479 or
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_4e.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:54 AM]

that such use impairs the usefulness and attractiveness of the area.”

[44]

 Because only a handful of such certificates had been granted the

park service was surprised when the Stocklens presented their

document. In any event, Superintendent Brown, supported by the

Regional Solicitor, argued that the certificate allowed condemnation for

the purposes of controlling development at a vital recreation site within

the lakeshore. While the issue was in the process of being settled, Chief

of Land Acquisition James Williamson began condemnation

proceedings on Riverside Canoe Livery. “Williamson came in,”

Kathleen Stocklen told a reporter. “I was waiting on a customer. He

threw his briefcase up on the glass counter—I thought it was going to

shatter—and demanded to appraise us then or he was going to

condemn us. It wasn’t a request –it was a threat.” Wiliamson was an

intimidating man, but he had threatened the wrong person. A former

schoolteacher and a sharp businesswomen, Kathleen Stocklen refused

to backdown to Williamson, Brown, or the whole National Park

Service. She immediately drew the support of Congressman Guy

Vander Jagt and Senator Donald W. Riegle. She also initiated legal

proceedings against the lakeshore for “breach of promise” and

“intimidation through lack of due process.” In response to this

vigorous defense the National Park Service beat a hasty retreat.

Condemnation was stopped and Superintendent Brown advised the

Stocklens “Please feel confident that no condemnation action involving

your property exists at this time and none is contemplated for the

future.”[45]

 Rather than resolving the issue the park service’s decision to back

away from condemning Riverside Canoe Livery only moved the

conflict with the Stocklens to a new stage. The National Park Service

next attempted to negotiate an agreement with the Stocklens that would

ensure that the canoe livery would be operated in a manner “consistent

with the maximum protection of the natural environment with in the

area.” Such agreements were signed by a large number of lakeshore

residents and were clearly mandated in the park organic act. The

Stocklen’s believed the park service was operating in bad faith and

charged that Superintendent Brown kept to himself for several months

the information that condemnation had been dropped on their property

in order to force them into signing an agreement. Consistent with the

National Inholders Association position the Stocklens regarded the

agreement as a taking and demanded compensation before signing

anything. More than money motivated this position. They were deeply

suspicious of the National Park Service and were loath to sign anything

that would leave their business subject to the whims of the federal

bureaucracy. [46]

 The National Park Service found itself in a quandary over the

Riverside Canoe case. Actions were well advanced to acquire the other

two canoe liveries on the Platte River. Once the lakeshore had to

abandon its plan to purchase the Stocklen’s property, the agency had to

give the competing canoe liveries a chance to back away from their

decision to sell their businesses. Nonetheless, the eventual outcome of

the aborted plan to acquire all three canoe businesses was to remove,
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_4e.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:54 AM]

within a few years, both of Riverside’s competitors and leave the

Stocklen’s in a monopoly position. For Superintendent Richard

Peterson, this unintended result raised the importance of having a landuse agreement in place with the Stocklens. “Our objective in the

agreement,” wrote Acting Regional Director Randall R. Pope, “is to

provide visitor protection and resource management safeguards which,

under our original plan, would have been written into a concessions

contract.” It was clear that the government’s own actions had resulted

in a set of circumstances that greatly enhanced the value of Riverside

Canoe. If a land use agreement was not arrived at before the last of the

competitors were removed, the agency feared that its only future option

in controlling traffic on the Platte would be to proceed to

condemnation on the Stocklens at a time when the Riverside’s value

was far in excess of its value in 1981 or 1982. [47]

 The Stocklen property remained an unresolved issue of contention

for more than a decade. In an effort to better protect her property

Kathleen Stocklen made numerous and wide-ranging Freedom of

Information Act requests for documents relating to Sleeping Bear

Dunes National Lakeshore. This personal investigation, along with the

Government Accounting Office and Inspector General’s scrutiny meant

that the Seeping Bear land acquisition program remained controversial

and highly suspect.

 The plan to use condemnation to remove or control commercial

establishments within the lakeshore was not simply directed against the

Platte River canoe liveries. In 1978, the Kalena Excavation &

Building Company near School Lake, the Bass Lake Body Shop, and

Bob’s Grocery near Little Traverse Lake were all acquired on the

grounds they were not compatible with the purposes of the lakeshore.

Closer in circumstance to the canoe liveries, which were clearly

compatible with the lakeshore, if they were properly run, was the

commercial ferry service between Leland and South Manitou Island.

The Grosvenor family had been operating the marine link to the islands

since 1918. They carried mail to the islands and to the formerly

manned lighthouse in the Manitou channel. Over time the Grosvenors

had acquired the land where their boats were docked, not just at the

Fishtown site in Leland but also on South and North Manitou islands.

At the same time the Stocklens were fighting off the condemnation of

their business, the Grosvenors were locked in a similar fight to convert

their business into a park service owned concession. [48]

 Whereas the attempt to turn Riverside Canoes into a concession was

based on a fear of too many people using the Platte River at any one

time, the park service’s fear with the ferry business was that there

would too few users to make the service cost-effective. The early 1980s

were a period of transition for the Grosvenors and their Manitou Island

Ferry Company. The old backbone of their business, goods and

commodities for Manitou residents dropped precipitously as the old

island families lost their homes to the new lakeshore. The protracted

wrangle between the National Park Service and the Angell Foundation

over the price of North Manitou Island left that island all but closed to

the public for years, at the cost of hundreds of lost customers for the

Grosvenors. The gradual phasing out of federal mail contracts was
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_4e.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:54 AM]

another blow. A National Park Service study described the commercial

prospects of the ferry operation as marginal at best. The government’s

fear was that as free enterprise operators the Grosvenors would be

forced to steadily raise the cost of ferry passage to the point where

ordinary citizens would not wish to make the trip to the island units of

the lakeshore. Operating the ferry under a concession contract was a

way to guarantee uninterrupted public access to the islands. Also, the

attempt to purchase the holdings of the Manitou Island Ferry Company

occurred at the very time the lakeshore was being pressured into

building a new ferry harbor at great public expense. The tremendous

federal expenditure anticipated in a new harbor inclined planners to

public control of the ferry business.[49] 

 In 1978, the government filed suit against the Manitou Island

Transit Company in an attempt to condemn their docking facilities.

The Grosvenors strongly objected to the park service’s valuation of

their properties. Their South Manitou waterfront property was valued

at $33,600 and their North Manitou lands at $14,000. These figures

were based on the fair market price for frontage on Lake Michigan.

The Grosvenors countered, however, that their docking sites were the

basis of their ferry business and that if the lands were taken from them

the family should be compensated for the full value of the ferry

business. In 1984 U.S. District Court Judge Benjamin Gibson reversed

his own 1981 ruling and agreed that the higher valuation was

appropriate. This cleared the way for the purchase of the docks. The

park service then continued Grosvenor’s ferry service as a lakeshore

concession. After two annually renewed commercial-use agreements,

the National Park Service and the Grosvenors agreed to a ten-year

concession contract in 1986. [50]

 The lakeshore’s most important land acquisition decisions of the

1980s: the fate of the post 1964 property owners and the fate of

environmentally sensitive areas within the abandoned Glen Lake

Highlands corridor were both taken under consideration by the United

States Congress. In 1982, a major revision of the Sleeping Bear

National Lakeshore organic act was approved which would have an

important impact on the future of land acquisition within the park.

NEXT> Relegislating the Lakeshore

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_4f.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:58 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Chapter Four

Relegislating the Lakeshore

 Public Law 97-361 was an attempt to put into law the decisions that

emerged from the general management planning process, as well as to

address lingering complaints related to land acquisition. Signed by

President Ronald Reagan in October of 1982, Public Law 97-361 was a

carefully brokered compromise between public and private interests,

environmentalists, and property owners. The three men most

responsible for the amendment of the lakeshore’s organic act were John

Graykowski, James Markwood, and Congressman William S.

Broomfield. Markwood was a legislative aide to Congressman Guy

Vander Jagt. He took up Congressman Vander Jagt’s commitment to

introduce legislation to remove from the lakeshore the Glen Lake

portion of the scenic highway. Graykowski was an aide to Senator

Donald Riegle, a moderate Democrat interested in protecting resources

vital to the character of the lakeshore. In HR 4062 Congressman

Vander Jagt proposed to delete the Glen Lake corridor from Sleeping

Bear lakeshore, disregarding the park service’s call for the retention of

three vital natural areas. The natural areas were a 160-acre lowland

called the Kettle and Kame area, the Bow Lakes and adjacent bog that

covered a total of 975 acres, and the scenic upland known as Miller

Hill, 1,208 acres. Together these areas represented important elements

in the geological history of the Sleeping Bear country. Congressman

Broomfield was a “suburban Republican” from Bloomfield, Michigan,

a comfortable bedroom community west of Detroit. A moderate

ideologically and a fiscal conservative he would normally have

hesitated to intrude himself into national park politics. Nonetheless,

Broomfield introduced a bill to protect constituents who had summer

homes in the area. H.R. 3787 extended use and occupancy rights for

up to twenty-five years to people who developed Sleeping Bear

property after 1964. Some ninety cottage owners were due to lose their

summer homes in February of 1983. Congressman Broomfield

proposed to extend their right to their cottages through the remainder

of the twentieth century. His arguments in favor of the bill were based

on fairness and pragmatism. Most of the post-1964 homes were

located adjacent to cottages built before that date and which were

going to be allowed to remain in private hands until the late 1990s.

Why not, Broomfield argued, give people with the post-1964 homes

the same rights as those who built a few years earlier, either way these

lands would largely be unavailable for public use anyway.[51]

 Compromise was essential if either the Broomfield or Vander Jagt

bills were to get through the Congress. Environmentalists were loathe

to let stand Broomfield’s extension of use rights for the post 1964

property owners. The Wilderness Society announced that it feared

setting a precedent which would destroy the effectiveness of cut-off
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_4f.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:58 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

dates on development in areas proposed for park status. Both bills had

to pass muster with Congressman John Seiberling (D-Ohio), an

environmentalist and chair of the House Subcommittee on National

Parks. In October of 1981 Seiberling and his subcommittee aides

visited Sleeping Bear Dunes. He met with Superintendent Richard

Peterson as well as homeowners concerned with losing their land.

While making clear his support for an effective Sleeping Bear

lakeshore Seiberling also felt it was important to work out a deal that

would protect local landowners rights. He himself was the owner of

property within the Cuyahoga Valley National Recreation Area.

“Basically,” he told reporters after his visit, “what we’re trying to do is

reconcile the general public interest with the interests of those who

happen to live in the park.” But the Citizens’ Council was dead set

against the inclusion in the lakeshore of the three natural areas from the

old scenic corridor. They wanted to see the park service’s land

acquisition authority reduced as they still feared federal authorities

were secretly attempting to take Glen Lake on the installment plan.

[52]

 The first step toward a compromise bill was the decision of

Congressmen Vander Jagt and Broomfield to combine their proposals

under one umbrella bill. Of the two, the Broomfield bill to help post1964 property owners had more support. Even the Mackinac Chapter

of the Sierra Club had come out in favor of the granting these people

extensions, provided the park service had discretionary power over

properties in environmentally sensitive or high visitor use areas.

Congressman Vander Jagt dispatched his aide, James Markwood, to

meet with the Citizens’ Council and Superintendent Peterson.

Meanwhile, Senator Donald Riegle had become involved with the issue

in the upper house. His aide John Graykowski also visited Sleeping

Bear and toured the Kettle, Bow Lakes, and Miller Hill. The more they

became involved with Sleeping Bear, the more Markwood and

Graykowski found other problems requiring legislative solution. Into

the legislative mix were thrown issues such as wilderness designation,

fee collection at the lakeshore, the park service's condemnation

authority, and the land acquisition ceiling. A complex round of giveand-take followed with Congressional environmentalists such as

Representative Dale Kildee (D-Flint) trying to expand Sleeping Bear’s

wilderness areas beyond even the General Management Plan

guidelines. Senator James McClure (R-Idaho) demanded a provision,

which returned all fees collected at Sleeping Bear to the federal

treasury. In exchange for this concession McClure, Chairman of the

Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, pledged to support

full appropriation of the lakeshore’s newly expanded land acquisition

ceiling. With the lakeshore’s organic act open for complete overhaul,

Vander Jagt and Markwood sought to create a mechanism short of

condemnation to settle the frequent disputes between land-owners and

the park service over property appraisals. Adding to the “let’s make a

deal” atmosphere was the pending adjournment of Congress and the

climax of the legislative election campaigns.[53]

 Like most election eve bills Public Law 97-361 left a smile on the

face of all of the interested parties. The Citizens’ Council proclaimed

victory because the scenic corridor in Leelanau County was formally
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_4f.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:58 AM]

removed from the park plan. “We’re satisfied,” proclaimed a Sierra

Club spokesman. The lakeshore received authorization to purchase

two of the three remaining environmental areas within the old corridor

that had been protected by Congress in the 1970 Act. The Bow Lakes

bog and the Miller Hill area were secured, while the glacial depression

known as the Kettle was not open to purchase and could only enter the

lakeshore through donation. Without this clear direction from Congress

it is unlikely the park service had the authority to make new

acquisitions within the old scenic corridor. Congressman Broomfield

was pleased to be able to extend the leases of most of the post-1964

property owners until 1998. The bill also directed the Department of

the Interior to formally submit the lakeshore’s wilderness preservation

plan to Congress by 1983. “The net result,” according to the Sierra

Club, “is that in the year 2000 the park will be a better place.” The

final bill also increased the land acquisition ceiling to $66 million.

Attempts to create a binding arbitration procedure for contested

purchases, were turned aside when the Senate amended the final bill.

The 1970 bill creating the lakeshore had run some seven pages. The

1982 bill amending the lakeshore was twice as long, even so it left

hanging several controversial issues.

 Left unaffected by Public Law 97-361 was the proposed six and a

half-mile scenic road corridor through the Crystal Highlands in Benzie

County. People in the county were divided over the desirability of the

corridor. Property owners on Platte Lake generally opposed the project

as something that might degrade the quality of water within that lake’s

drainage. In 1977, the County Board of Commissioners had

enthusiastically approved the proposed scenic road. Some business

interests still favored the road as a way to guarantee that Benzie

County was seen as the gateway to the Sleeping Bear Dunes. Unlike

the politically savvy Citizens’ Council in Leelanau County, the Platte

Lake Improvement Association did not act decisively to have the

scenic corridor removed from the lakeshore when the issue was before

Congress. “Whatever they did, we’ve got to do,” lamely observed a

member of their board of directors after the fact. The formal removal

of the Leelanau portion of the scenic drive from the lakeshore acted as

a prod for Benzie County to bring the issue to a head. An ad hoc

committee of the county commission was formed to review the road.

That feasibility study established that there would be no serious

environmental side effects from the road, that it would, however, be

very costly ($18.7 million), and that based on current park visitation

rates the road was not necessary. The park service’s main reason for

wanting the road—to maintain the area’s rural character—was turned

on its head, with the corridor cited as the main threat to the areas rural

landscape. Finally in August of 1983 the county commissioners met

and voted to reverse their earlier support for the park road. Later that

year Congressman Vander Jagt introduced H.R. 4242 to delete the

Benzie Corridor from the lakeshore. “I’d say it’s dead as a doornail,”

one of the Congressman’s aides told the press. “If the local people

don’t want it, forget it.” Nonetheless no bill to officially remove the

corridor from the lakeshore was ever approved and two decades later it

remains part of the Sleeping Bear park plan.[54]

 The amendment of the lakeshore’s organic act dictated the
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_4f.htm[7/11/2012 10:15:58 AM]

dimensions of Sleeping Bear’s land protection plan. The plan was the

brainchild of Secretary Watt and was part of a nation-wide effort to

make the National Park Service’s land acquisition program more

efficient and transparent. Land protection plans, it was hoped, would

also cut the cost of park expansion by asking units to identify

alternatives to fee acquisition and by encouraging parks to acquire only

the absolute minimum interest in the land needed to meet management

needs. The Sleeping Bear plan focused on the remaining 5,012 acres of

non-federal land within the revised boundaries of the lakeshore. It

proposed how best to use easements and other protection regimes on

these lands as well as reviewing the status of the 1,399 acres of private

land already under restrictive agreements. The plan also proposed

scenic overlooks, parking areas and access roads for the Miller Hill and

Bow Lakes preservation areas. The plan largely confirmed what had

been enacted in 1982 and this angered many people who expected that

the plan would reflect the new local consensus against the Benzie

corridor. Public meetings presenting the plan were predictably stormy

as old grievances were voiced and threats muttered. Even the proposal

to use easements to protect the Bow Lakes drew flak from a property

owner who argued he would rather the lakeshore bought the whole

tract rather than place restrictions on the use of a portion of it. The

sentiment, which drew the largest applause at the public meetings,

however, came from State Senator Connie Binsfeld. “Landowners

have had to go through turmoil throughout the creation of the park

while officials come and go,” she observed. “There is a lot of stress

involved on the resident’s part. Enough is enough—I hope there would

be no more changes in the plan.”[55]

 The lakeshore had to wait before receiving the funds necessary to

purchase the Bow Lakes area. In 1987, Congress appropriated $2

million from the Land and Water Conservation Fund and a portion of

the 725-acre bog area came under lakeshore management.[56]

NEXT> Managing More With Less; Lakeshore Operations, 1979-1983

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_4g.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:03 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Chapter Four

Managing More With Less: Lakeshore Operations, 1979-1983

 With the adoption of a new General Management Plan, ten years of

on-site management experience under their belts, and the amendment

of the lakeshore’s organic act, the National Park Service had for the

first time a clear-cut sense of its mission at Sleeping Bear. Ironically,

this clearer sense of mission came at the same time the entire agency

was suffering from frustration over budget reductions. During the early

1980s federal-spending priorities changed. The administration of

President Ronald Reagan annually proposed budget reductions for the

National Park Service and other domestic programs while building the

strength of the defense establishment. Reagan’s priorities were at odds

with the largely Democratic Congress, which led to annual disputes

over budgetary priorities. Programs such as the Youth Conservation

Corps, which had undertaken much valuable site development and

restoration work at Sleeping Bear, were discontinued. Land acquisition

funds were so reduced as to call into question the lakeshore’s ability to

even pay for properties under condemnation. The prospect of collecting

entrance fees at Sleeping Bear was considered for the first time.

Between the President’s attempt to shrink the size of the federal

government in the early 1980s and the burden of heavy budget deficits

in the late 1980s the entire decade was one of belt-tightening and

manpower shortages.

 Sleeping Bear Dunes’ development was circumscribed by these

national trends. Despite a clear-cut need for the improvement of

visitor facilities at the Platte River Campground and the Stocking

Scenic Drive, little more than planning took place to improve either

site. The slow pace of development frustrated even a fiscal

conservative such as Congressman Guy Vander Jagt. “Each year

seems to bring postponements of urgently needed public

accommodations,” he complained in 1979. Such a complaint loudly

voiced and charges that toilet facilities at the lakeshore violated federal

health standards shook loose a small increase in funding. New

construction activity, however, remained largely stalled. The

maintenance division devoted a considerable amount of its time to

clearing properties acquired through land acquisition. The park

remained headquartered in the old bank building in Frankfurt, far from

the actual dunes. The principal visitor contact point remained the

refurbished house overlooking Glen Lake. The park’s collections and

equipment remained scattered throughout the lakeshore in a variety of

abandoned buildings.[57]

 The opportunity to acquire much-needed storage and maintenance

space presented itself in 1980, when the United States Air Force

announced its intention to close its Empire base. Since the days of
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_4g.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:03 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

Superintendent Martinek the National Park Service had wished to use

the hilltop reservation south of Empire, Michigan. But the lakeshore’s

claim on the Air Force base was by no means uncontested. The village

of Empire wanted the lion’s share of the eighty-seven acre base

returned to the local tax rolls to make up for revenues lost by the

establishment of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore. A more

serious challenge came from within the U.S. Department of the

Interior. The Bureau of Indian Affairs put in a claim for the surplus

federal property in the name of the Grand Traverse Band of OttawaChippewa. The Ottawa-Chippewa wanted the base as a site for a tribal

college and a light manufacturing plant. After a year of study,

however, the Indians withdrew their request due to the high cost of

converting the base to their proposed use. Secreatary of the Interior

Watt briefly put another obstacle in the way when he threatened to sell

the base to the highest bidder, but this scheme fell away before

Congressional crticism. It was not until 1983 that the General Service

Administration got around to making the transfer official. The

lakeshore received the bulk of the base with a small portion reserved

for the Air Force and the Federal Aviation Administration to maintain

data collection stations.[58]

 While the Ottawa and Chippewa peoples did not acquire the Empire

Air Force Base site, their visibility within the lakeshore grew during

the late 1970s and early 1980s. In May 1979 the United States District

Court ruled that the Ottawa and Chippewa had retained their aboriginal

right to fish in the waters of Lake Michigan. The decision disrupted the

Michigan Department of Natural Resources’ delicate balancing of the

needs of the commercial fishing industry and the powerful sportfishing lobby. In the wake of the federal court ruling a third force was

introduced into the equation: Indian fishermen who rejected state

regulation over their fishing activities. Chippewa fishermen from Sault

Ste. Marie and Bay Mills in the Upper Peninsula began to

commercially fish in the waters of Grand Traverse Bay. As the Indians

whitefish catches increased so to did the level of verbal abuse and

physical harassment directed against them by sport fishermen. By

August 1979 the Bureau of Indian Affairs approached the

Superintendent of Sleeping Bear for sites from which Indian fishermen

could launch boats on Platte and Good Harbor bays. The lakeshore

cooperated by making access points available, but the park service

would allow no formal commercial operations on its beaches.

Nonetheless, local fishermen were “disgusted” by the lakeshore’s

cooperation with the Indian gill-netters. By October Chippewa

fishermen were operating within the lakeshore at the mouth of Otter

Creek. On one occasion forty sport fishermen organized a “beach

party” at the end of the Esch Road, blocking the Indian’s access to

Platte Bay. The presence of a dozen law enforcement officers and the

Indian’s willingness to avoid confrontation and shift their activities to

Good Harbor Bay defused the potential for conflict. The crisis

atmosphere over fishing in the Sleeping Bear gradually dissipated in

the early 1980s as broad protocol was negotiated between the

Department of Natural Resources and the Ottawa-Chippewa to regulate

commercial and sport fishing.[59]

 By that time the National Park Service had its own conflict with
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_4g.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:03 AM]

sports fishermen. The problem began when the National Park Service

issued a series of draft regulations on hunting and fishing within the

parks. The new guidelines would have ended trapping with the

lakeshore, an activity engaged in between ten and fifteen hunters

annually. More explosive was the proposed ban on the use of minnows

and spawn as bait. The regulations would have ended smelt dipping

within the lakeshore and severely restrict steelhead fishing on the

Crystal and Platte rivers. Michigan fishermen, outraged by federal

support of Indian fishing were not about to let their rights be further

restricted. More than 2,000 complaints flooded into Washington, D.C.

The Sleeping Bear Advisory Commission formally protested the new

regulations. Not counting on the volume of complaints alone to force a

policy retreat, one of the advisory commission members buttonholed

Secretary of the Interior James Watt at a fund raising dinner. “This is

not right,” Watt was quoted to have said, “Sleeping Bear should not be

included in this.” In the end it was determined that since Sleeping

Bear’s organic act specifically stated that fishing was to be conducted

“in accordance with the laws of the State of Michigan and the United

States applicable thereto,” the lakeshore could be exempted from the

national guidelines as it had an existing legal framework. The ban on

trapping, which the federal courts had rather ruled was an activity

distinct from hunting, was banned at Sleeping Bear after 1982.[60]

 The lakeshore won much needed good-will with the sport fishing

community in 1979 when it assumed responsibility for dredging the

mouth of the Platte River. Dredging had begun on the Platte in 1968, in

the wake of a storm, which drowned seven Platte Bay fishermen. The

Michigan Department of Natural Resources started the dredging to

provide a way for boats to exit or enter the Platte River, saving

sportsmen the long and potentially dangerous open water passage

around Point Betsie. Michigan officials saw the operation as a

temporary, stopgap measure until a harbor of refuge could be built at

the river mouth. After environmentalists blocked the Platte River

harbor plan the DNR found themselves with an expensive on-going

responsibility to keep the river mouth open during fishing season.

“Coho fever” began to abate in the late 1970s and the state authorities

announced in 1978 that they would not dredge the Platte the following

year. The river mouth, of course, was within the lakeshore so park

officials made no plan to continue so invasive a procedure as

dredging. However, as the fall of 1979 approached the lakeshore found

itself the object of escalating public pressure to keep the Platte open for

sport fishermen. Superintendent Brown lacked the funding to pay for

the operation alone so he persuaded the Department of Natural

Resources to share the cost of the effort. With extreme reluctance the

state agreed to help with the dredging for one more season. “After this

year,” a DNR official said of the lakeshore, “it’s their baby.” [61]

 The National Park Service wanted no part of an open-ended battle

against the natural action of wind, waves, and sand. But as the

summer of 1980 approached the pressure to dredge again began to

mount. The community of Honor, Michigan, was planning for its

fourteenth annual National Coho Salmon Festival. “There was a

feeling,” remarked lakeshore facility manager Merline Schlange, “that

this dredging operation is absolutely necessary for the economic health
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_4g.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:03 AM]

of the community and the safety of the fishermen.” The park budget,

however, simply could not afford to contract for a dragline. Left up to

its own devices the lakeshore would have had to choose between

dredging the Platte or keeping South Manitou Island open to visitors.

At the last minute the Washington, D.C. office scraped up $6,000. It

was not enough to fully fund the project. Sleeping Bear was told find a

way to get the job done anyway. The superintendent elected to dredge

only during peak use periods, such as weekends. There was danger in

this half-hearted commitment. The power of the sand flow in the

Platte was such that without dredging the river’s mouth would be

impassable for boats within a matter of days. Park dredging gave the

appearance of navigational maintenance, without the full safety benefit

of a genuine commitment. By the second week of September tens of

thousands of salmon were swarming at the mouth of the river; swarms

of anglers responded to the news. On September 18th between twenty

and thirty boats were angling for salmon in Platte Bay when a sudden

shift in the wind and weather turned Platte Bay into surging sea of

white-capped swells. The boats made a dash for the mouth of the

river. Chaos ensued when the first boats ran aground on the sandbar.

The park service’s dragline was not in operation, since Thursday was

not considered a peak period. Boaters were forced to jump into the

surf to pull their craft into the safety of the river. In the crashing

waves boats banged into one another and fishermen were swept off

their feet. The timely arrival of a Coast Guard Boston Whaler saved

five of the fishermen, the others got a cold dunking and a bone chilling

scare. All talk of letting nature take its course or of saving money

ended that day. To Benzie County officials it was an eerily familiar

repeat of the deadly 1967 storm and the local tourist economy could

afford no further reprise.[62]

 Within three days of the near disaster at the Platte, Sam Eberly,

Chairman of the Benzie County Board of Commissioners and a

member of the lakeshore advisory commission, had a meeting with

Midwest Region Director James Dunning. Congressman Vander Jagt

lobbied the Washington, D.C. office. Less than a week after the storm

the lakeshore was awarded a special reallocation of funds to continue

the dredging until the end of the salmon run. Since that time, in spite

of occasional special studies, the National Park Service has made a

commitment to maintain an unsightly dragline operation. Although it

is a clear interference with a natural process, the dragline is a

concession to sport fishermen and a small price to pay for having

avoided the construction of a major marina at the Platte.

NEXT> A New Harbor: To Build or Not to Build?

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_4h.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:06 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Chapter Four

A New Harbor: To Build or Not to Build?

 During an era beset with budget problems, it should have come as

no surprise that the no-build option was deemed the most appropriate

for the long smoldering controversy over a site for the lakeshore’s ferry

service. The single-most expensive recommendation of the General

Management Plan had been to build a new harbor within the

boundaries of the lakeshore. In 1981 a $309,000 congressional

appropriation funded a study of five potential harbor sites. The project

was directed by the National Park Service’s Denver Service Center

with engineering services contracted from the Ann Arbor firm of

McNamee, Porter and Seeley, Inc. The goal was to provide a docking

facility for the Manitou islands ferry and to provide recreational

boaters with access to the Sleeping Bear shoreline. Such a harbor had

long been part of the National Park Service’s long-range plans for the

lakeshore. Loud and persistent complaints from the village of Leland,

the site of the Grosvenors’ ferry dock, pushed the harbor study to the

front burner. The Sleeping Bear ferry, in the minds of many village

residents, contributed to traffic congestion in their scenic community.

Five possible sites were part of the initial investigation: Glen Haven,

Port Oneida, North Bar Lake, South Bar Lake—Empire, and Leland.

The inclusion of the latter was simply as a part of a “no build” option,

typical in planning documents. Nonetheless, the park service was

excoriated in public for including Leland in the study at all. “I am

shocked that this is being considered,” complained a member of the

advisory commission. “The people of Leland don’t want it. Take the

proposal back to Denver and tell them that.” The Leelanau planning

commission and its board of commissioners quickly went on record in

opposition of Leland be included in the study in any way.[63]

 The harbor study also drew flak as a fiscal “boondoggle.” The

Traverse City Record-Eagle called for federal budget director David

Stockman to investigate it as a waste of taxpayer dollars. “If the

National Park Service wants to give me that $309,000 for the study I’ll

take it and retire on what is left over,” commented Keith Wilson of the

Michigan Waterways Commission. The park service had once sunk his

harbor plan for the Platte and now he was quite willing to deride their

planning process. “Everything the NPS wants to know about the

harbor sites being discussed is already in the files of the Department of

Natural Resources in Lansing. All they have to do is ask for it.”

Benzie County officials also took their shots at the study. Each of the

five study sites was located in Leelanau County, which clearly did not

want the harbor. Although Benzie County was further from the

Manitou islands it wanted ferry docks badly and had the advantage of

being able to offer two fully functioning harbors at Frankfurt and

Elberta. For years Elberta had been the site of the Ann Arbor
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_4h.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:06 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

Railway’s car ferryboats. The demise of that business left officials

there anxious to bring another tourist business into the Frankfurt area.

Spurned by the Denver Service Center study the Michigan legislature

appropriated money for their own study of converting the state-owned

car-ferry docks at Elberta to a park service docking site. [64]

 Between 1982 and 1984 the separate components of the harbor

study, engineering, visitor use, and environmental, were completed.

The lakeshore presented the results to the public in a series of public

meetings. The study results were sobering, with each potential site

carrying a heavy price tag or considerable resource management

burdens. South Bar Lake and Leland were not addressed in the final

report as neither was in the lakeshore proper. Of the remaining sites

Glen Haven was determined the best location from an economic pointof-view. A harbor there was projected to cost $3.4 million, although it

was the intrusion of a great breakwater wall in the middle of one of the

finest beaches in mid-America that was the true cost of the building at

the site. The need to provide parking for several hundred cars and

trailers, a ticketing facility, site administration, toilets, and fire

protection to support the harbor would also have blighted the historic

charm of the hamlet of Glen Haven. The two Port Oneida sites

investigated would have had less secondary impacts, but the shallow

water of the area would have required higher initial construction costs,

between $4.3 and $6.8 million. The North Bar Lake site had little to

recommend it as it carried the hefty price tag of Port Oneida with

environmental damage as bad as Glen Haven. For a park unit charged

by Congress to protect the Sleeping Bear area “from developments and

uses which would destroy the scenic beauty and natural character of

the area,” a new harbor proved hard to justify.[65]

 The National Park Service had spent hundreds of thousands of

dollars and four years of planning to reach a pretty bad set of

alternatives. But it was time and money well-spent if only because

during the course of those studies and deliberations public sentiment

shifted. The image of a five hundred-foot breakwater wall jutting into

Sleeping Bear Bay and a five hundred-car parking lot in Glen Haven

was more than most Leelanau County residents could abide. Glen

Arbor townsfolk railed against the docking facility plan. Their

strongest argument, made by an advisory commission member was:

“The Park cannot, lawfully or in good conscience, purposefully destroy

what it is charged to protect.” The environmental argument joined

neatly with the community’s frugal Republicanism. “We can’t

understand,” editorialized the Traverse City Record-Eagle, “how the

Park Service can seriously consider building a new $4 million

harbor......when good service is already provided from a good harbor

just a short distance from the islands.” The very people who in 1981

had criticized the park service for even including Leland as a “nobuild” option were by 1984 clamoring, “leave it in Leland.” The

Detroit Free Press logically reasoned: “If the ferry slip is being moved

because the town found it a nuisance, what impact does the Park

Service suppose it is going to have on the dunes?” A new facility

within the park the editors argued would be “a real failure of

imagination.”[66]
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_4h.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:06 AM]

 Even within the town of Leland sentiment began to shift in favor of

retaining the docking facility. Michael Grosvenor, owner of Mantou

Island Transit had worked hard over the years to manage the surge in

ferry customers. He developed a series of remote parking lots and

connected them to the dock via a shuttle service. The historic Fishtown

area still thronged with people just before or after a ferry docking, but

the bustling maritime scene was in keeping with the threshold

experience of a genuine harbor. Leland merchants were uncomfortable

with the sentiment that the docking should be removed because of

traffic congestion. If Grosvenor, one of the few merchants to provide

parking for his customers was driven from the town, what could other

businesses expect in the future? Restaurants in particular were loath to

see the ferry relocated from the town. Breakfast at the Bluebird had

long been a tradition among visitors waiting to go over to the

Manitous. “Like it or not,” a town resident concluded, “Leland cannot

and will not be excluded from Michigan's No.1 industry, tourism." In

the end that was the conclusion reached by most observers. The

Advisory Commission recommended the “no-build” option and in

March 1985 Midwest Regional Director Charles Odegaard ordered the

lakeshore to forego constructing a new facility. [67]

NEXT> Conclusion

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_4i.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:10 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Chapter Four

Conclusion

 The period from 1978 to 1983 was a period of planning and

controversy in which the most significant decisions were those which

recommended taking no action at all. It was a period when the

executive branch itself questioned the efficacy of federal environmental

leadership. A significant portion of the lakeshore, the scenic highway

around Glen Lake was removed from the park plan, but this fell far

short of the heady “Reagan Revolution” rhetoric of returning the whole

of Sleeping Bear to state control. Four and a half years were spent

studying a possible site for a harbor, which upon reflection was not

needed after all.

 What was produced at Sleeping Bear during this five-year transition

period were plans; a General Management Plan, plans for new

campgrounds, plans for a new park headquarters, plans to complete the

land acquisition program, plans for a harbor that would never be built.

The plans laid out the path by which the National Park Service would

meet its mandate in northwest Michigan to serve the public’s

recreation needs and preserve a special environment. Perhaps more

important than the plans themselves was the process by which the

Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore was reimagined between

1978 and 1983. During these years Sleeping Bear evolved from being

a new area to an established entity. The demise of the scenic drives

compromised the vision of people like E. Genevieve Gillette who

wished to see the lakeshore embody the entire geological history of the

region’s unique landscape. Also compromised were the aesthetics of

graceful park drives and breathtaking viewsheds that New Dealinfluenced planners like Allen T. Edmunds had seen as central to the

park plan. These losses were the price for what was gained: a genuine,

if always painful, engagement with the people of the Sleeping Bear

area. The public turned the direction of National Park Service planning

on the issue of the scenic drives. The service won acceptance for the

special conservation areas within the defunct corridor. Through the

park service’s reluctant operation of a drag-line at the mouth of the

Platte and Leland’s wary embrace of the Manitou ferry dock, the habit

of consultation and even cooperation was beginning to be learned.

 Whether consultation between the local community and the

lakeshore could be used to produce a better lakeshore or whether the

long-term interests of the nation and the local interests of northwestern

Michigan could be harmonized to preserve a treasured landscape, were

the questions faced by the park service in the 1980s and 1990s. 

NEXT> Chapter Five "A Local and National Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes Park, 1984-1995
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_4i.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:10 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5b.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:14 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Chapter Five

Road Wars

 The movement of visitors through the lakeshore was one of the

primary and has been one of the most enduring concerns of the

National Park Service in the Sleeping Bear area. The original master

plan for the lakeshore called for the creation of a scenic road system

which would relieve tourist congestion on local roads and provide

interesting overlook points. While even in the early plans M-22 and

M-109 were planned to be partially used by visitors, the agency hoped,

as much as possible, to "separate Lakeshore traffic from local or

residential traffic." But that plan, dating from a time when parks were

unabashedly designed landscapes, did not survive the more

preservation-oriented 1970s. The preparation of a new general

management plan for the lakeshore between 1978 and 1980 brought

with it two features which would have a great impact on road policy at

the Sleeping Bear. The general management plan endorsed the

aggressive designation of large areas of the park as wilderness and

removed the Leelanau County portion of the scenic road system from

the lakeshore. The Benzie County scenic road corridor was effectively

rendered defunct by local opposition during the early 1980s. These

decisions seriously exacerbated what under any circumstances would

have been a thorny relationship between park management and the

local government authorities charged with maintaining area roads.

 One of the defining features of wilderness is the lack of roads.

Roadless character is critical for an area to meet the legal requirements

of the 1964 Wilderness Act. When the new general management plan

validated the decision to administer more than half of the lakeshore as

an official wilderness, the park service was set on a collision course

with the Leelanau County Road Commission. As the lakeshore

completed more and more of its land acquisition the park service

planned to close vehicular access to large portions of the Sleeping Bear

landscape. But the roads throughout the park were maintained by the

local road commission, whose funding came from local property taxes

and state appropriations based upon the amount of road mileage under

their jurisdiction. The road commissions in both Leelanau and Benzie

counties had already been hurt by the establishment of the national

lakeshore because it took more than 40,000 acres off of the local

property tax rolls while at the same time attracting thousands more

tourists to use the local road system. Wilderness designation and its

roadless requirement hit those commissions a second time by

threatening road closures that would trigger a drop in state

appropriations. The conflict between the interests of the local road

commissions and the National Park Service came to a head on North

Manitou Island.
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5b.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:14 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

 During the late nineteenth century North Manitou Island was a

microcosm of the rest of northern Michigan. The 14,000-acre island

was inhabited by 300 people who either worked for a lumber company

cutting Manitou timber or they scratched out a living from forest

farms. The people on the island had a school, baseball team, and their

own railroad-a narrow gauge logging line. A network of roads linked

the remote farms to the logging dock and the U.S. Life Saving Service

station. The disastrous crash of the forest economy in the 1920s helped

to spur the depopulation of North Manitou. From the 1930s to the

creation of the lakeshore North Manitou was largely depopulated, save

for a handful of summer homeowners and the sporting activities

sponsored by William Angell and later by his foundation. Nonetheless,

the Leelanau County Road Commission had kept on their books fortytwo miles of roads on North Manitou. By 1984, when the island was

formally and finally acquired by the National Park Service, the annual

payments received by the road commission for the all but unused

Manitou roads was $40,000. In return for this large sum all the road

commission had to do was retain a part time maintenance worker on

the island to occasionally remove a fallen tree with a chain saw. As a

New York Times reporter observed North Manitou was used by the

Leelanau Road Commission "as a sort of interest-bearing account for

years." Wilderness designation threatened to foreclose on that

account.[2]

 Both the National Park Service and the road commission anticipated

a problem regarding the closing of the island roads. As early as 1972

Leelanau County asserted that roads within the lakeshore would remain

under local government control because they had no intention of giving

them up and the lakeshore's enabling legislation prevented it from

acquiring public land by condemnation. In 1979, Superintendent

Donald Brown reviewed with the Leelanau County Road Commission

the implications of the new general management plan. Brown believed

that the only resolution of the conflict between the wilderness and road

revenues was for a new source of funding to be made available for

Leelanau County. He recommended that no time be lost exploring new

legislation, on both the state and federal level, to make up the

difference.

 That advice fell on deaf ears. Yet as late as 1983 no legislative

action had been taken. Part of the problem was that the local road

commissions were unsure how much federal assistance to request. "We

know we need assistance in doing the job," a Benzie County Road

Commission engineer admitted, "but we don't know how much to ask

for." Part of the problem was institutional, in that county road

commissions are fairly powerful local entities in Michigan. They are

run by pragmatic-problem solvers, jealous of their prerogatives. They

found the National Park Service's bureaucratic style of issue resolution

plodding and unresponsive. "They are quick to raise objections, but

slow with solutions," complained James Gilbo, engineer and manager

of the road commission. "If something is not black and white in their

plan, they tend to shutdown and say an action is not authorized by

Congress." [3]

 Also a problem was Congressman Guy Vander Jagt, who did finally
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5b.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:14 AM]

sponsor a bill to provide federal assistance for Sleeping Bear road

building in 1984. Vander Jagt was a fiscal and philosophical

conservative. He strongly supported President Ronald Reagan's efforts

to reduce federal domestic spending programs. In 1986, Vander Jagt

even advocated repeal of the Twenty-Second Amendment to the

United States Constitution, so that Reagan could be elected to a third

term. Failing in that Vander Jagt called for Reagan to run for the House

of Representatives, so he could lead the nation as Speaker-of-theHouse. The Congressman regularly voted zero funding for the

Department of the Interior during House budget debates. His special

pleading for extra Interior funds for his district did not win much

sympathy among the Democratic majority. Even the Reagan

administration testified against Vander Jagt's bill during a House

hearing. National Park Service Director Russell Dickinson reminded

Vander Jagt that seventy percent of the lakeshore's visitors were

Michigan residents and that the federal government already provided

the state with millions of dollars from the Highway Trust fund. Part of

the problem with obtaining federal funds for local roads within the

lakeshore was the fear of establishing an expensive precedent for

scores of other parks. Vander Jagt tried to point out that Indiana Dunes

National Lakeshore already had been receiving special annual

appropriations with which to improve locally owned roads. The

powerful chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, Chicago

Congressman Sidney Yates had special affection for the sister

lakeshore park but an antipathy for Guy Vander Jagt. The latter had

lent uncolleageal support to a Republican who had given Yates a tough

reelection challenge, which made Yates more than happy to rain on

Vander Jagt's lakeshore road initiatives. Another congressman, with

less ideological and interpersonal baggage, could have won at least

temporary federal assistance for Leelanau and Benzie county.[4]

 With no special federal relief in the offing the roads within the

Sleeping Bear National Lakeshore continued to suffer from neglect.

Arthur Clark, the Benzie County Road Commissioner, complained that

the roads and bridges in the area were deteriorating faster than he

could repair them. "Someone could get killed," he complained. This

was only a slight exaggeration. A 1982 Department of the Interior

study of M-22 and other highways in the lakeshore described the roads

as "heavily impacted" by tourist traffic and "deficient" in design and

surfacing. To maintain the roads properly the road commission

estimated they needed $16.7 million in additional revenues over ten

years. They would surrender no existing revenue sources until new

monies were forthcoming. [5]

 North Manitou Island became the symbolic battleground between

the park service's determination to follow through with their

management plans and the road commissioners insistence on holding

on to every financial asset at their disposal. The National Park Service

had requested that other roads within the lakeshore be closed, but

North Manitou became the battleground because it was a large, insular

portion of the park to which the park service could control access and

it had forty-two miles of defunct road.[6]

 Without receiving federal funds to make up the shortfall the
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5b.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:14 AM]

Leelanau County Road Commission refused to surrender the island

roads. In August 1984, the Commission voted to explore "all possible

commercial uses" of the road rights-of-way, including commercial

logging and the operation of motorized scenic tours through the

wilderness island. Meanwhile the park service, which had just

completed the purchase of the Grosvenor's ferry dock on the island,

announced it would not allow the road commission use of the dock, as

their actions threatened the island's environment. The road commission,

headed by strong willed Glen Noonan, refused to be so easily

outflanked. They asserted ownership of an abandoned dock at the end

of one of their island roads and notified the park service they would

use it to bring road equipment to North Manitou. Superintendent

Richard Peterson knew that dock was in severe disrepair so he

"authorized" the road commission to conduct operations on the island

for one year but placed severe restrictions on their activities, including

the provision "no timber may be cut or destroyed from federal

property." The road commission dispatched a forester to the island to

estimate the value of the timber along the county's road right-of-way.

In October 1984, the commission's attorney warned Congressman

Vander Jagt, "Something serious" was about to happen between the

feuding agencies.[7]

 The "something serious" was the enforcement of North Manitou's

wilderness status by park rangers. All unauthorized vehicles were

ordered removed from the island. In August a private vehicle leased by

the road commission was impounded by island rangers. The 1973

Chevrolet Blazer belonged to James M. Munoz, a local schoolteacher

and charter boat operator. He had the truck on the island for several

years and made it available to the road commission when they needed

access to the island's roads. Munoz had ignored a registered letter

warning him to have the Blazer removed from the island. "I have been

wronged," Munoz complained to the road commission, after the park

service shipped the truck to a mainland storage facility. Congressman

Vander Jagt expressed "shock" at the rangers' action and offered to

intercede in the dispute. The truck was eventually returned to Munoz,

but only after he signed an agreement pledging not to leave it overnight

anywhere in the lakeshore. The road commission responded to the

incident by giving Suttons Bay High School permission to transport a

vehicle to the island, use it to give students a tour of North Manitou,

and keep the truck on the island indefinitely. The commission also

informed hunters preparing to participate in the North Manitou deer

hunt that it was all right to bring motorcycles on to the island. Munoz

struck his own blow against the lakeshore by proposing to the Leland

Board of Education that the one-acre site of a former North Manitou

school house be developed for educational or commercial recreational

use.[8]

 The road commission-park service melodrama took on a tragic

dimension on December of 1986. A single engine plane on a training

flight from Marquette, Michigan, to Traverse City became caught in a

winter storm. With the craft's carburetor icing badly, it began to lose

altitude. The flight instructor attempted to make an emergency landing

on the partially frozen surface of Lake Manitou, on North Manitou

Island. The ice could not hold the plane, which broke through and sank
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5b.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:14 AM]

to the bottom of the interior lake. Before that happened one of the men,

although badly injured, managed to escape from the wreck and make

his way to the shore. Unfortunately he yielded to hypothermia within

an hour. The attempt by park rangers and the Leelanau police and

firemen to search for survivors and find the lost plane fed local

discontent with the National Park Service's plan to manage the island

as a wilderness free from motor vehicles. The three-day search took

place amid blowing snow and gusty thirty-mile an hour winds.

Searchers on the island requested the use of snowmobiles so that they

could more quickly reach the priority search areas. Lakeshore officials

demurred, but the State Police and the Coast Guard approved the use of

snowmobiles. Unfortunately heavy seas prevented their transportation

to the island. The parents of the missing student pilot were dismayed to

discover that two pairs of cross-country skis were the only equipment

available to speed the searcher's efforts, and immediately contacted

their congressional representative. Red-hot calls from Washington,

D.C. encouraged Superintendent Richard Peterson to belatedly offer

the use of the lakeshore's all-terrain vehicles. But by that time the

pedestrian patrols discovered the crash victims.[9]

 Loudly voiced criticisms to the contrary, nothing the lakeshore did

hindered the use of motorized equipment in the search. Weather

conditions were simply too rough to transport any equipment to the

island. The road commission, which claimed to maintain vehicles and

roads on the island, did not look much better. They had offered

rescuers the use of their four-wheel drive vehicle ("if they can get it

running") and were forced to admit to the State Police that there were

many downed trees blocking the roads. Superintendent Peterson

responded to the lessons from the crash by having several snowmobiles

prepositioned on the island to aid any future winter rescue. Ironically

the lakeshore agreed to allow a heavy flatbed truck on the island to

transport the fallen plane from Manitou Lake to the Lake Michigan

dock. Still to many people the incident gave the appearance that the

National Park Service valued the sanctity of wilderness more than the

prospect of saving human lives.[10]

 The bad blood between Leelanau County and the lakeshore

continued into the following year. After the road commission's North

Manitou dock was wrecked in an autumn storm, the National Park

Service blocked their efforts to obtain a Department of Natural

Resources construction permit on the grounds it wanted only one dock

on the island. The lakeshore offered the road commission the right to

use the new National Park Service dock that was being planned. Rather

than greet this offer as an olive branch, the road commissioners saw it

as a plot to control Leelanau County's options. The response came in

August of 1987 when the park service's own dock required a

Department of Natural Resources permit. Officials in Lansing

requested Leelanau County's approval for the dock because it would be

used for a Leelanau County commercial operation, the island ferry.

After sitting on the permit for several months the Leland Township

supervisor tore up the park service application. The supervisor, who

also blamed the park service for traffic congestion in Leland, had met

with Superintendent Peterson and hoped to interest him in a shuttle

system from the lakeshore to Leland. Peterson was unwilling to
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5b.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:14 AM]

compromise on either North Manitou roads or Leland's traffic woes.

"It's like talking with God," the supervisor complained. "They're

nothing but a bunch of buck-passers." In disgust he declared "tell them

to go suck an egg."[11]

 The war of words between the park service and the county became

more heated when a third party to entered the fray. The slow pace at

which the lakeshore was implementing the wilderness

recommendations in the general management plan dismayed many

environmentalists. After six years of waiting for North Manitou to be

purchased and another five years for the wilderness plan to be put into

effect, the environmentalists were ready for action. In August of 1986,

the Sierra Club announced that if the park service did not act to have

the road commission removed from the island it would initiate legal

action. The Sierra Club lobbied Michigan Governor James Blanchard

to investigate the road commissions collection of revenues based on the

unused island roads. An investigation by the state attorney general

followed. "We don't care whether the county gets any money for the

roads or not," declared Anne Woiwode, head of the Sierra Club's

Mackinac Chapter, "but we are not going to sit by and watch them

degrade this proposed wilderness area." The Sierra Club's threat of a

suit brought prompt action from the lakeshore. On April 6, 1987 the

National Park Service published a public notice of its wilderness rules

for North Manitou in the Federal Register. "Use of vehicles in

wilderness areas is prohibited under federal statute," the notice made

clear.[12]

 By this time the Sierra Club was not the only one threatening legal

action. In March of 1987 Leelanau County filed a complaint with the

federal district court to force the park service to allow them to maintain

the island's roads and to establish that the road commission were the

rightful owners of the right-of-way. The Sierra Club then filed suit to

be named co-defendant in the suit, with the goal of insuring that

environmental considerations would be given strong representation in

any negotiated settlement. Leelanau County, however, objected to the

Club's involvement and filed a brief in opposition to their joining the

case. For its part the court did not seem to anxious to take on the case.

Judge Douglas W. Hillman was slow to set deadlines for the pre-trial

motions, leaving the lakeshore and the county to find their own way

through the issue of road management.

 By 1988, it was clear that the fight over the roads on North Manitou

Island had spiraled out of control. "I don't understand what this is all

about," Lakeshore Assistant Superintendent John Abbett admitted in a

moment of candid frustration. The fate of the roads on an offshore

wilderness was not really important to Leelanau County. What did

matter was money. The county needed more of it to provide appropriate

care for heavily used tourist roads. But the old bitterness over the

creation of the lakeshore, the land acquisition process, and the general

management plan had been allowed to bleed into the road maintenance

issue. "The main issue is the public's rights," Glen Noonan told his

fellow commissioners. "Are we going to let the National Park Service

dictate the final policy of the Road Commission?" Both the lakeshore

and the county looked in vain to Congressman Vander Jagt to solve the
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5b.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:14 AM]

road commission's problems. Unfortunately, Vander Jagt had tried and

failed to even convince his own political allies to provide the county

with federal support. That left the road commission with two practical

alternatives: a local property tax increase and a larger share of state

highway funds. As the prospect of a meaningful legal victory in federal

district court faded the county turned to these other solutions. In 1987,

Connie Binsfeld, Glen Lake's Republican representative in the

Michigan Senate, shepherded a bill through the legislature, which

increased the amount of road funding received by Leelanau and Benzie

counties from the state. Leelanau's share of $146,000 for 1988 came

with the provision that the funds be "used exclusively" for construction

or reconstruction which provided "safe and efficient...access to

national parks and lakeshores."[14]

 The National Park Service also sought creative alternatives to the

regular head-butting with the road commission. An out of court

settlement was crafted between the lakeshore and the county in which

the Nature Conservancy purchased the bulk of the county's rights-ofway on North Manitou for around $150,000. The National Park Service

then purchased the land from the Conservancy, thereby getting around

the lakeshore's legislative mandate to acquire public lands only by

donation. In the wake of this settlement a more constructive

relationship between the road commission and the park service

gradually emerged. A turning point came when the road commission

sought to make improvements to County Road 616. The hilly road had

several dangerous curves the commission had long wanted to have

straightened. Glen Lake school buses had to make long detours in

winter to avoid its winding, icy surface. Superintendent Peterson made

a special effort to accommodate the commission's need to use park

land to realign the right-of-way. The lakeshore also worked with the

road commission on applications to the Public Land Highway Fund and

to the state department of transportation. Such funding requests did not

solve Benzie and Leelanau counties escalating transportation costs, but

they did help to ease the local burden. "We'll take anything we can

get," became the watchwords of James C. Gilbo, manager of the

Leelanau Road Commission. Gilbo could even state publicly that

"We're happy the Park Service is willing to explore solutions to the

problem."[15]

 While the lakeshore was in the midst of their dispute with the

Leelanau Road Commission, Superintendent Peterson ran head-on into

an additional road controversy concerning planned improvements to

Pierce Stocking Drive. The seven-mile dune road had become the

single most popular attraction in the park. It had long needed to be

resurfaced and partially realigned. The National Park Service believed

the entrance to the scenic drive, which began and ended with a very

steep hill, needed to be relocated and a more gradual approach laid out

up the dune. A bike lane on the Scenic Drive and additional parking,

especially for recreational vehicles and trailers were further planned.

The project, budgeted at $2.2 million had been placed on the back

burner many times due to funding shortfalls. When it looked like the

road improvements were finally going to go through in May of 1986,

the project hit a snag from an unexpected source.
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5b.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:14 AM]

 The Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore Preservation

Committee was the snag. Formed by Marie Scott, a Michigan native

and a former lakeshore seasonal interpreter, the committee believed the

road improvements as planned by the park service were too intrusive

on the environment. The committee, which was largely made up of

local people, also objected to the fact that the park service had not held

public hearings specifically on the project. Superintendent Peterson

contended that the realignment had been part of the general

management plan, which was the subject of extensive hearings in 1979.

Instead of building a new entrance road to the scenic drive, Scott's

group advocated that the lakeshore partially take over the county

owned Dune Valley Road. Superintendent Peterson, however, felt this

would cause potential traffic problems with regular users of the county

road, not to mention further conflict with the road commission which

was loathe to lose more road mileage to the park service. Scott's

committee expressed objections, which were shared by some lakeshore

staff. One ranger, speaking to the press anonymously, complained that

the scenic drive was being widened "so much that it doesn't become

any different than any of the county roads." The design team from the

Denver Service Center, however, had no problem with that criticism

since the Stocking Drive had heavier traffic than most county roads.

The complaint revealed a split in the ranks of the park service that was

becoming increasingly common nationwide. Many younger employees

saw the park system as an archipelago of ecological islands, protected

from the rest of the world, while more traditional managers still

thought of a park as primarily a recreational destination.[16]

 Marie Scott elicited the support of the office of U.S. Senator Donald

Riegle, which pressed Superintendent Peterson to hold hearings on the

project. Peterson agreed to delay the start of the project and to entertain

individual comment. The lakeshore management was not on firm

ground and should have known it. There had not been an

environmental assessment of the much tinkered with project.

Superintendent Perterson demurred on holding hearings, although he

did reluctantly scale back the bike lane and more importantly eliminate

a large parking lot near the entrance. The parking lot had been a

nonessential late addition to the plan and would have destroyed a large

stand of mature hardwood trees. Driving the superintendent to push

through objections to the project was the need to reopen the popular

road as soon as possible. "We've answered all their questions," a

lakeshore spokesman said after meeting with Scott and her group.

"They just don't like the answers." One of management's objections to

altering the park plan was the argument that the project was actually

underway. Construction contracts had been signed and the realignment

had been surveyed and flagged. It was, therefore, with grave suspicion

of Scott's group that Superintendent Peterson viewed the news that

during the first week of June 1986 someone had pulled up between 300

and 500 survey stakes at the construction site. The Sleeping Bear

Dunes National Lakeshore Preservation Committee strongly denied

association with the "monkey wrenching" incident, which caused more

than $1,000 damage. The group threatened to sue the park service if it

went ahead with the construction, but in the end lacked the financial

resources to make good that threat. The project was completed in

November, a month too late for tourists visiting the park to appreciate
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5b.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:14 AM]

the beautiful autumn hardwoods.[17]

 The incident was at once an illustration of the fact that for the

National Park Service nothing ever came easy at Sleeping Bear. It also

served as a warning that a transition was taking place in northwest

Michigan. The old-style knee-jerk opposition based on the idea of

"keeping the park service out," was gradually giving way to new

coalitions of citizens who looked to the National Park Service to play a

leadership role in preserving the natural and cultural heritage of the

Sleeping Bear area. These citizen-activists could be articulate

supporters of the lakeshore or vocal opponents. The warning of the

Stocking Drive protest was that public participation would be insisted

upon in all phases of the planning process.

NEXT> Fort Empire: A New Headquarters For Sleeping Bear

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5c.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:18 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Chapter Five

Fort Empire: A New Headquarters For Sleeping Bear

 Both the original master plan for the lakeshore and the revised

general management plan called for the headquarters of the park to be

located in Empire, Michigan. Yet from 1971 until 1987 the

"temporary" offices in the former State Savings Bank Building in

Frankfort served as the lakeshore headquarters. The space that Julius

Martinek had found cramped and inadequate when the lakeshore was

founded continued to serve as the base for twenty headquarters

personnel sixteen years later. More so than even the site's space

limitations, it was Frankfort's location well south of the lakeshore, that

made the site such a frustrating headquarters location. Everyday park

staff wasted hours of time driving back and forth from the lakeshore to

the headquarters. That ended in January of 1987 when several Bekins

moving vans emptied the old bank building of park service equipment,

furniture, and records, and drove to the new centrally located

headquarters in Empire. [18]

 The long delayed preliminary plans for the headquarters called for a

combined office facility and visitor center. The preferred location of

the building was within a half mile of the intersection of M-22 and M72. During the years when the headquarters was merely a line in an

unfunded plan, lakeshore staff frequently speculated on just where the

structure would be built. The more cynical would hold "we'll probably

just end up in the lot behind Taghon's gas station."[19]

It was not until 1984 that funding looked solid enough for planning to

move forward. Realty specialists from the General Services

Administration were given charge of the project. They issued a

request-for-proposals for a 12,000 square-foot office, exhibition

building. Although the building would be built to General Services

Administration standards, it would not be owned by the government,

rather the National Park Service would be a long-term tenant. For the

village of Empire this had the advantage of making the structure a

private and, therefore, taxable endeavor. For the lakeshore, which had

little prospect of receiving a construction budget large enough to build

their own facility, the involvement of the General Services

Administration was a way to put the bulk of the costs for the new

headquarters into the Washington, D.C. office's general facilities rental

account. The downside of this creative budget management was that it

ensured that the public would continue to pay for the building with rent

long after the construction costs had been covered. More than a dozen

developers bid on the project. A group called Empire Investments,

formed by a group of local investors, won the General Services

contract. The project was supported by a tax-free bonds issued through

the Leelanau County Economic Development Corporation. The site
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5c.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:18 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

that was selected was a large open field behind Taghon's gas station.

 There had been considerable discussion about using the former

Empire Air Force Base site, which already was serving as the

maintenance center, as the headquarters site. Certainly there was plenty

of space available, much of which could be easily adapted to office

use. The general management plan, however, had called for a joint

headquarters-visitor center facility. The lakeshore staff believed that

the Empire base site, located nearly a mile off of M-22, was too

remote from the stream of tourist traffic to function well as a visitor

facility. The desire to implement the plan may have blinded lakeshore

leadership to the opportunity to use the former base administratively

and then upgrade the existing Glen Lake visitor center. Certainly the

latter site seriously needed to be expanded, particularly the washroom

facilities, which had been little changed from the days when the

building had served as a private residence. In fact, the cost of new

washrooms at Glen Lake helped to drive lakeshore management to

accept the Empire site. By going with the General Services

Administration plan the lakeshore's new headquarters was categorized

as a "relocation," not a new construction project.[20]

 The Chicago firm of Hammond, Beeby & Babka designed the new

headquarters building. James W. Hammond, the principal architect for

the building was a long-time summer resident of Glen Lake. Ironically,

twenty years before he had been one of the many people worried about

losing their homes to the national lakeshore. Two decades later he

helped to build the park service's permanent headquarters. Hammond's

original design called for a 14,000 foot square box, enclosed by a large

cedar shaked hip roof and weathered cedar siding. Cost overruns,

however, necessitated a late design change to a flat roof. This gave the

building an appearance that at best was bland. In an effort to inject a

bit of style Hammond added a tower. At first the idea was that the

tower could be fitted with a staircase that would allow visitors to

ascend to an observation deck that allowed at least a glimpse of the

dunes and the Lake Michigan shore. Such an overlook would have

made up for a principal shortcoming of the Empire site as a visitor

center-it was out of view of the lakeshore. But safety and financial

considerations prevented the tower from ever being adapted to serve as

an observation deck. On the inside, the new headquarters and visitors

center was a very functional and pleasant space. To visitors

approaching the site, however, the low wood-sided building with the

blockhouse-like tower looked a bit like a frontier fort. In fact among

some of the local residents the headquarters came to be known as "Fort

Empire."[21]

 The new visitor center was equipped with an excellent set of

exhibits and an auditorium for public programs. It lacked the "lodgelike" feel of the Glen Lake facility, which during the winter was often

filled with cross country skiers or hikers warming themselves by the

fireplace. That older visitor center was demolished, which cleared the

view from M-109 of Glen Lake. The new visitor center offered a much

more professional image and superior facilities for large groups of

tourists. Within the first year more than 73,000 visitor contacts were

made at the new facility. In July of 1984, National Park Service
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5c.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:18 AM]

Director William Penn Mott visited Sleeping Bear as part of a swing

through Michigan to meet park staff at existing National Parks and to

inspect several prospective park projects in the Upper Peninsula. Mott

was a crusty career park administrator and a landscape architect by

training who was not afraid to speak both bluntly and humorously.

After touring the new Empire visitor center the Director addressed the

staff of the lakeshore. In what was supposed to be a morale boosting

talk, he broke-up his audience by candidly voicing the expert opinion,

"You have what must be the ugliest visitor center in the entire National

Park System." [22]

NEXT> Plovers, Swans, and Deer: Resource Management, 1984-1995

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5d.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:21 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Chapter Five

Plovers, Swans, and Deer: Resource Management, 1984-1995

 Probably the least controversial aspect of the history of the National

Park Service at Sleeping Bear Dunes has been the management of

natural resources within the lakeshore. That is not to say that there

have not been challenges, rather the work of protecting and managing

the plant and animal communities of the Sleeping Bear has always

been less volatile than issues relating to property and people. Like most

national park units personalities and chance have shaped the

development of the natural resources management at Sleeping Bear.

The Sleeping Bear lacked the influential congressional sponsorship that

won for a few select parks in the region, like Indiana Dunes National

Lakeshore, a sizable, independent scientific research staff. At Sleeping

Bear the determining factor in the development of its program was

continuity. Virtually since the creation of the lakeshore natural resource

Max Holden has attended to management issues. A former Wildlife

Ranger, Holden initially worked on Sleeping Bear issues as a member

of the scientific staff of the Midwest Regional office. In that capacity

he helped to prepare the initial wilderness plan for the lakeshore and

advised Superintendent Martinek on resource management issues. After

1978 Holden was based at Sleeping Bear as a Resource Management

Specialist. While natural resource research at many national parks

waxed and waned based on personnel fluctuations, Sleeping Bear has

had a consistent, steady program that helped the park to develop a solid

environmental record of the national lakeshore area. [23]

 Managerial continuity was enhanced by the baseline of scientific

studies of the Sleeping Bear area inherited by the National Park

Service. Large dune complexes were among the earliest and most

intensively studied natural phenomena in Michigan. Beginning in the

1880s the study of Lake Michigan dune plant and animal communities

by biologist Henry C. Cowles played a significant role in the

development of modern ecological science. Studies and publications

sponsored by the Cranbrook Institute of Science, the Michigan

Academy of Sciences, and state universities continued the investigation

of the areas during the period before the creation of the lakeshore.

While research questions, to say nothing of methods, have changed

considerably over time, Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore has

benefited from a more rich and varied set of longitudinal data about its

geology, flora, and fauna than most new park units.[24]

 The task of utilizing this data and conducting new studies of the

Sleeping Bear has been shaped by important institutional strictures

common to all national parks. The most important of these has been the

movement toward ecological management. Since the 1960s, an overt

struggle had been waged within the service between management
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5d.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:21 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

based upon the principles of scenic preservation and tourist supervision

and a management philosophy grounded in the realization that park

areas were complex natural systems. With the latter perspective came

the recognition that detailed studies were necessary to guide

management as well as the will to restore lands transformed by human

action. Also important was a new set of federal environmental

procedures. The National Environmental Policy Act established a

review process to ensure no federally funded or licensed activities

would be undertaken without taking into account the impact upon the

environment. The act also created the Environmental Protection

Agency, which has raised awareness of issues of pollution and toxic

contamination throughout the country. Also formative has been the

Endangered Species Act, which elevated the importance of identifying,

monitoring, and protecting plants and animals in danger of

extinction.[25]

 The challenge of ecological management was most visibly seen in

the resource management decisions relating to wildlife within the

lakeshore. In spring of 1989, for the first time in the twentieth century,

there were no seabird nests at South Manitou Island's Gull Point. When

Congress created the lakeshore, the gull colony on South Manitou

Island numbered in the thousands. The importance of the declining

rookery for the threatened ring-billed gull was a significant

consideration in the selection of the island for inclusion in the Sleeping

Bear National Lakeshore proposal. In the past the loss of the rookery

while the island was under park service control would have been

chalked up as a major failure by park management. Indeed, during the

early years of the lakeshore the National Park Service did step in to try

and save the gull nesting grounds. It was scientific evidence, gathered

by park service sponsored research projects, which changed the

agency's view of the decline of the rookery from being a resource

management problem to a necessary and inevitable ecological action.

 Based on long term studies made by Northwestern Michigan

College faculty, by a multiyear National Park Service contract

conducted by Northern Illinois University scientists, and most

important of all, research on the human history of the island, the

lakeshore management staff concluded that the decline of the gull

nesting grounds was a natural phenomena. During the nineteenth

century the gull had chosen as a nesting ground the stony tipped end of

South Manitou harbor. At that time the island was near its peak of

human activity. Numerous farms dotted the island, small-scale

commercial logging took place, as well as commercial fishing. Local

farmers all kept broods of chickens for eggs and meat. Predators like

the red fox were trapped or poisoned as a threat to livestock. The

decimation of natural predators like the fox made Gull Point an ideal

location for a rookery, as the young hatchlings could mature in safety.

As farming on the island declined and the park service began to

administer the island, the fox population rebounded. Crossing over the

ice of frozen Manitou Passage, the fox reinhabited the island. As the

number of predators increased the gull colony was hit hard. For several

years the rangers on the island actually live-trapped red fox to reduce

their nocturnal depredations among the baby gulls, helplessly pleating

among the rocks. Over time, however, it became clear that what was
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5d.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:21 AM]

taking place on the island was natural and that when predatory pressure

became too great the gulls would simply relocate their rookery to one

of the many small rocky islets that made up the Lake Michigan

archipelago. The trapping of the fox was ended, and over the course of

the decade of the 1980s the gull population relocated to a less

vulnerable site.[26]

 The gulls themselves acted as predators, preying on an endangered

species within the lakeshore, the piping plover. The white and sand

colored shorebird is known for its darting dashes across the sand and

its melodious, whistling song. The piping plover was well on its way to

extinction due to the loss of beach habitat when several pairs returned

to North Manitou Island in 1980s. Beaver Island and Hat Island further

up the archipelago also saw a return of the birds. The lakeshore

cooperated with the Michigan Department of Natural Resources in

forming a Piping Plover Recovery Team. Beaches on North Manitou

Island as well as at mainland locations outside the park, particularly

Cathead Bay and Waugoshance Point were closed to the public to

protect plover nesting sites. Two nests of the rare bird became a fixture

on North Manitou while a third nest was established at the mouth of

the Platte River beginning in 1994. The latter site posed a greater

challenge to lakeshore resource managers because it was one of the

busiest recreational beaches in northwestern Michigan. Fortunately, the

erection of a barrier around the nesting area and the posting of park

rangers in the area allowed the birds to successfully hatch their young

at the improbable site. Another endangered bird species to make its

way into the lakeshore was the bald eagle. In 1995 a pair of bald eagles

built a nest on North Manitou Island. The return of the national bird to

the island after an absence of twenty years was an endorsement of the

contested decision to manage North Manitou as a wilderness.[27]

 Not all bird species, however, were welcome at Sleeping Bear. In

1919, the mute swan was introduced as a domestic species in

Charlevoix County, Michigan. They soon escaped into the wild and

spread to fourteen northern Michigan counties. During the late 1970s

and early 1980s the mute swan population in the lakeshore dramatically

increased. Previously limited solely to the Platte River and the

wetlands around Otter Creek, the swans began to inhabit most of the

inland lakes within the national lakeshore. The swans were bad

neighbors. They frequently attacked native Canada geese, scattering

family groups and leaving the young goslings isolated and vulnerable.

At first park visitors were thrilled to see the large, graceful birds.

Picnickers at Little Glen Lake would often feed the birds pieces of

bread, only to be rewarded with a nip as soon as they turned around.

Less graceful in flight than when floating majestically on a pond the

swans would also occasionally fly into the side of a canoe the birds felt

threatened nesting sites. More than a few surprised canoeists capsized,

blaming the swans for attacking them. The aggressive birds were even

known to harass swimmers. In 1983 park rangers removed several

swans that were fouling the beach at Glen Lake. Thereafter, Resource

Management Specialist Holden developed a formal management plan

to deal with the feral species. The plan, approved by the region in

1984, concluded that the presence of the swans was "inconsistent and

incongruous with the management principles of maximum protection
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5d.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:21 AM]

of the natural environment." Developed in consultation with the

Michigan Department of Natural Resources, the plan called for the

removal of thirty swans from the lakeshore. The birds were to be livetrapped, their wings fixed, and then removed to Boardman Lake, where

local residents maintained an artificial feeding program. The policy

was in keeping with a statewide initiative to limit northern Michigan's

swan population to no more than 1,000 birds.[28]

 While the policy was still under review at the regional office, and

prior to any formal public comment, a minor controversy erupted when

rangers trapped several particularly troublesome swans. Those who

enjoyed the presence of the swans and those who were simply

suspicious of any park action disputed this action. "Why do they go

sneaking around without telling residents what's going on," complained

a Glen Lake resident who found park rangers placing a trap near Little

Glen Lake. The plan was later released for public comment, which was

favorable, and adopted.[30]

 The most high-profile wildlife management issue was the

lakeshore's management of the North Manitou Island deer herd. The

deer were introduced to the island in 1920 and because of a special

winter feeding program, the population soared to more than 1,000. The

herd suffered a pathetic crash when the Angell Foundation stopped the

feeding program during the protracted condemnation suit to purchase

the island. A multiyear study by University of Michigan wildlife

biologists indicated that deer were seriously overbrowsing the island.

Immature maple and pine trees as well as violets, trilliums, and other

wildflowers were all but eliminated from the island by the deer. To

restore the island's vegetation the park service in 1985 adopted the goal

of reducing the white-tailed deer population to about 300 head, then

after the natural vegetation had a chance to recover let the population

rise again to a sustainable level of ten deer per square mile. In the fall

of 1985, in an effort to bring the deer quickly under control the park

service and the Michigan Department of Natural Resources raised the

individual limit on deer from one per hunter to three. The news of this

bonanza for hunters was widely reported, although it was tempered by

the report that all North Manitou hunters would have to obey the strict

wilderness guidelines that governed activity on the island. Nonetheless,

more than 700 hunters were attracted to the challenge and opportunity

of the island. The herd was trimmed by 825 deer. But this was not

enough to prevent a large die-off the following winter. Perhaps as

many as 200 deer died before the advent of spring. The large fall hunt

and the disastrous winter which followed went far to bringing the

Manitou deer population under control. Deer hunting continued on the

island in subsequent years, with normal bag limits in place. By 1988

Resource Management Specialist Holden could report that the island's

vegetation was beginning to make a comeback. At the same time the

surviving deer were much healthier. By 1995 the lakeshore

superintendent was able to conclude his report on the once grim deer

situation by observing that the animals "continue to be large and

healthy (the hunters look pretty good too)." [30]

 The management of hunting in the lakeshore became an

increasingly sensitive issue during the late 1980s. As recreational
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5d.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:21 AM]

developments grew outside the park an increasing number of urbanites

began to make their homes in northwest Michigan. Many of these

newer resident's shared the traditional interest in field sports such as

hunting. Others, however, were uneasy with the continued use of highpowered firearms each fall, both in the increasingly densely settled

townships of Leelanau and Benzie as well as within the national

lakeshore. "I feel like I am living in the suburbs, instead of living in the

country," said one resident of Glen Arbor township. Indicative of a

rising tension between old traditions and new values was the 1990

clash between a hunter and an animal-rights advocate. On November

14 of that year Larry Hayward was bow-hunting within the lakeshore

near Alligator Hill. His opportunity to bag a deer was disrupted,

however, by Barbara Anderlik, a retired teacher who was in the area

lighting firecrackers to warn deer of the imminent arrival of the

firearm-hunting season the next day. Hayward was furious and he

"accosted" her in the forest and later brought her up on charges of

violating Michigan's hunter harassment statute. Anderlik was found

innocent of that charge, but she was found guilty by a district court

jury of illegal possession of firecrackers. She fumed as she was slapped

with a two-year probation, a week of community service, and a $150

fine. Anderlik responded with a civil suit against Hayward, which

despite the involvement of the National Rifle Association, ended in an

abject apology from the hunter and a cash payment to the animalrights activist.[31]

 The issue moved closer to a management concern in 1995 when a

group was formed called "People For A Safer Park." Founded by

Ananda Bricker, who lived near the Dune Climb, the group's goal was

to restrict hunting from the lakeshore's busiest public use areas, a total

of about 13,000 acres. Bricker was motivated to launch the effort when

she found a rifle slug in the tree next to her house. There had been a

couple of incidents of people being accidentally shot within the

lakeshore during the deer hunting season, but all of the people involved

had been hunters, no casual park visitors or residents had been hurt by

hunters. Bricker, with the help of Barbara Anderlik, stunned long-time

residents of the area when she was able to collect and present to

Congressman Bart Stupak (D-Menominee) a petition in favor of the

ban signed by 7,300 people. Hunters responded with a petition drive of

their own. The lakeshore responded to the dueling petition drives by

reviewing its hunting management policy, which already restricted

hunting from several small areas, such as Pierce Stocking Drive.

Although additional closures was a policy that resonated with a portion

of the public, the lakeshore determined that there was no indication that

visitor safety required further closures.[32]

 

 The management of plant species within the lakeshore attracted less

public attention but still made significant strides during the late 1980s.

In 1981, the lakeshore contracted with the University of Michigan to

inventory the area's plant life. That report, completed after seven years

of fieldwork, documented over eight hundred species of vascular plants

at Sleeping Bear. It became the baseline for vegetation management.

Eight threatened species were identified by the botanists, including the
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5d.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:21 AM]

calypso orchid and the walking fern. The report gave the park service

greater confidence in restoring the numerous dwelling sites it

purchased. Following the removal of all structures, selected exotic

plant species would be uprooted and when possible natural tree and

vegetation cover would be planted. Budgetary limitations prevented a

rigorous restoration of the presettlment landscape. Had all exotic

species been removed erosion would have occurred because the

lakeshore did not have the funds to replant all sites with native species.

A top priority were former gravel pit sites, which required heavy

equipment to recontour the landscape and replace lost topsoil. At some

sites plantations of non-native Douglas Fir and remnants of fruit

orchards were cut down to prepare the land for natural plant

succession. Of course, orchards were part of the cultural landscape of

the area so there was no wholesale campaign to remove them from park

lands. The fruit trees challenged resource managers to look at issue of

vegetation restoration and preservation in a new light. Sleeping Bear,

like many parks created out of former agricultural lands inherited many

trees that were of biological/historical significance. During the

nineteenth and early twentieth centuries a wide variety of fruit trees

were cultivated, each with their own distinctive characteristics. During

the last half of the twentieth century, however, the national market in

agricultural products enforced a conformity on growers in favor of

varieties such as Macintosh apples that retained freshness longer. The

identification, and in some cases the protection, of historic varieties of

fruit trees became part of the increasingly complex job of managing a

landscape both wild and historic. [33]

 Invasive exotic plant species such as purple loosestrife, baby's

breath, and garlic mustard were particularly vexing to resource

mangers. The purple loosestrife, an attractive flowering plant

introduced from Europe, became a problem in the Platte River area in

the late 1980s. Favoring wetlands the perennial became established in

dense clusters that made it very difficult to eliminate. Park personnel

and volunteers initially tried pulling up the plant from areas where it

grew in profusion, but this proved impossible because of the thick

tangle of roots. Quickly reaching a height of five to six feet, the purple

loosestrife would, if left unchecked, eliminate all native plants in its

vicinity by overshadowing them and poisoning the ground. Picking the

seed heads before they ripened was adopted as a short term control

measure. Research contracts sponsored by the Midwest Regional Office

were looked to for a long-range solution to what remains a growing

problem at Sleeping Bear. Park personnel also removed garlic mustard,

spotted knapwood, and baby's breath. The latter, with a root system up

to twelve feet in length, was a particular problem on Nature

Conservancy lands near the lakeshore. The lakeshore cooperated with

the Nature Conservancy's efforts to bring the attractive but fast

spreading exotic species under control.[34]

 Baby's breath originated in Turkey, but the plant favored the same

sand soil as Pitcher's thistle, a native dune plant unique to the sandy

shores of the Great Lakes. By the 1980s the Pitcher's thistle was

categorized as a threatened species in the United States. To protect

pitcher's thistle habitat the lakeshore nixed proposals to place boatlaunching facilities on Platte Bay and at Glen Haven. The National
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5d.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:21 AM]

Park Service had a special responsibility to protect the native dune

cover because Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore had the largest

remaining concentration of the Pitcher's thistle. Yet even at the

lakeshore exotic species like the spotted knapwood and baby's breath

were making deep inroads. At the nearby Point Betsie Preserve baby's

breath established itself as eighty percent of the dune cover. With each

of the plants capable of producing 14,000 seeds it spread over the

landscape at a rapid rate. Baby's breath's dense root system and

attractive flower made some people question if it was a threat. As a

dune cover it actually did a superior job of holding the sand in place

than did the native Pitcher's thistle, which requires shifting sand to

thrive. In combating baby's breath, some people speculated that the

National Park Service risking the long-term best interest of the sand

dunes to protect a native plant.

 Preserving the dunes from ever-increasing visitor use was an

important resource management concern during the early 1990s. In

1991, the lakeshore was the focus of a high visibility attack on its

resource protection program by the Michigan United Conservation

Clubs. Richard L. Jameson, executive director of the conservation

organization, issued a public letter in which he denounced Sleeping

Bear as "the worst managed park I have ever seen." He chastised the

National Park Service for not better controlling the visitor access to the

fragile dune slopes. At any one time Jameson correctly charged

"hundreds of people were hiking helter-skelter all over the dunes." The

combined effect of this usage, Jameson maintained, was the

destruction of plant communities and the erosion of the dune face. The

lakeshore's administration was aware of the erosion problem and

already had a study underway to better understand the damage done by

hikers striking off on their own. On the other hand the lakeshore was

reluctant to be too strict in its enforcement of signs requesting hikers to

stay on the marked paths. In the face of the critique the lakeshore

prepared a dune protection plan which recommended improved signage

to better channel visitors along established walkways and to alert them

to the damage that could result from unrestrained pedestrian

movement. The plan did not, however, recommend severely restricting

visitor mobility. As the superintendent commented "walking in the

sand is an integral part of the[dune] appeal."

 While the footprints left in the sand by park visitors were the most

obvious human impact on the Sleeping Bear environment, atmospheric

pollution was the least visible. Beginning in 1981 Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore included the monitoring of acid levels in

precipitation as part of the regular resource management program. The

results of this program were shared with the Michigan Department of

Natural Resources and the Michigan United Conservation Clubs. The

shocking findings, after five years of study, indicated that the acidic

content of rain in the lakeshore had increased by a factor of twentythree. The source of this pollution was remote smokestack industries

burning high sulfur fuels. Fortunately the glacial soils of the lakeshore

counteracted much of the unnatural acidity before it could cause

significant damage. Nonetheless, in 1990 the lakeshore initiated an

extensive water quality-monitoring program to chart both atmospheric

pollution, contamination from run-off, and ground water pollution.
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5d.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:21 AM]

While there was nothing save public education lakeshore managers

could do to combat airborne pollution, there were other toxic problems

at Sleeping Bear that required immediate resource management

action.[37]

 The most extensive toxic clean-ups within the lakeshore both

revolved around faulty petroleum storage. In 1989, after a drawn-out

ten-year condemnation procedure, the National Park Service completed

its purchase of Casey's Corners, a canoe livery and gas station located

on the Platte River near M-22. In making the purchase the lakeshore

got more than they bargained for when it was discovered that

underground fuel tanks had leaked into the surrounding soil and ground

water. Although the Casey's property was less than an acre in size, the

cleanup required the removal of several tons of contaminated soil and

thousands of gallons of toxic water. The soil was excavated and

thermally treated, in an effort to burn off the hydrocarbons. The

polluted water, however, could not be treated onsite and was trucked

across Michigan to Saginaw where the municipal wastewater treatment

plant could dispose of the contamination. The clean up cost more than

$500,000 and led to a wide-ranging investigation of possible toxic sites

within the park. A total of sixty-two possible fuel storage sites were

identified, some former gas stations, others farms with fuel storage

areas. Dealing with these sites became the major focus of resource

management time and dollars during the early 1990s.[38]

 As if the lakeshore did not have enough problems with toxic leak

sites, an accident occurred in May of 1989 that added to their

difficulties. Carelessness by park personnel and the lack of backup

safety features caused several hundred gallons of fuel oil to spill from

a storage tank on North Manitou Island. The oil had just been brought

to the island to fuel the generator at the ranger station. It was an

embarrassing and costly error. Historic buildings were immediately

and temporarily relocated from the vicinity of the spill. Ironically only

a week before Superintendent Peterson had recommended putting a

leak containment wall into the storage building although there were no

funds to do the job. For the cleanup, however, the Environmental

Protection Agency provided funding for an experimental effort to treat

the contaminated soil through bioremediation. Hundreds of thousands

of gallons of ground water were treated at the site through the use of

carbon filters. Even so, the park service had to pay to have 370 barrels

of contaminated soil transported from the island. The cleanup and

monitoring of the spill site stretched out over four years before the

Michigan Department of Natural Resources removed the North

Manitou ranger station from its list of contaminated sites. The incident

led the lakeshore to the installation in 1995 of a photovoltaic array to

generate electricity from solar power, which greatly reduced the need

for fuel oil on the island.[39]

NEXT> Historic Resource Management

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5d.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:21 AM]

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5e.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:26 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Chapter Five

Historic Resource Management

 Although the impetus to create the Sleeping Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore flowed from its impressive natural wonders, the enabling

act, Public Law 91-479, clearly authorized the National Park Service to

develop a plan to provide "protection of scenic, scientific, and historic

features contributing to public enjoyment[emphasis added]." During

the twenty-five years of administration since that act was approved the

National Park Service has developed the historic resources of the

lakeshore into some of the most highly visibility features of the park.

Yet the story of historic resource management in the lakeshore has

mirrored the general development pattern at Sleeping Bear with

maddeningly slow progress in some areas and public controversy over

proposed park actions.

 The first resources of any kind managed and interpreted by the

National Park Service at Sleeping Bear were those related to maritime

history. South Manitou Island lighthouse and the Glen Haven Coast

Guard Station were the first properties acquired by the National Park

Service in the area and the rehabilitation and maintenance of those

structures has been an ongoing challenge. The high water levels of the

late 1980s were a particular threat to the South Manitou lighthouse,

located only fifty feet from shore. Prior to the creation of the lakeshore

the site of the North Manitou lighthouse had been washed away by a

high water storm. Emergency measures had to be taken to protect the

South Manitou light tower and its outbuildings. Typical of the need to

balance competing management goals, recommendations to construct a

breakwater to protect the lighthouse had to be carefully balanced by the

need to protect pitcher's thistle habitat. Superintendent Martinek's

acquisition of the Frederickson maritime collection laid the foundation

for the lakeshore to become even more deeply involved in presenting

the history of the Great Lakes. Martinek had hoped to display the

collection in a park maritime museum at a renovated Glen Haven

Coast Guard station. But like so many of the development plans at

Sleeping Bear and the other Great Lakes national lakeshores, the

maritime museum was put on hold for want of funds. After seven years

on the shelf the process of structural rehabilitation, restoration, and

exhibit design was set in motion. The complex project, which required

a sensitive blending of historic architecture and interpretive design,

became a tug-of-war between the Denver Service Center and the

Harper's Ferry Design Center. Only the active involvement of

lakeshore interpreters Charles Parkinson and William Herd kept the

project on-track. Finally, in 1984 the project was completed. The

maritime museum interpreted the old lifesaving service through

restoration of a portion of the historic station as well as the larger story

of shipping in the Manitou Passage through the Frederickson collection
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5e.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:26 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

artifacts. Popular interpretive programs further brought the site to life

during the summer through the reenactment of ship-to-shore life saving

techniques. By the early 1990s the site, which only open during the

summer tourist season was averaging more than 40,000 annual

visitors.[40]

 The development of the Glen Haven Maritime Museum took place

at a time of rising public interest in the maritime history of the Great

Lakes. New maritime museums blossomed throughout the region,

leading to the creation of the Association of Great Lakes Maritime

Museums. Numerous popular histories of shipwrecks, rescues, and

lighthouses were written while folk music about the lakes, in part

stimulated by the success of Gordon Lightfoot's 1977 ballad "The

Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald," also began to flourish. Lakeshore

personal offered professional assistance, on the local level to

preservationists attempting to save the historic car ferry at Frankfort,

and on the regional level by helping to form in 1983 the Great Lakes

Lighthouse Keepers Association. The popularization of scuba diving as

a sport joined with the rise in regional history to create a new interest

in the maritime past, the underwater preserve.[41]

 The state of Michigan began to promote the idea of underwater

shipwreck parks during the mid-1970s. Through the work of Professor

Donald Holecek, Michigan State University, and the Michigan Sea

Grant program a conscious effort was made to locate and protect

sunken ships as a potential recreational asset. It was discovered that

many wreck sites were being ruined by professional salvagers

interested in the white oak planking of the old schooners or the brass

fixtures of sunken steamers, as well as by the less systematic

depredations of sport divers collecting souvenirs. In 1980, the state

legislature passed a bill that allowed the Department of Natural

Resources to create bottomlands preserves in areas of particular

significance. Local historian Jed Jaworski, who had founded a

maritime museum in Frankfort, led the effort to protect wreck sites

within the Manitou Passage. A proposal was drafted to set aside a 282-

mile area of bottomlands around the Manitou Islands and the Sleeping

Bear mainland. Seventy shipwrecks were located in that area. Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore cooperated with the preparation of the

preserve plan that culminated in November of 1988 with the creation

of the Manitou Passage State Underwater Preserve.[42]

 The Underwater Preserve provided the protection of state law for

the wrecks within its boundaries. Limited state funds were available to

help mark wreck sites for divers and to support the development of a

management plan for the preserve. The task of evaluating those sites

and preparing historical information on each wreck for recreational

divers was left to local supporters. The National Park Service had

considerable experience with such work. At Isle Royale National Park

the service had located, mapped, and buoyed shipwrecks within the

boundaries of the park. Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore also took

an active role in inventorying its underwater resources, even if like

Sleeping Bear most of the bottomlands were located outside the

lakeshore's boundaries. Sleeping Bear contributed to the Manitou

Preserve considerable staff time and the technical support of the
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5e.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:26 AM]

National Park Service's Submerged Cultural Resources Unit. The latter,

composed of some of the most experienced archeological divers in the

nation, undertook an assessment of sites within the preserve. The park

service dive team also identified appropriate areas of bottomland for

the disposal of spoil from dredging required at the North Manitou

dock. In 1990, the local preserve committee was able to place buoys at

the sites of seven shipwrecks and several former dock sites.[43]

 Wrecks were not the only boats that were part of the lakeshore's

resource management program. Since early in its history, the lakeshore

had accepted small watercraft as part of its maritime collection. The

task of caring for these vessels, however, more often than not came

down to the dedication of the staff more than an adequate institutional

commitment. A case in point was the fish tug Aloha. In 1985, James

Dura, one of the last gill net fisherman operating out of Milwaukee,

offered the lakeshore his boat and rig. A grant from the Eastern

National Parks and Monuments Association made the acquisition

possible, but afforded no funds to overhaul the fifty-year-old tug, or

even position it at Glen Haven, where it could contribute to the

maritime museum. The forty-foot long fishing boat was brought to

Frankfort, where it was temporally docked. For better than six months

park interpreters did minor repairs on the boat and inventoried its

contents of historic fishing gear. Like all old wooden boats the Aloha

leaked and every day or so the bilge pumps had to be operated to

prevent swamping. One day Chief of Interpretation Charles Parkinson

went to check the bilges and found the boat gone. The only sign of the

Aloha were the mooring lines extending straight down in the water.

The Aloha had split a seam and sunk to the bottom of the harbor. The

accident had the happy result of releasing emergency funds to raise the

boat and have it transported by truck to Glen Haven. Although the

lakeshore still lacked the funds to restore the vessel, it was possible to

display the tug, identical to the lost fleets of fishing vessels than once

operated out of Leland and the Manitous. The lakeshore eventually was

able to house the bulk of the small water craft collection in the historic

cannery building in Glen Haven. In 1992, the cannery was opened to

the public as an adjunct to the marine museum, although budgetary

pressure made it difficult for the lakeshore to staff both facilities. [44]

 The historic cannery building was only one component in one of

Sleeping Bear Dunes's most important if vexing maritime cultural

resources: the historic steamship village and mill town of Glen Haven.

Founded in the late 1870s, Glen Haven was typical of the numerous

small company towns that dotted the shores of the upper Great Lakes

during the heyday of the logging industry. Through the energy of D.H.

Day, Glen Haven lingered on into the twentieth century, after the big

timber was cut, as an agricultural shipping point and as a port for

vacationers heading north via regular steamship lines. Although many

critical features of the old town complex were lost over the years, most

notably the dock, saw mill, and narrow gauge railroad, the National

Park Service acquired a remarkably intact 1920s-era village. The 1979

General Management Plan specified that Glen Haven's village

atmosphere was to be maintained and that the buildings of the town

were to be adapted to provide visitor services and interpretation. In

1983, the village was successfully nominated to the National Register
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5e.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:26 AM]

of Historic Places as a historic district.[45]

 Although the majority of the village was under direct National Park

Service control, occupancy permits for three properties were slated to

expire between 1993 and 2005. Beginning in 1983 the lakeshore

undertook efforts to stabilize some of the village's historic buildings.

An interest in developing a concrete plan for the rest of the buildings

naturally followed the decision not to build a new harbor facility at

Glen Haven. In 1987, a Development Concept Plan for the village was

put together with the help of the Denver Service Center. The purpose

of the plan was to suggest ways to preserve the town, protect adjacent

natural areas, and enhance the cultural experience of visitors to Glen

Haven. The methods suggested to achieve these goals were fairly

standard heritage tourism tactics; including, the adaptive reuse of

village buildings by commercial operations providing sympathetic

visitor services; the rerouting of vehicular traffic away from the historic

village; and the preparation of a series of trails, wayside exhibits, and

overlooks to provide visitors with an opportunity to educate themselves

about the local history and to enjoy the splendid lakeside setting. But

what was a good plan for maintaining a small historic town might not

have been appropriate for a small town largely owned by the National

Park Service. Many of the lakeshore staff objected to the plan because

they felt it offered too much of the village, with too few park service

controls, to private users. Unable to influence the Denver Service

Center plan lakeshore employees openly disparaged it in public

comments.[46]

 The public controversy which followed the release of the plan

focused largely on the proposal to use commercial contracts managed

as park concessions to fund the maintenance of the village's historic

buildings. The park had in mind retailers like a bookstore or an arts

and crafts shop, a restaurant, as well as a bed-and-breakfast in the old

Sleeping Bear Inn. Former residents who had sold their property in the

village complained that they had been forced out of Glen Haven in the

1970s because it was considered a fragile natural area. Now other

people were being invited in to make a profit there. "I was born and

raised in the village of Glen Haven," commented one women, "and

since my home was among those taken by the threat of condemnation I

am against the recommercialization of homes and businesses." Owners

of businesses operating in the neighboring community of Glen Arbor

opposed commercial leases on historic buildings because of the fear of

government sponsored competition. "Our tax money would go to

subsidize businesses," complained a Leelanau County advisory

commission member, "that would not have to pay local taxes and

would benefit from all the park promotions." The Citizens' Council of

the Sleeping Bear recommended that the park service simply leave

Glen Haven as it was. Environmentalists opposed the plan as heavyhanded with Nature, because of the need to develop remote parking

sites, and crass due to its commercialization of the historic village.

"This is all a Reagan Administration thing, this commercialization

that's going on," said Marie Scott, head of Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore Preservation Committee. "The Park Service are

supposed to be caretakers of the land. They're not supposed to be

overdeveloping it."[47]
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5e.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:26 AM]

 The management of the lakeshore was caught off guard by the

strongly negative reaction to the Glen Haven proposal, and the division

within its own ranks. "There has been a lot of 'anti' comment,"

Assistant Superintendent John Abbett admitted to the press. The

negative reaction was in part a reflex response by the local community

based on decades of mistrust and an ideological reaction by

environmentalists to any whiff of commercialization in the parks in the

wake of James Watt's tenure in the Department of the Interior. The

unfortunate timing of the Glen Haven plan's release, however, was also

detrimental to any consideration of its merits. In 1987, Leelanau

County was divided over issues of development, commercialization,

and the environment. The Homestead golf course proposal[discussed

below] sparked a general fear that the Sleeping Bear area needed to be

wary of the "Gatlinburg Effect"-referring to the unplanned, tacky

Tennessee town outside the boundaries of Great Smoky Mountains

National Park. Evangeline Stanchik, a Leelanau County member of the

Advisory Commission, was widely quoted as saying that Sleeping Bear

needed an Opryland-like amusement park to stimulate local job

growth. "We could, you know, have rides and maybe bears, and art

shows, things like that." There was a strong feeling that out-of-control

growth was right around the corner for northwest Michigan. "Once it

really gets discovered it won't take long, it's coming," predicted

environmentalist Marie Scott. Her group, the Sleeping Bear

Preservation Committee, also opposed the North Manitou Island

development plan, which called for continuing the island as a

wilderness, because park planners envisioned a small hostel near the

dock for people who were unprepared or inexperienced in camping. "Is

this a hostel or a hotel," complained Scott, who successfully had the

hostel concept removed from the North Manitou plan. In such a

climate, the Glen Haven plan, with its reliance on commercial leases

and the blending of restoration and reconstruction, was sure to be a

lightining rod.[48]

 The Glen Haven plan was quietly shelved, or as the Assistant

Superintendent put it, public comments caused "a lot of review of the

preliminary data and recommendations." In May of 1988, a draft of a

revised Glen Haven plan was circulated but it was not until November

of 1992 that the final development concept plan and interpretive

prospectus for the ghost town was finally approved. In the final plan

the interpretation program, the trail system, and the revised parking

and circulation system all reflected the thinking of the controversial

plan of 1987. The major difference was in the role envisioned for

adaptive reuse and commercial leasing. The Sleeping Bear Inn was still

projected as a site for a commercial concession and the former D.H.

Day store continued to be proposed as an outlet for the Eastern

National Parks and Monuments Association site. All other historic

buildings in the town were projected to remain vacant, with the

lakeshore undertaking basic exterior maintenance as needed. Plans to

reconstruct a portion of the village dock, an example of the narrow

gauge railroad track, an example of one or two train cars, and a Native

American house were dropped. Even so, the cost of the plan (including

improvements to D.H. Day Campground) was close to $3 million. The

plan was to be phased in over ten or fifteen years, because little money
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5e.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:26 AM]

was available for the National Park Service to carry the burden all on

its own.[49]

 The rejection of the draft plan for Glen Haven was a disturbing

development for cultural resources management at Sleeping Bear. The

adaptive reuse of historic structures by appropriate commercial tenants

was a standard means of bringing funds from the private sector to

protect public assets. While it was perhaps understandable that a

concentration of such leases in one location, as the Glen Haven plan

called for, was too much commercialization for a natural area, Sleeping

Bear was also becoming a historic park and the need to protect those

resources required experimentation with new management techniques.

The rise of the National Register of Historic Places as a planning tool

and the growth of historical programs within the National Park Service

had largely taken place since the initial conception of Sleeping Bear

Dunes National Lakeshore. Far beyond the conception of Philip Hart

or Allen Edmunds, park units like the national lakeshores, which were

carved out of private land, found themselves managing not just

"islands of wilderness" but also time capsules of regional history. That

this history was what might be called small "h" history, the story of

ordinary people and vernacular buildings, made it less obvious for the

public and even park management to appreciate. The unique and the

aesthetically pleasing had long dominated historic preservation in the

United States. The cultural resources at Sleeping Bear and her sister

lakeshores represented instead broad regional development patterns,

which made the task of identifying and managing such properties one

of large scale and, for many managers, of frightening proportions.

"We've got 300 vacant and abandoned buildings in this park,"

Superintendent Peterson said in frustration over the rejection of

commercial leasing. "What do we do with them?"[50]

 Peterson's question was particularly relevant regarding the large

number of agricultural and recreational structures that composed the

rural landscape of Sleeping Bear park. Initially the National Park

Service regarded these structures as obstacles inhibiting the return of

the land to its natural, forested condition. During the mid-1970s the

buildings on numerous farm and old resort properties were sold for

salvage or removal from the site at public auction. Such action was in

violation of President Richard M. Nixon's Executive Order 11593,

which had specifically charged all federal agencies with the evaluating

the eligibility for the National Register of Historic Places of all

properties under their control. This policy of ignoring the historic

potential of vernacular buildings came to a sudden end in 1977. The

reason for the change was in part due to the growing awareness of

historic preservation issues in the wake of the 1976 bicentennial, yet

like so many policy changes at Sleeping Bear considerable impetus also

came from critics outside the park service.

 The first resolution of the Sleeping Bear Dunes Advisory

Commission called for the preservation and interpretation of some of

the lakeshore's historic farms. This resolution was promptly forgotten

until five years latter when the commission was faced with public

complaints regarding park management of South Manitou Island.

Sylvia B. Kruger of East Lansing, a summer resident of the island and
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5e.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:26 AM]

a local history enthusiast, deserves credit for helping to change the way

the lakeshore viewed historic farmsteads. During 1976 and 1977

Kruger questioned the impact of wilderness status on the rural

properties on the island. She noticed a gap between the rhetoric of the

Midwest Region Director, Merrill D. Beal-who assured her, "there are

procedures that we follow that make the destruction of any cultural

property quite unlikely"-and the actions of park personnel on South

Manitou Island. In July 1976, Superintendent Martinek himself helped

to demolish the gates leading to the Anderson house. The Youth

Conservation Corps Camp on the island was kept particularly busy that

summer removing farm fences all over the island. When Kruger

complained about these actions she was told, "we do not believe that

the fences of South Manitou Island represent a significant historical

resource, and we intend to proceed with their removal." Kruger

protested to the advisory commission that these actions, as well as the

preparation of several building for demolition, were done without

appropriate historic preservation surveys. The commission was

impressed with the substance and passion of her arguments. She was

invited to be an ex officio member of the commission, to provide

special advice on South Manitou Island. She continued in that role until

1980 when she became a regular member of the commission.[51]

 Kruger's complaints brought an end to a lakeshore wide policy of

removing agricultural structures from farms bought by the park service.

At that same time Donald R. Brown replaced Superintendent Martinek.

The former had greater sensitivity to the issue of landscape

preservation. In August of 1977, he ordered a moratorium on the

removal of any agricultural features, both on South Manitou and the

mainland. A comprehensive historic site survey of the new park was

contracted with Michigan State University. Because of the rapid rate of

land acquisition at that time, Brown's order came just in time to save

many of the lakeshore's most valuable resources. Scores of Port Oneida

buildings were slated for removal. At the Mason farm the lakeshore

had actually sold the barn for salvage. "We were going to start tearing

the barn down to move it to some property we owned, on Monday,"

recalled Lorraine Mason, "and on Friday the Park Service called us and

said, 'Hold it, we want to buy that back.'"[52]

 The inventory of historically significant properties conducted by the

Michigan State University Art Department, together with an earlier

archeological overview completed by the Michigan State University

Museum, provided a baseline for historic resource planning and action.

The Michigan State Historic Preservation Office reacted very

proactively to the reports and advised the Director of the Midwest

Region of the National Park Service that Sleeping Bear Dunes

contained several potential National Register of Historic Places

districts, including South Manitou island where the "farming

complexes" were specifically cited as requiring management attention.

The letter emphasized the importance of looking at "vernacular farm

structures, orchards, and fields" as all part of the same agricultural

story, a resource in which "human and natural history merge." These

recommendations, as well as Kruger's involvement with the advisory

commission, ensured that the agricultural historic resources of the

lakeshore would be considered during the formation of the general
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5e.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:26 AM]

management plan.[53]

 During the public comment phase of the general management plan

process, Sylvia Kruger argued for creation of a South Manitou historic

district that would include an 1890s-era living history farm site. The

official workshop planning books included alternatives that would

allow for the continuation of agriculture in the Good Harbor Bay area

and the interpretation of agricultural history on park lands in the

Empire area. Public reaction to these proposals and others, to preserve

Glen Haven as a historic village, was favorable. The final plan

incorporated most of these elements along with the general

commitment that "Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore will be

managed primarily for the perpetuation of the natural environment and

the preservation of cultural features..." While those were fine general

principles, the plan was short on specific strategies for determining

what should be preserved and how it would be funded.[54]

 From the beginning of the lakeshore's attempt to deal with its rural

cultural resources there was an aesthetic dimension at work. As early as

1970 local people had expressed concern over the loss of the familiar

sight of farmhouses and barns tucked among the forested glacial hills,

framed by a field of hay. In 1980, Superintendent Brown ordered the

mowing of selected agricultural fields in order to preserve such

roadside viewsheds and prevent the growth of aspen and other second

growth trees. Sylvia Kruger urged the same practice on South Manitou

Island, where the fields were rapidly disappearing. Some agricultural

lands were maintained during the 1970s and 1980s by leasebacks or

cooperative farm agreements between the lakeshore and local farmers.

During the general management plan process public sentiment had

been strong for the lakeshore to keep some of its agricultural lands in

crops. "There are people out there starving and you are locking up vital

resources," was a frequently voiced sentiment. Some of the agreements

yielded a considerable financial return, but it went into the general

federal treasury and was not available for use in the park to pay for the

upkeep of farm buildings. Maintaining open fields through cooperative

agreements with local farmers, however, was problematical. Fruit

growing required considerable pesticide use and the mowing of hay

took place during the natural nesting time of several bird species. As

cooperative agricultural agreements were phased out during the late

1980s the lakeshore had to come up with its own policy. In 1989, the

lakeshore developed a plan to plant its fields in the Port Oneida area

with native plants such as blackeyed susan and little bluestem and to

undertake an annual mowing after nesting season. With limited

resources for both planting and mowing the lakeshore only gradually

expanded this practice to the bulk of its potential historic agriculture

fields. Eventually, considerable work was done restoring long

neglected farm fields on South Mantou Island.[55]

 The problem faced by Sleeping Bear National Lakeshore was not

unique. Other parks such as the Cuyahoga Valley National Recreation

Area and Ozark National Scenic Riverways also had a large number of

rural historic sites within their boundaries. In 1984, the Southwest

Region Office sponsored a special case study of the Boxey Valley in

Arkansas to develop guidelines for identifying and preserving rural
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5e.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:26 AM]

districts. Nonetheless, Sleeping Bear was thrust into the spotlight on

this issue because of the large number of potential agricultural and

recreational historic sites under its direct management. At times during

the 1980s and 1990s it appeared that the park would respond to this by

assuming a leadership role within the agency on how to deal with

vernacular historic sites. In 1985, the lakeshore hosted a four-day

seminar "Managing Rural Historic Districts within National Parks."

Preservationists and park historians from across the region participated

in the program. Historians from the regional office had just completed

a special history of the Port Oneida area, so that district served as a

case study for the workshop. Practical management alternatives that

emerged from the program included leasing farm buildings as bed and

breakfasts, professional office buildings, or artist's studios. The

lakeshore, however, did not feel it knew enough about its several

hundred historic structures to move immediately toward a management

plan. The decision was made to study the problem further. In 1987, the

Historic American Buildings Survey was contracted to supply a

summer research team. Their work focused on South Manitou Island,

where they photographed, prepared line drawings and histories of

vintage buildings. A year later a second team prepared a study of Glen

Haven, and in 1989 the Historic American Buildings Survey team

conducted its work on North Manitou Island. In 1990, the Historic

American Buildings Survey completed its projects at Sleeping Bear

with additional work at Port Oneida and Glen Haven. While this was

going on the buildings under park control at Port Oneida and on the

islands continued to deteriorate, with only minimal attention from the

lakeshore's overtaxed maintenance division. The Historic American

Buildings Survey work at Sleeping Bear was more of a distraction than

a help. Most valuable in situations where structures face imminent

destruction, the survey was not in a position help move the lakeshore

closer to a management solution, nor did it undertake research in

enough depth to make solid recommendations concerning what should

be preserved, what should be allowed to deteriorate, and what simply

could be removed as surplus.[56]

 The large number of structures within the lakeshore eligible for the

National Register presented management with a difficult problem. To

realize fully the historic preservation potential of Sleeping Bear could

easily cost the entire budget of the national lakeshore. The steady

increase in importance of cultural resources within the lakeshore

interpretation, resource management, and maintenance divisions that

occurred between 1970 and 1995 would have surprised the National

Park Service planners like Allen T. Edmunds who first conceived of

the lakeshore. Yet the accelerating commitment to historic properties

has been fully in accord with congressional action and changing public

values. Perhaps because it is an issue that has evolved out of the

lakeshore's post-1970 growth, park leadership has been hesitant to seek

decisive action, unsure of its course. In many ways the issue has the

appearance of one that has been massaged more than managed. In

1987, the opportunity to preserve and interpret the historic town of

Glen Haven was within reach. Objections from the local community

and division within the lakeshore management doomed that

opportunity. More than a decade later little more than basic

stabilization has taken place there. In 1985, appropriate historical
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5e.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:26 AM]

information and effective management alternatives were available for

Port Oneida. Again no commitment was made and park owned

buildings within the district continued to suffer in a limbo of neglect

and creeping decay.

 During the 1990s popular interest in the historic buildings of the

lakeshore began to increase. Across northern Michigan people were

concerned with the loss of farms to recreational developments. The

Leelanau County and Grand Traverse County's Old Mission Peninsula

were particularly effected by this trend. Magazine articles and

photographic essays mourned the loss of the region's rural heritage,

while activists and planners sought ways to preserve the rural

landscape. Efforts to maintain farms through the sale of their

development rights on the Old Mission Peninsula drew national media

attention. Faced with this changing climate of opinion the National

Park Service took steps to develop a Historic Properties Management

Plan. To complete the national register nomination for the Port Oneida

district and to inform management concerning potential rural districts

on the islands the Midwest Regional Office contracted with the

Landscape Architecture program at the University of Wisconsin for a

series of special studies on the history of the Sleeping Bear area. The

first of these studies reviewed the agricultural history of Benzie and

Leelanau counties and established a context for understanding how the

Sleeping Bear area fit into the history of farming in the Upper Great

Lakes region. The following reports focused very specifically on Port

Oneida, South Manitou, and North Manitou islands. The studies united

comprehensive research with pragmatic alternative management

strategies. In the future they will be invaluable to park interpreters

dealing with agricultural sites. Although the resulting reports were

models of how to describe and assess rural historic districts, the

resources continued to deteriorate while they were under additional

investigation for six years. At the same time, lakeshore management's

ad hoc approach to the more than one hundred potentially historic

building under its control drew increasing flak. A group called the

Sleeping Bear Dunes Preservation Committee was formed to lobby for

a more proactive lakeshore policy toward cultural resources.[57]

 In 1995, the lakeshore proposed to raze a shed on North Manitou

Island. The problems encountered illustrated both the complexity of

resource management at Sleeping Bear and the opportunities for

preservation. The Manitou Island Association as part of their orchard

operations had built the 2,400 square foot shed in the 1930s. The shed

was located next to a historic barn and along with several other

features it constituted a fairly intact farming complex. Members of the

Sleeping Bear Preservation Committee were quick to label the plan "a

clear case of anticipatory demolition," believing the park service

wanted the shed gone before it could be nominated to the National

Register of Historic Places. Actually the lakeshore had been focused on

finding a site for its solar electric system that had been designed to

reduce the risk of fuel oil spills. Lakeshore management wanted the site

to be within the old Manitou village area, as they did not want new

construction to intrude on those areas of the island managed as

wilderness. Within the village area the location had to be chosen

carefully, so as not to mar the historic views of the Coast Guard
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5e.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:26 AM]

Station, a potential National Historic Landmark. Initially adaptively

reusing the shed for the storage of the solar batteries was deemed as

unwise because the old building was said to have deteriorated to the

point of being structurally unsound. Lakeshore management worried it

simply did not have the funds to bolster the old shed. Preservationists

argued that the 1989 management plan for North Manitou needed to be

revised to allow greater latitude for historic resource management. In

the end that costly and time-consuming prospect was deemed less

palatable than trying to adaptively reuse the shed. "I am not sure how

we will come up with all the funding for it," Superintendent Ivan Miller

told the press. The funding, however, had to be found when the

national Advisory Council on Historic Preservation ruled that the

lakeshore had not followed the procedures required by the National

Historic Preservation Act of 1966. The clash between environmental

protection, wilderness values, and historic preservation regulations,

aggrevated by a continuing shortage of construction funds, served to

divide the Sleeping Bear staff. On one side was "management," anxious

protect wilderness and begin a project before the committed funds

were lost and on the other side were resource specialists fighting to

establish the importance of historic site values within the park. The

resolution was to adaptively reuse the building, although that resulted

in the loss of a considerable amount of the building's original

exterior.[58]

NEXT> The Art of the Possible; Managing in an Era of Austerity

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5f.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:30 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Chapter Five

The Art of the Possible: Managing in an Era of Austerity

 For lakeshore managers it was the high cost of rehabilitating and

maintaining old buildings that made the issue of historic preservation

so intimidating. Had park budgets been growing at anything near the

pace of park responsibilities Sleeping Bear may have responded more

decisively to its emerging historic districts. Instead, between 1980 and

1995 Sleeping Bear Dunes was stymied in the doldrums of flat, if not

declining budgets. Nationally the park service was in crisis during these

years. Soaring federal budget deficits depressed the growth of the

National Park Service's budget at the very time environmental and

historic preservation regulations were expanding its mandate and

raising its costs. In 1986, Congress passed the Gramm-RudmanHollings Act that instituted across-the-board federal budget cuts.

During its first year of operation, Gramm-Rudman-Hollings reduced

the entire National Park Service budget by 4.32%. The national director

called on all superintendents to "do more with less."[59]

 The 1990s brought scant fiscal relief to the lakeshore. Between 1983

and 1993 visitor use of the national park system increased by fifty

percent. Federal government shutdowns in 1990 and 1995 were

testimony to the partisan contentiousness of the overall budgetary

process. The park service budget would have been a problem under the

best of circumstances. Stewart Udall's goal of doubling of the national

park system during the 1960s, which set off a spurt of expansion that

continued well into the 1970s, created a large number of parks like

Sleeping Bear Dunes which were all maturing at the same time. That

maturation process required ever escalating budgets throughout the

1970s and 1980s. Of course, what happened is that few of these parks

met their initial development schedules and a tremendous backlog of

projects accumulated throughout the system. Crowded older parks

competed with the under-funded new units for insufficient resources.

The policies of George B. Hartzog, Jr., one of the most successful of

the National Park Service Directors, contributed to the funding crisis.

Hartzog believed in the benefit of spreading national park units around

the country, in the same way that the military placed bases and defense

contracts strategically in key congressional districts around the country,

to build a national constituency for the agency within the Congress. By

the time Hartzog retired the park service managed an area in every

state but Delaware and there was a National Historic Landmark in

every congressional district. This was savvy bureaucratic empirebuilding during the 1960s but it led inevitably to a lessening of

standards as to what constituted a national park unit and set the stage

for the emergence of "pork parks" during the 1980s. Just as the

Department of Defense found itself with redundant bases it could not

close or weapon systems it did not need, the National Park Service
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5f.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:30 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

found its funding crisis exasperated in the 1980s by congressionally

initiated new park projects. Through new park units such as

Steamtown, U.S.A., the Illinois and Michigan Canal National Heritage

Corridor, and in Michigan, the Keweenaw National Historical Park the

National Park Service found itself thrust into the role of helping aging

rust-belt communities adjust to deindustrialization through heritage

tourism. Yet while Congress's desire to vote money for new parks

increased it became less interested in supporting the units that had been

created earlier. In 1993, the National Parks and Conservation

Association issued a report aptly titled, "National Parks in Crisis." The

report's conclusion was that due to years of chronic budgetary austerity

"our national parks are in a race against time for survival."[60]

 Since personnel costs are the largest element in most park budgets,

cuts to the number of seasonal staff was an inevitable management

response to austerity. Yet, seasonal staff were the dedicated, underpaid backbone of the lakeshore. During the short summer season more

than fifty backcountry rangers, interpreters, and maintenance staff were

brought into the lakeshore on a temporary basis. Reducing their

numbers meant shortening visitor center hours, canceling some

interpretation programs, and reducing ranger patrols, all of which came

at the expense of visitor education and safety. The use of several

hundred volunteers donating thousands of hours of service as

campground hosts and as tour guides helped to partially make up the

shortfall. Some summers virtually all interpretive programs had to be

cancelled. Hurt in ways that would be difficult to quantify were

resource management programs such as air and water quality

monitoring that had to be cutback as well as efforts to control exotic

plants such as baby's breath.[61]

 No area of park operations was hurt more by the budget crunches of

the 1980s and 1990s than was maintenance. Retirees might volunteer

to work at the Glen Haven maritime museum but only a dedicated few

will volunteer to pickup garbage or clean toilets at D.H. Day

campground. Yet such mundane tasks were vital responsibilities at

Sleeping Bear. To meet such day-to-day needs long-term maintenance

was sacrificed to the great cost of the lakeshore overall. Trail crews

were nowhere near as active as they needed to be on the lakeshore's

fifty-five-mile network of trails, and in many years no trail

maintenance was funded at all. Lack of trail maintenance encouraged

people to leave designated hiking corridors and strike out on their own,

with the result that fragile dune plant communities would be degraded.

A vital area such as maintenance was so vulnerable to fiscal cuts

because the annual maintenance fund was never adequate to the park's

needs. Sleeping Bear annually assembled a list of its under-funded

maintenance priorities and then competed with all other national park

units for access to the national maintenance budget.[62]

 Maintenance shortfalls exacerbated the lakeshore's historic resource

management program. If a historic house, as one wag put it, is a hole

in the ground where a property-owner throws his money, Sleeping

Bear had more than a hundred such holes for its maintenance budget.

Even high profile buildings such as the Glen Haven cannery had to

wait more than two years for painting and roof replacement because of
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5f.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:30 AM]

national competition for maintenance funds. Farmhouses and barns

within Port Oneida deteriorated more each year. By 1990 the Gordon

Basch home, once one of the finest in the district had its roof collapse

and its walls buckle. Most of the buildings endured better than the

Basch home, yet Ranger William Herd had to admit, "With limited

funds and so much to do...all we're doing is putting plywood on the

doors and windows and patches on the roofs." Public appeals to

stabilize historic old homes on South Manitou Island were brushed

aside by Superintendent Ivan Miller's pragmatic observation, "You

have to draw the line somewhere...some buildings are just not going to

be salvageable." In 1994, Miller estimated that the lakeshore had fallen

behind by $500,000 in its maintenance budget. That shortfall was

obvious to anyone who observed the large inventory of old

buildings.[63]

 Credibility built up through quality interpretation programs was lost

when the public witnessed the backlog of buildings suffering from

decay. If the old farm buildings had simply been torn down and the

area returned to nature, people would have understood. But to keep the

old buildings up because they were "historic" and then not maintain

them was sure to frustrate old farm families who prided themselves on

the care of their homesteads. "To see the shape of the place would have

killed Mom and Dad," complained a great granddaughter of a Port

Oneida pioneer. "Everything was always kept up so nicely." Another

women lamented, after a visit to her lost farm, "What a shame that the

original old homestead was not allowed to die in dignity." Enraged she

concluded a letter-to-the-editor of a local paper with a curse. "I, Jo-An

put a 3,000-year CURSE OF PESTILENCE on the "ERICKSON

ACRES" affecting only the un-loyal towards our beloved land onto

those un-sensetive to sacred things!" The holders of leases about to

expire argued before Congress that since the park service could not

care for the property under its control already, what was the logic of

giving them more land? "Many of the homes already vacated have not

been cared for or removed by the Park Service and have become

serious hazards."[64]

 Under a severe budgetary regime construction projects proceeded at

a very slow pace. The most important new construction at Sleeping

Bear was the redesign of the Platte River Campground, the lakeshore's

busiest visitor facility. The new campground had been at the head of

Superintendent Martinek's wish list back in the 1970s. Plans for a new

facility had been drawn up and approved since 1980, yet getting the

construction funds to begin work took another decade. The delay

facilitated the study of a major Indian encampment site impacted by the

proposed new construction. Extensive archeological excavations were

carried out in order to recover valuable cultural resource data regarding

prehistoric Indian life in the Sleeping Bear area. Political high-jinks

played a role in delaying the project. While lakeshore visitors had to

be content with a site little improved from what had been the Benzie

State Park Campground, Congress played havoc with the National Park

Service's list of new construction priorities by adding pet projects to

the head of the list. Projects that had nothing to do with existing

national parks such as major funding for Chicago's Navy Pier and

Boston's public library received funding ahead of Sleeping Bear Dunes.
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5f.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:30 AM]

The lakeshore lacked aggressive support in the House of

Representatives and so its projects were frequently bumped down the

funding list. When the project finally was funded in 1990, it

substantially improved the camper's experience. Thirty-five new sites

were added and the spacing between sites was increased to allow

greater privacy. New restrooms were added and all were equipped with

flush toilets and showers.[65]

 Getting the Platte River Campground project finally underway was

a relief to Superintendent Peterson. Advancing the lakeshore

programmatically with limited resources was an exercise in frustration.

In 1990, the task of directing the lakeshore passed from Richard

Peterson to Ivan D. Miller. Peterson went west to become the Assistant

Superintendent at Glacier National Park. During his ten-year tenure at

Sleeping Bear the size of the lakeshore's full-time staff remained static,

while the number of part-time employees actually declined

substantially. Visitation to the park increased by forty percent, yet the

overall budget remained flat. Peterson's most important contribution

was enabling the lakeshore to move out of the highly inconvenient

Frankfort bank building and into a new headquarters within the

lakeshore boundaries.

 Ivan D. Miller came to the lakeshore from Pacific Northwest

Regional Office. The Minnesota native had been with the park service

since 1963 and had experience working at some of the "crown jewels"

of the system, including Yosemite, Glacier, and Denali, where he had

been Chief Ranger. Miller had a Master's degree in Forestry and

extensive experience in park planning, most notably a four-year tour in

Saudi Arabia, where he helped to set up their first national park. Miller

first came to Sleeping Bear as a tourist in 1975 and had long thought it

would be a nice place to work. He returned to the park fifteen years

later, warned about "the complex land issues out there at Sleeping

Bear."

 After negotiating cultural barriers in the Middle East, Miller was

well prepared to handle the sometimes stormy public relations of

Sleeping Bear. His first test came only weeks after arriving in Empire

when the president of the Michigan United Conservation Clubs blasted

Sleeping Bear Dunes as "the worst managed park I ever saw." Rather

than responding defensively Miller invited conservation club president

Richard L. Jameson to review the lakeshore's draft dune management

plan and to participate in a dune management workshop. The program

included tours of Sleeping Bear and other locally managed dune sites.

While Jameson remained adamant that stronger protection measures

were need at Sleeping Bear, he came to realize that public access was

more sharply controlled by the National Park Service than at state and

county parks. Miller's approach ensured that Jameson's critique was

part of a cooperative solution not a public feud.[67]

 As Miller began work as superintendent many projects envisioned

in the general management plan under Superintendent Brown and

planned under Superintendent Peterson were finally being funded. The

Platte River Campground was the most important of these in terms of

improving the image of the national lakeshore. Less successful at
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5f.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:30 AM]

demonstrating park service planning prowess was the installation of a

new docking facility at North Manitou Island. Unlike South Manitou

the northern island had no natural harbor, which necessitated the

building of a large pier, long enough to accommodate fluctuating lake

levels and stout enough to withstand the action of ice and gales. A

major construction effort was required to build the 200 foot-long

facility. The dock was completed in 1987, but within a year a sand bar

had formed that made the pier unusable to the Manitou ferry. This was

extremely embarrassing since providing a secure docking facility had

been one of the reasons behind acquiring the ferry service and making

it a park concession. Extensive prework studies had established that the

site in front of the Coast Guard Station was prone to sand

accumulation. Management, however, went ahead with building at that

site in order to keep new construction out of the wilderness areas of the

island. It was a bad decision made for a good reason. For more than a

year after Miller arrived visitors to North Manitou Island had to be

taken to a beach on the southern shore where the ferry could nudge

close enough in for the campers to splash ashore. The new

superintendent had to order extensive dredging to remove the sand bar.

The first dredging was done in November 1992 and has been redone

roughly every two years since that time. It is a biannual reminder of a

less that successful planning effort.[68]

 The management plan for the Platte River corridor was another

example of a flawed planning process. The planning had been

underway for several years before Miller arrived at Sleeping Bear and

pushing that through to completion proved to be no easy matter. The

1979 general management plan had proposed in broad-brush strokes

design and policy changes to improve the experience of visitors to the

naturally diverse area. A specific management plan for the Platte River

corridor was deemed desirable as a way to advance the broad goals of

the general management plan. John Abbett, lakeshore Assistant

Superintendent, spearheaded the task. In 1985, a contract with the

consulting firm Environmental Resources Management produced

studies of visitor use of the Platte River and the effect of dredging at

the mouth of the river. Abbett's small group of lakeshore staff followed

this contract with further visitor surveys and consultations with other

agencies. The large number of overlapping jurisdictions within the

relatively compact, less than 2,000-acre, corridor made planning

particularly difficult. The Benzie County Road Commission owned

Lake Michigan Road, which provided vehicular access to the area. The

Department of Natural Resources owned 161 acres near its fish weir on

the river. At the mouth of the river Lake Township owned a 2-acre

park and the county controlled the Platte River boat launch ramp area.

More than thirty residential properties, some destined to become part of

the lakeshore, some not, and the private canoe livery also had to be

taken into account in establishing the plan.[69]

 Four planning alternatives were completed and available for public

comment in the spring of 1991. Among the most controversial options

was the proposal favored by fishermen to remove the boat launch from

the Platte River and place it at the end of Tiesma Road, where semiprotected direct access to Platte Bay was available. Initially Abbett

favored this site until it was discovered that the proposed boat launch
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5f.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:30 AM]

would displace a prime pitcher's thistle habitat as well as the Prairie

Warble, which had recently been listed as a threatened species. The

need to avoid such sensitive areas should have been detected during the

initial planning. The Tiesma Road launch was scuttled, but no solution

to the annual dredging of the mouth of the Platte was presented. There

was strong public support for planning elements which included trail

and landing improvements, a pedestrian bridge across the Platte as an

alternative to people walking on the M-22 highway bridge, and

improved visitor facilities at the busy swimming area at the mouth of

the Platte. A plan was approved in 1992 and within two years the

lakeshore had completed improvements at several of the downstream

public use areas and redesigned the parking lot at the mouth of the

river. Also installed were improved comfort stations, changing rooms,

and a boat-trailer turn-around. Together with improvements made at

the Loon Lake public access and the picnic area along the Platte River,

the park service had done much to improve the experience of canoeists

on the river while at the same time directing visitor use in such a way

as to stabilize the vulnerable river banks.

 Planning for the future of the Platte River brought to a head the

simmering disagreement between the lakeshore and Kathleen and

Thomas Stocklen, the owners of Riverside Canoe Livery. Float and

canoe trips on the Platte River were a major visitor activity during the

summer months. No commercial activity within the lakeshore had as

much impact upon the park as Riverside Canoe. Yet the National Park

Service had less control over Riverside than any other piece of private

property within the park. The Stocklens refused to sign a National Park

Service restrictive use agreement that would give lakeshore

management the assurance that the business would not be operated in

such a way as to "impair the usefulness and attractiveness of the area."

One hundred and fifteen other property owners within the lakeshore

signed such agreements, which were specifically called for in the park's

enabling legislation. The Stocklens were motivated partially by

business considerations. They did not want what they felt was a

capricious national park management process to have leverage over

their business. Unlike the other 115 property owners who signed

agreements the Stocklens insisted on being paid to accept a limitation

on their property use. The possibility of negotiating the issue was

further complicated because principle also drove owners of Riverside

Canoe. Kathleen Stocklen had become very active in the National

Inholders Association. For her defeating the National Park Service at

Sleeping Bear was part of a larger struggle to protect individual rights

from an overly aggressive bureaucracy. The clash between Riverside

Canoe and the national lakeshore rested on core values. For the

National Park Service the restrictive use agreement was vital to protect

the Platte from a major business on the river, as well as to insist that all

property owners be treated equally. For the Stocklens it was the

National Park Service that was the threat, not to the river but to

people's right to use the river. "It would be easy for us to make a deal

and take their money," Kathleen Stocklen told the press. "But we want

to be sure the public never gets shut off the Platte River."[71]

 In October 1990, after attempts to negotiate an agreement broke

down, the National Park Service again began condemnation
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5f.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:30 AM]

proceedings against Riverside Canoe. The goal was less to take the

Stocklens property, which the National Park Service recognized would

entail a disruption of vital visitor services, than it was to force the

Stocklens to accept a restrictive agreement that would protect the

lakeshore from future negative impacts. The Stocklens regarded

condemnation as a declaration of war and they launched an immediate

counter attack. They turned back federal appraisers' request for access

to their property and made an appeal for assistance to Congressman

Guy Vander Jagt. Kathleen Stocklen leveled charges of criminal

breaches of the public trust against the Sleeping Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore and was able to revive the inconclusive, ten-year-old,

Inspector General's Office investigation of the park. She insisted that

lakeshore officials filed false reports to improve their condemnation

case. Backed-up by the Mountain States Legal Foundation, the

Stocklens also filed a counter-suit against the National Park Service,

requesting a declaratory judgement based on their 1971 certificate

prohibiting condemnation. The park service won a key victory when

the federal court established the validity of condemnation, in spite of

the 1971 certificate. Despite the legal setback Kathleen Stocklen's

conservative political connections and the good reputation of her

business won her assistance at the highest governmental level. The

press dubbed the struggle "David vs. Goliath," but when it came to

political pull the Stocklens dwarfed the lakeshore. Senator Malcolm

Wallop (R-Wyoming), a national property rights advocate and Vice

President Dan Quayle both pressed the Department of the Interior on

behalf of Riverside Canoe. In September 1992 the National Inholders

Association even planned a demonstration on the steps of the Interior

building in support of the Stocklens. It was cancelled, however, when

the department bowed to the onslaught of political pressure.[72]

 On September 14, 1992 Kathleen and Thomas Stocklen met with

National Park Service Director James Ridenour. At this level the

Stocklens were a problem that Director Ridenour just seemed to want

to go away. The park service director had owed his appointment to the

influence of Vice President Quayle, which may have disposed him to

take a direct personal interest in the case. Ridenour ignored detailed

settlement negotiations, which had been underway between the

Stocklens and Superintendent Ivan Miller over the content of a

restrictive agreement that could resolve the issue out of court. Instead

Ridenour drafted with the Stocklens a brief letter of agreement in

which the latter promised:

...we will use our property for the purpose of a canoe

livery/marina/general store as it has been used for the past

28 years. We have no intention of changing that use in the

future. Our use has been and will continue to be consistent

with the purpose and intent of the Act that created

Sleeping Bear Dunes (Public Law 91-479). Moreover, our

use has not and will not impair the usefulness and

attractiveness of the Lakeshore.

The National Park Service and the Stocklen's both agreed to drop their

suits. Recognizing a complete cave-in when she saw it Kathleen
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5f.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:30 AM]

Stocklen further insisted that the legal expenses of Riverside Canoe be

fully compensated. "I reminded him eyeball to eyeball that we weren't

the ones who started this," Stocklen said. The park service paid the

Stocklen's $26,750 to cover their attorney's fees. By going over the

heads of the park service's local and regional officials, and going to the

top of the bureaucratic food chain, Kathleen Stocklen won a complete

victory. "We are pleased to have reached a settlement on this

longstanding issue," Director Ridenour told the press. "God bless

America," a relieved Kathy Stocklen wrote to Director Ridenour. "It is

a 'Country Worth Saving' and we must all have the courage to do the

saving."[73]

NEXT> The Homestead Golf Course Saga

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5g.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:33 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Chapter Five

The Homestead Golf Course Saga

 A decisive factor in the defeat of the National Park Service's

attempt to "save" the Platte River was the power of the national

property rights movement. That same political force manifested itself

in one of the most long lasting land use disputes in northwest

Michigan, the Homestead golf course proposal. The case, which

severely fractured the communities of Leelanau County, pitted the

desire to develop a modern tourist infrastructure against the need to

preserve the environmental amenities that made the Leland Peninsula

attractive to tourists in the first place. Like the Riverside Canoe

embroilment the Homestead case was a battle about controlling

successful, high-quality private businesses from growing in such a way

as to do permanent harm to a beautiful and popular public resource.

 In retrospect one of the major mistakes made when drawing the

boundaries of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore during the

1960s had been the decision to omit the lands around the Leelanau

School from the national lakeshore. The private school was seen as a

compatible institution as was the small guest inn located near by

known as the Homestead. Several hundred acres of land owned by

Arthur S. Huey, who was owner and operator of both the school and

the resort were included in the lakeshore and were purchased by Kuras

in 1979 at the cost of $1.3 million. The land exempted from

condemnation did not long remain a "compatible use." In 1974, Robert

A. Kuras, a savvy Harvard business school graduate and a veteran

developer bought into the Huey family's interest in the Homestead

property. Initially Kuras was their partner but the Huey's soon found

themselves on the losing side of a power struggle for control of the

resort. With control over the Homestead Kuras began an aggressive

expansion program. In 1979, while the people of Glen Lake were

railing against the proposed scenic road, the "National Park land grab,"

and the Leelanau Enterprise-Tribune headlined "Survey shows summer

visitors want Glen Lake area as is," local officials approved Kuras's

plan to transform the Homestead into a huge, multipurpose resort

complex. Few people thought the expansion a more serious threat than

the scenic parkway, but the new Homestead was a major departure

from the small scale, "local atmosphere" type of accommodations

summer visitors had come to expect in Leelanau. When they approved

the new Homestead, Glen Lake residents were fooling themselves that

they could have both a large-scale resort development and restrained

commercialism.[74]

 The new Homestead was an impressive facility with five

restaurants, two conference centers, retail shops, five swimming pools,

eleven downhill ski runs, and seven tennis courts set along the Lake
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5g.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:33 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

Michigan beach and at the mouth of the Crystal River. Scores of

condominium residential buildings containing 400 individual units

sprouted throughout the manicured grounds. The resort also included a

dozen single-family homes and a hotel. From the beach at Glen Haven

the condominium units, which grew steadily throughout the 1980s,

looked like a small city carved out of the forested lakeshore. When it

first opened visitors to the Homestead enjoyed accommodations and

dining superior to that found anywhere else in the county. Kuras's

imagination and dynamic personality made him popular with local

politicians. Naturally, the author of nearly 700 local jobs was valued, as

someone who was bringing needed economic development to Leelanau

County.

 Throughout northwest Michigan resort-conference center

complexes like the Homestead became popular. Orchards and pastures

throughout the region were acquired to build combination golf and ski

resorts. Golf courses designed by premier links authorities such as Jack

Nicholas and Pete Dye became very popular with vacationing

downstate businessmen. By the late 1980s the region had joined the

Carolinas and California as one of the leading golf destinations in the

United States. The Homestead boasted an asset unlike its rivals-it was

located adjacent to the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore.

Guests at the Homestead had sandy beaches and dramatic dunes at

their fingertips. What they did not have was a golf course. Kuras felt

that the ability to offer a championship caliber golf course was

essential to the continued success of the Homestead. Unfortunately, his

principal asset became his principal obstacle to expansion; Homestead

was surrounded by the national lakeshore. During the mid-1980s Kuras

quietly acquired several non-contiguous parcels of land for potential

expansion. In the fall of 1986, Kuras announced that Homestead

intended to build a golf course and condominium complex on a 254-

acre site along the scenic Crystal River.[75]

 From the beginning the plan ran into community opposition. The

first salvos were fired at an unexpectedly hostile Leelanau County

Planning Commission meeting in November 1986. More than sixty

people crammed the township hall, most of them in opposition to the

golf course. Within four days the Friends of the Crystal River was

formed to stop the golf course. Scott Jones, a retired Chicago public

relations specialist became its highly effective president. Kuras went to

great expense to put together a good development team to plan the golf

and condominium complex. He immediately organized several

workshops with the community to explain his plan and receive

community input. The plan was modified in light of publicly expressed

objections. What Kuras gradually discovered, however, was something

that the National Park Service had learned long ago: once people in

Leelanau made up their minds about something which effected them

public presentations would likely generate more heat than light. Every

time Kuras modified his plan, Scott Jones and the Friends of the

Crystal River countered with the simple observation, why not put the

golf course somewhere else?

 What many Leelanau County citizens objected to was the location

of the golf and residential development along the banks of the Crystal
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5g.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:33 AM]

River. The proposed project site currently was a wetland that would

have to be filled in to allow Kuras's golf course. It did not take much

imagination for people to worry about the effect of replacing the

natural water filter of the wetland with a heavily fertilized fairway.

Visions of the clear river waters replaced by algae blooms and

breeding salmon and trout lost to septic system runoff mobilized

opposition. "We cannot take chances with this precious river system,"

pleaded a local teacher in a Traverse City newspaper article.[77]

 Kuras was further hurt by a negative public perception of his career

as a developer. The Hawk's Nest condominiums that he placed on a

bulldozed hill top above Lake Michigan were not only a stunning

visual intrusion on the national lakeshore, but a carelessly planned

source of erosion. During periods of heavy rain mud, small trees, and

rocks were washed down the slope to private homes and park land

below. The elaborate plan of environmental monitoring Kuras

proposed for the Crystal River in order to allay environmentalists

sounded hollow in the light of such past results. Kuras further alienated

people by the way he seemingly tried to win covertly rezoning of the

proposed site. He had kept his golf course plan to himself while he sat

on the Glen Arbor township zoning board and participated in drawing

up the long-range land-use plan. In fact, he first publicly announced

the project at a special meeting of the zoning board. This was later

denounced in a public petition as a "clear breach of the public trust."

As the controversy heated up, accusations surfaced that support of the

golf course proposal was being used as a litmus test for filling job

vacancies at the resort. By 1988, Robert A. Kuras was the most

controversial figure in Leelanau County. Neighbors quarreled over the

issue, friends fell out; the Homestead expansion joined religion and

politics on the forbidden subject list of homes desiring peace and

quiet.[78]

 Those who favored the project pointed out that Kuras's development

accounted for more than $22 million in local property tax valuation. If

Homestead needed a golf course to remain viable, then approval of that

plan was vital to the county's economic survival. The golf course

proposal revealed fault lines running throughout a community anxious

about its future. Like the residents of most resort areas the people of

Leelanau County had very ambivalent feelings toward tourists. People

from downstate or out of state were the heart of the regional economy,

but they were also disparaged as "fudgies," a swarming breed that

descended on beaches, shops, and galleries during warm weather and

disappeared at the first sign of frost. A stronger hostility was reserved

for "fudgies" who sought to stay in the area. "It's not the fudgies who

bother us so much, it's the permafudge," Cris Telgard, owner of the

Bluebird Restaurant told a Chicago Tribune reporter in 1992. "They

come in, build their condos and start taking over." A Glen Arbor

resident complained about that new type of visitor to the area, "the lazy

rich shopper show off tooling around in the BMW." Such visitors, it

was believed, did not really care for the beach combing and hiking

offered by the area. "The dilemma is, do we build golf courses to

accommodate them or do we send them somewhere else." A former

"fudgie" even noticed the difference and complained to the Leelanau

Enterprise-Tribune, "It is too bad that it looks like you are being turned
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5g.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:33 AM]

into a rich man's playground." The rich brought in their wake jobs for

the local people, but also a clash of lifestyles, as was seen in the

controversy over hunting restrictions. For many embracing the golf

course was consciously a devil's bargain in which they surrendered a

part of their community to save the rest.[79]

 In the end the local people came down in favor of the project. In

September 1987, a referendum of Glen Arbor Township voters

approved of rezoning the land in favor of the golf course by a margin

of 285-209 in an election that saw nearly ninety percent of electorate

participate. But local approval merely set Kuras up for a new round of

frustration when he sought a necessary wetlands permit from the

Michigan Department of Natural Resources (DNR). After going to

great lengths to win the approval of the DNR, Kuras was stunned by

the aggressive intervention of the Chicago office of the Environmental

Protection Agency. The Environmental Protection Agency effectively

stymied the Homestead project for four years. Kuras fought back with

political connections. In 1990, State Senator Connie Binsfeld of Glen

Arbor was elected Lieutenant Governor. A long-time supporter of

Kuras, Binsfeld had previously tried legislative means to speed the

environmental review process. Through Binsfeld's liaison Michigan

Governor John Engler nudged his political weight behind the golf

course plan. Engler met with William Reilly, President George Bush's

Environmental Protection Agency administrator. Senator Donald

Riegle (D-Michigan), Kuras' friend and former college roommate, was

helpful behind the scenes, but after being burned in a notorious

savings-and-loan scandal Riegle had to keep a low profile on

Homestead. Nonetheless, such high level involvements made the

Homestead case a national news story, even earning a spot on NBC's

"Today Show." Eventually the Washington, D.C. office of the

Environmental Protection Agency pushed aside the Chicago field

office and took direct charge of the case. It was to the surprise of no

one then, when the agency withdrew its objections to the project,

clearing the way for Kuras to at last receive his wetlands permit.[80]

 Outflanked on the political front the Friends of the Crystal River

fought back in the courts. With five other environmental groups,

including the Sierra Club and the Northern Michigan Environmental

Action Council, Scott Jones's group sued the Environmental Protection

Agency and the Michigan DNR in federal district court. A restraining

order and later a permanent injunction prevented the Environmental

Protection Agency and the DNR from issuing the long-sought wetlands

permit. Instead, the court argued the review process needed to begin

anew with the United States Army Corps of Engineers as the lead

agency. By this time the reputations and egos of many powerful people

and more than $1 million of Kuras's money were invested in the

Homestead golf course. In August of 1992, the Environmental

Protection Agency refused to accept the district court ruling and the

case was sent to the federal appeals court. Suddenly, however, in

November of that year the political wind temporarily went out of

Kuras's sails with the election of William J. Clinton as the first

Democratic president in more than a decade. A new administration at

the Environmental Protection Agency doomed the Homestead appeal in

the federal court.[81]
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5g.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:33 AM]

 Up to this point the National Park Service had been pretty much on

the sidelines in the bitter golf course controversy. In 1988, the Midwest

Regional Office provided comment to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service, which expressed minor reservations about the golf course's

potential impact on ground water pollution. Superintendent Richard

Peterson consciously dodged efforts to draw the lakeshore into a

discussion of Kuras's sensitivity to the environment. "We have a

working relationship with the Homestead," he declared. "It's pretty

good, actually." In February 1990, Congressman Dale Kildee (D-Flint)

drafted a bill to add fourteen Michigan rivers to the Wild and Scenic

Rivers System. Many environmental groups lobbied for the Crystal

River to be added to the list. Scott Jones and the locally based Friends

of the Crystal River worked to defeat this idea out of a clearly

expressed desire to keep opposition to the golf course free from the

inevitable backlash that would follow National Park Service

administration of the river. In 1992, however, the national lakeshore

was thrown directly into the furor.[82]

 On December 12, 1992, at a news conference in Traverse City,

representatives of an "independent" citizens group shook hands with

attorneys for the Homestead. Together they announced what they

promised would be the solution to the long divisive golf course

conflict: Kuras would exchange his 267 acres of Crystal River wetlands

for 302 acres of forested uplands within the national lakeshore. For

several months people in Leelanau County tried to arrange a

compromise settlement. Although the Friends of the Crystal River were

clearly winning their fight they wanted to end the dispute in a way that

would unite, not divide the community. For Kuras who had sunk

several million dollars into the project the compromise was a rope

thrown to a drowning man. The swap promised to net him more land,

which could be more cheaply developed than the Crystal River

wetland, with dramatic Lake Michigan vitas as a bonus. The initial

reaction to the news was a collective sigh of relief. Local business

organizations and the press all endorsed the proposal.

 Unconsulted in the spasm of community goodwill was the National

Park Service, either in Empire or Washington, D.C. Superintendent

Ivan Miller gamely greeted the news noncommittally: "We're

evaluating the proposal and giving it close scrutiny." He tried to

dampen enthusiasm for the swap by reminding the press that Congress

would have to approve the action, something that was rarely done.[84]

 Within a few months, however, the bloom began to fade from the

rose of compromise. While the local township boards approved of the

swap, a solid phalanx of environmental groups were arrayed against it.

They feared a precedent unleashing a rash of future park exchanges

with private citizens and regretted the loss of a scenic park upland,

including a large chunk of the Bay View Trail. Eventually even the

Northern Michigan Environmental Action Council and the Friends of

the Crystal River, who originally were open to the swap plan, reversed

field and joined the opposition. "You don't resolve a problem with

another problem," Scott Jones reflected. Nor did the political situation

favor the swap. Senator Donald Riegle was too closely associated with
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5g.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:33 AM]

Kuras personally and too wounded politically to push the exchange

legislation on Capital Hill. Michigan's other Senator, Carl Levin, had a

strong environmental record and was loath to move against his allies

for so private a cause and so public an issue. After holding his peace

for several months Superintendent Miller blasted the swap proposal.

"Its like taking a piece out of the Grand Canyon to put in a waterslide,"

he told the lakeshore advisory commission.

 Proponents of the swap, like the Traverse City Record-Eagle, called

on the National Park Service to support the compromise and

"demonstrate a willingness to be good neighbors to the Homestead."

But Kuras hurt his own cause with environmentalists by failing to

resolve a faulty septic system at the resort. For more than ten years

Kuras boasted of a "state of the art" septic system yet failed to

complete his application for a wastewater discharge permit. In 1992,

the Department of Natural Resources determined that the sewer system

at Homestead was inadequate to serve the resort's 500 condominiums

and that leaks from the system were polluting the local ground water

supply. "He'd rather spend money on lawyers fighting the DNR," an

environmentalist complained, "than on upgrading the system." The park

service was already "good neighbor" enough to Kuras who held an

easement for a sewage spray field on lakeshore land. In return for that

the public received polluted ground water.[86]

 By 1995 the land swap deal was hopelessly stalled. Yet like a

recurring bad dream the golf course proposal could not be put to rest.

In December of that year a second compromise land swap proposal

was brokered between the Friends of the Crystal River and the

Homestead. In this deal the Homestead would deed to the National

Park Service 168 acres of land along the Crystal River for 204 acres of

national lakeshore land north of the Homestead. Those involved in the

negotiation congratulated themselves on having devised a "local

solution" to the controversy. Scott Jones who had led the opposition to

the golf course said he was "very happy" with the plan. Every other

environmental organization involved, however, were as opposed to this

swap as they were the original compromise plan. Superintendent Miller

wasted no time in also rejecting the proposal. "We applaud the efforts

that these two groups went through," Miller observed. "But there were

not enough people at the table. The American public was not

there."[87]

 It was perhaps inevitable that the river of community divisiveness

flowing from the Homestead golf course case would end up being

funneled into the familiar channel of negativity toward the National

Park Service. Ill-advised comments by environmentalists contributed to

the flow of misdirected anger. In rejecting the idea of a swap, the

Sierra Club's local director insisted congressional action should clear

the way for the National Park Service to condemn and purchase the

Crystal River tract outright. The idea of the Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore being expanded inflamed Leelanau residents on

both sides of the issue. This unlikely prospect appeared even more

ominous when local property rights advocates dusted off a 1988 report

from the National Parks and Conservation Association. The private

environmental advocacy group had drafted a "dream" plan for national
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5g.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:33 AM]

park expansion, which included adding an additional 94,000 acres to

Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore. Included in the plan were

North and South Fox Island, Beaver, Hog, Garden and High islands,

and various mainland tracts scattered between Wilderness State Park on

the north and Nordhouse Dunes near Ludington on the south. The plan

was never given serious consideration when it was new, six years latter

it was forgotten by everyone but those paranoid about "communist

environmental groups." "Connect the dots," Kathleen Stocklen urged

the press. The whole fanciful debate about park expansion, excited

further by a well timed visit by Charles Cushman to Glen Arbor, was,

in the words of one journalist, "akin to ripping the bandage off a

wound that has just begun to heal." Twenty-five years after the

creation of the lakeshore emotion rather than reason dictated Leelanau

County's response to any issue touching on the National Park

Service.[88]

 At the time this report was being written the Homestead expansion

plan and the proposed swap were still unresolved issues. The

controversy illustrated in a telling fashion the difference in outlook

between the managers of the national lakeshore and the people of

northwest Michigan. A large number of people, both those for and

against Robert A. Kuras' drive to expand his resort, saw the issue in

terms that were pragmatic and parochial. The bitter controversy was a

challenge to the local community and in the best traditions of a

democratic society they sought to resolve the issue through

compromise. Yet the solution proposed by the land swap proposal

could at best be characterized as "passing the buck." In 1995, Scott

Jones admitted, "both sides as well as the community are tired of the

controversy and would like to see it settled." The park service's

response to the swap proposal was bureaucratic and national. The plan

was taken by the superintendent to the regional director in Omaha,

Nebraska, and discussed in light of their combined experience with the

policies of the National Park Service. Their perspective was not what

was good for the frustrated residents of Glen Arbor Township, but how

did the proposal advance the long-term interests of the broad American

public. "The trade does not provide a positive return to the park,"

observed Assistant Superintendent Duane Pearson. "The National Park

Service is not a land holder or owner of lands for the purpose of

improving the position of a private entrepreneur."[89]

 In the end the swap floundered on the same criteria that led to the

creation of the national lakeshore twenty-five years before: national

interest. In 1970, saving the Sleeping Bear Dunes area for public use

was deemed a national priority by representatives of Americans who

lived far away from Michigan's beautiful sandy shores. In 1995, there

was no "compelling national reason" to change the boundaries of the

lakeshore to allow a developer to build a golf course. The fact is, the

constraints that national interest placed on the land use options of the

self-reliant people of Benzie and Leelanau counties has always been

and likely always will be the source of dissatisfaction with the National

Park Service.

NEXT> Conclusion: Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore At TwentyFive
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_5g.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:33 AM]

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_figures2.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:38 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Figures

Figures

Figure 5:

Waterways Commission Plan for the Platte, c. 1972.

Figure 6:
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_figures2.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:38 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

Original Sleeping Bear Development Plan, 1969.

Figure 7:
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_figures2.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:38 AM]

Development Concept for Glen Haven Area, 1988.

Figure 8:
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_figures2.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:38 AM]

Conflict Between Roads and Wilderness Values, Grand Rapids Press,

Sept. 1, 1985.

NEXT> Figures 9-11

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_figures3.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:47 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land:

The Early Management

of Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Figures

Figures

Figure 9:

Riverside Canoe Case in Record-Eagle June 21, 1992.

Figure 10:

Homestead Golf Course Saga Record-Eagle August 31, 1991.

Figure 11:
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_figures3.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:47 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

Expiration of Twenty-Five Year Leases Record-Eagle May 27, 1995.

NEXT> Images

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_images2.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:51 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find

Them:" The Origins of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land:

The Early Management

of Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing

the Sleeping Bear

Dunes Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear

Dunes National Lakeshore

Images

Images

Sleeping Bear Dune, c. 1940

Sleeping Bear Dune, c. 1940

1956 Oldsmobile adapted for tours of the dunes.

(image #13 missing from original manuscript)

Dune Climb area, 1958.
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_images2.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:51 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and

Present Employees of

Sleeping Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

Mouth of the Platte River at the time of the Great Lakes Shoreline Survey.

Subdivision on Sleeping Bear Bay.

Park Planners at Empire Bluffs, 1961. Left to right are Conrad Wirth, Ben

Thompston, Ronald Lee, Robert Ludden, Elmer Martinson, Allen Edmunds.
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_images2.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:51 AM]

Great Lakes Shoreline Survey photography, Pyramid Point, 1957.

Senator Philip A. Hart

Senator Philip A. Hart, the man most responsible for the creation of

Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore. 

National Park Service Director Conrad Wirth inspects the proposed

Sleeping Bear park area. This photograph was taken just prior to the stormy

public meeting in the Glen Lake Community High School. Director Wirth

later described the meeting as "a real bad night."

NEXT> More Images

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_images2.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:51 AM]

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_images3.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:57 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Images

Images

E. Egenvieve Gillette, founder of the Michigan Parks Association and

tireless supporter of the proposed National Lakesore. 

Julius Martinek, first Superintendent of Sleeping Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore.

Chief Naturalist Charles Parkinson instructs fifth graders at a winter

camp, 1986.
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_images3.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:57 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

Glen Lake visitor center

Dedication ceremonies for the Glen Lake visitor center, December

1976.

Thousands of gulls take flight at South Manitou Island's Gull Point

colony.

Don Brown

Donald R. Brown, second Superintendent of Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore.

Pierce Stocking Drive

The redesigned Pierce Stocking Drive, 1989.
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_images3.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:57 AM]

Former AF Base

Former Air Force Base at Empire, adapted for use as a maintenance

facility, c. 1987. 

Chaos at Platte

Chaos at the mouth of the Platte Rivier prior to National Park Service

administration.

Dedication of the new park, October 22, 1977.

NEXT> More Images

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_images3.htm[7/11/2012 10:16:57 AM]
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_images4.htm[7/11/2012 10:17:03 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Images

Images

Superintendent Brown at the podium during the dedication ceremony,

held at the site of the Dune Climb. 

Richard R. Peterson, third Superintendent of Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore.

In January, 1987 the lakeshore moved into the Empire visitor center

and headquarters complex.
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_images4.htm[7/11/2012 10:17:03 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

The newly constructed National Park Service dock at North Manitou

Island, 1988.

Modern comfort station at the expanded and improved Platte River

campground, 1992.

Visitors view exhibits in front of Sleeping Bear Inn. Maritime Heritage

Day. 1989.
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_images4.htm[7/11/2012 10:17:03 AM]

Erosion threatened the South Manitou lighthouse in 1986.

Charles Kruch demonstrates Coast Guard rescue techniques, 1986. 

Tanger William Herd explains a Coast Guard surfboat to a visitor,

1984.
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_images4.htm[7/11/2012 10:17:03 AM]

Park interpreters lead visitors on a historic farm tour, 1987.

NEXT> More Images

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/ 
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_images5.htm[7/11/2012 10:17:08 AM]

Cover Page

MENU

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter One,

"National Parks Are

Where You Find Them:"

The Origins of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore

Chapter Two,

"We're Going For The

Right Thing:" The

Legislative Struggle to

Create Sleeping Bear

Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1971- 1977

Chapter Three,

Changes on the Land: The

Early Management of

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore,

1977-1983

Chapter Four

Plans, Programs and

Controversy: The

Reassessment of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, 1977-1983

Chapter Five,

"A Local and National

Treasure:" Managing the

Sleeping Bear Dunes

Park, 1984- 1995

Conclusion,

Sleeping Bear Dunes

National Lakeshore At

Twenty-Five

A Nationalized Lakeshore:

The Creation and Administration of Sleeping

Bear Dunes National Lakeshore

Images

Images

Naturalist, Pam Lea leads visitors on nature walk along Empire Bluff

Trail, 1986. 

Ivan D. Miller, fourth Superintendent of Sleeping Bear Dunes National

Lakeshore, presents an award to Management Assistant and former

Chief Ranger Ray Kimpel, 1993.

The Dune Climb remains a popular visitor use site, 1989.
A Nationalized Lakeshore: The Creation and Administration of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore: by Theodore J. Karamanski

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/slbe/adhi_images5.htm[7/11/2012 10:17:08 AM]

Appendix One,

Budgetary Progress of

Sleeping Bear Dunes N.L.

Appendix Two,

Selected Past and Present

Employees of Sleeping

Bear N.L.

Appendix Three,

Selected Visitation

Statistics

Appendix Four,

Public Law 91-479

Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 5 Notes

Conclusion Notes

Figures

Images

Bibliography

The Lake Michigan overlook platform, Pierce Stocking Drive, 1989.

The end of the trail, Empire Bluff, 1989..

Allen Edmunds, "father" of the Great Lakes National Parks.

NEXT> Bibliography

Top

History | Links to the Past | National Park Service | Search | Contact

Last Modified: January 10, 2001 10:00:00 am PST

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/slbe/