Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:00 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

Currents and

Undercurrents:

An Administrative History of

Lake Roosevelt National Recreation

Area

by

Kathryn L. McKay

and

Nancy F. Renk

January 2002

National Park Service

U.S. Department of the Interior

TABLE OF CONTENTS

laro/adhi/adhi.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Table of Contents)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhit.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:01 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Cover

Cover photo: LARO ranger and Park Service boat near northern end of Lake

Roosevelt, ca. 1972. Photo courtesy of National Park Service, Lake Roosevelt

National Recreation Area ("A Boater's Guide to Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake,"

draft ca. 1972, file K3819 Lake Roos. Boater's Guide, LARO.HQ.C10).

Foreword

Preface

Abbreviations Used in Text

Abbreviations Used in Endnotes

Introduction

Chapter 1. When Rivers Ran Free

Chapter 2. The River Becomes a lake

Chapter 3. A Long Road Lies Ahead: Establishing Lake Rooevelt National Recreation Area

Chapter 4. Agreements and Disagreements: From Tri-Party Agreement to Multi-Party

Agreement

Chapter 5. Charting the Course: Managers and Management Issues

Chapter 6. Family Vacation Lake: Recreation Planning and Management

Chapter 7. Building and Maintaining the Park: Administrative and Visitor Facilities

Chapter 8. Changing Stories: Interpretation

Chapter 9. From Simple to Complex: Cultural Resources Management

Chapter 10. An Uphill Struggle: Natural Resources Management

Chapter 11. Regaining Ground: Leases and Special Use Permits

Chapter 12. Echoes of the Past: Future Issues

Appendix A. LARO Superintendents

Appendix B. An act for the acquisition of Indian lands for the Grand Coulee Dam and
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Table of Contents)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhit.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:01 PM]

Reservoir, and for other purposes (Act of June 29, 1940)

Appendix C. Memorandum of Agreement Among the Bureau of Reclamation, National Park

Service, and Office of Indian Affairs Relating to the Planning, Development, and

Administration of the Coulee Dam Recreational Area (December 18, 1946)

Appendix D. Public Land Order 2087 (May 9, 1960)

Appendix E. Lake Roosevelt Cooperative Management Agreement (April 5, 1990)

Appendix F. Edward G. Torrison and Marlene J. Torrison, Husband and Wife, Plaintiffs v.

Vaughn L. Baker, et al., Defendents (September 27, 2000)

Appendix G. Visitor Statistics

Annotated Bibliography.

Index (omitted from the online edition)

ABBREVIATIONS USED IN TEXT

ARPA Archaeological Resources Protection Act

BIA Bureau of Indian Affairs (formerly known as Office of Indian Affairs)

BLM Bureau of Land Management

BPA Bonneville Power Administration

CBAS Columbia Basin Archaeological Survey

CBIAC Columbia Basin Inter-Agency Council

CDAA Coulee Dam Amphibious Aircraft Company

CCSO Columbia Cascades Support Office, Seattle

CCT Colville Confederated Tribes

CMP Concessions Management Plan

CODA Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, Coulee Dam Recreational Area

(renamed Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area in 1997)

Corps U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

CRMP Cultural Resources Management Plan

CY Calendar Year

DARE Drug Abuse Resistance Education

DCP Development Concept Plan

DOI Department of the Interior

DSC Denver Service Center

EA Environmental Assessment

EIS Environmental Impact Statement

EPA Environmental Protection Agency

FY Fiscal Year

GCNC Grand Coulee Navigation Company

GMP General Management Plan

HBC Hudson's Bay Company
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Table of Contents)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhit.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:01 PM]

I & RM Interpretation and Resource Management

IAF Ice Age Floods

ICC Indian Claims Commission

IPM Integrated Pest Management

IRA Indian Reorganization Act

LARO Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area

LRCC Lake Roosevelt Coordinating Committee

LRCMA Lake Roosevelt Cooperative Management Agreement

LRCOG Lake Roosevelt Council of Governments

LRPOA Lake Roosevelt Property Owners Association

NAGPRA Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act

NHPA National Historic Preservation Act

NPCA National Parks and Conservation Association

NPPC Northwest Power Planning Council

NRA National Recreation Area

OIA Office of Indian Affairs (later Bureau of Indian Affairs)

ORV off-road vehicle

PA Programmatic Agreement

Park

Service National Park Service

Reclamation U.S. Bureau of Reclamation

RMP Resource Management Plan

RRE Roosevelt Recreational Enterprises

SCS Soil Conservation Service

SHPO State Historic Preservation Office

STI Spokane Tribe of Indians

TVA Tennessee Valley Authority

USGS U.S. Geological Survey

VAC Visitor Arrival Center

WPA Works Projects Administration

YACC Young Adults Conservation Corps

YCC Youth Conservation Corps

ABBREVIATIONS USED IN ENDNOTES

EWU Eastern Washington University, Cheney

GPO Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

HFC Harpers Ferry Center Photo Archives, Harpers Ferry, West Virginia

LARO.FS.1107 files maintained by LARO's Natural Resources Manager, Fort Spokane

LARO.HQ.ADM LARO's central files, park headquarters

LARO.HQ.CIO files maintained by LARO's Chief of Interpretation

LARO.HQ.LIB files or books available in LARO's library, park headquarters

LARO.HQ.PAO files maintained by LARO's Program Assistant's Office

LARO.HQ.RMO files maintained by LARO's Resource Manager's Office
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Table of Contents)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhit.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:01 PM]

LARO.HQ.SUP files maintained by LARO's Superintendent

LARO.HQ.100-

USA files maintained in the attic at LARO headquarters

LARO.KF.2004 files maintained by LARO's Archaeologist, Kettle Falls

NARA-PAR National Archives and Records Administration, Pacific Alaska Region,

Seattle

NARA-PSR National Archives and Records Administration, Pacific Sierra Region, San

Bruno, California

n.d. not dated

n.p. no place

NPS National Park Service

RG Record Group

UI University of Idaho

USBR U.S. Bureau of Reclamation

UW University of Washington, Seattle

WASO Washington, D.C., Office, NPS

WPA Works Projects Administration (Works Progress Administration)

WSA Washington State Archives, Olympia

WSA-CRB Washington State Archives, Central Regional Branch, Ellensburg

WSA-ERB Washington State Archives, Eastern Regional Branch, Cheney

WSU Washington State University, Pullman

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

laro/adhi/adhit.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Foreword)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhif.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:02 PM]

IN REPLY REFER

TO:

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

FOREWORD

United States Department of the

Interior

NATIONAL PARK SERVICE

Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area

1008 Crest Drive

Coulee Dam, Washington 99116

FOREWORD

This administrative history is one of a series being done throughout the National Park

System. It adds to our knowledge and understanding of Lake Roosevelt National Recreation

Area and how it came to be.

The study chronicles the establishment of the recreation area from its roots in the Grand

Coulee Dam project to the present. It traces how the area has been managed and operated

over time by the National Park Service. It also portrays various issues that have been

associated with the recreation area since its establishment in 1946.

While administrative histories are of interest to a wide range of individuals, they are

particularly useful for Park Service staff to help them better understand why the area looks

and operates the way it does due to decisions made and policies implemented over the years

by their predecessors. It provides a context for making management decisions on issues, some

of which have been present for decades.

This document was prepared for the National Park Service under contract with Tracks of the

Past and Flume Creek Historical Services, consulting firms based in Columbia Falls,

Montana, and Sandpoint, Idaho, respectively. The primary authors are Kathryn L. McKay and

Nancy F. Renk. Through the use of outside parties to produce these studies, the National Park

Service hopes to provide an independent review of the events and circumstances that have

shaped this unit of the National Park System. As such, the views expressed are those of the

authors based on their research and contacts with numerous individuals having knowledge

about various aspects of the National Recreation Area.

This history of Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area is a "living" one. As additional

information comes to light about the events described in this document and as subsequent

events occur relevant to the unit's administration, revisions of this document will be made as

appropriate.

Vaughn L. Baker

Superintendent
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Foreword)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhif.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:02 PM]

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

laro/adhi/adhif.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Preface)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhip.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:03 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

PREFACE

Many, many people helped us with this project. First and foremost, we would like to thank

the current and recent employees of Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area. We

understand why the park has a reputation for friendly staff and a good work environment!

Those who were particularly helpful included Vaughn Baker, Sherry Dotson, Dan Hand,

Lynne Brougher, Roberta Miller, Ray Dashiell, Linda Morgan, Dan Mason, Scott Hebner,

Karen Taylor-Goodrich, Marty Huseman, Ray DePuydt, and Gina Arnold. Past employees

and their spouses who agreed to interviews included Gerry Tays, Dan Brown, Don and

Connie Everts, Bill and Doris Schieber, Gary Kuiper, Tom Teaford, and Sis Robinson. We

greatly enjoyed talking with and learning from each of these people. We also appreciate their

useful comments on drafts of this report and their patience with follow-up inquiries.

Librarians, archivists, and museum employees throughout the Pacific Northwest provided

tremendous assistance to us as we searched for documents and other materials related to the

history of the Lake Roosevelt area and the National Park Service. These include: Pat Witham

of the Grant County Historical Museum; Tim Brooks and Cheryl Grunlose of the Colville

Tribal Museum; Gary Schmauder of Lincoln County Historical Museum; the National

Archives branches in San Bruno, California (and we'd like also like to thank our research

assistant Marcia Plancon for the many linear feet of photocopies she sent us from San

Bruno); Joyce Justice at the National Archives branch at Seattle, Washington; Frank

Sciamanda of Washington State University's Holland Library, Manuscripts, Archives, and

Special Collections; Washington State Archives in Tacoma; Gary Lundell at University of

Washington, Manuscripts and University Archives; Bonneville Power Administration Library

in Portland, Oregon; David Hastings at the Washington State Archives in Olympia; Grant

County Archives in Ephrata; Grand Coulee Library in Grand Coulee; Flathead County

Library in Kalispell, Montana; Washington State Archives, Central Regional Branch,

Ellensburg; Nancy Compau at the Northwest Room, Spokane Public Library; Shirley Dodson

at the Stevens County Historical Society; Karen Deseve of the Eastern Washington State

Historical Society Research Library and Archives; Jeff Creighton of the Washington State

Archives, Eastern Regional Branch; Rodney Cawston, Aletha Heath, and Jayleen Palmer of

the Colville Confederated Tribes Archives in Nespelem; and Bryon Flett, archivist for the

Spokane Tribe of Indians in Wellpinit.

We would particularly like to thank our technical contact, Gretchen Luxenberg of the

Columbia Cascades Support Office, for her cheerful and knowledgeable assistance with all

aspects of the project. Former Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area employees who

revised drafts of this report included Kelly Cash, Art Hathaway, Gary Kuiper, and Gerry

Tays. We also benefited greatly from the review comments of people who currently work at

Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area. We would like to give special thanks to the

National Park Service reviewers not at Lake Roosevelt, including Cathy Gilbert, David

Louter, Janet McDonnell, Stephanie Toothman, Bill Walters, and Fred York.

At the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation office in Grand Coulee, the following people provided

easy access to documents and photographs and answered questions: librarian Marjoe
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Preface)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhip.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:03 PM]

Richards, Jack Scoles and Judy Quill in the photograph archives, and Public Information

Officer Craig Sprankle. In addition, Regional Archaeologist Lynne MacDonald in Boise gave

freely of her time to discuss cultural resource management issues at Lake Roosevelt.

We appreciate the willingness of the Colville Confederated Tribes and the Spokane Tribe of

Indians to cooperate with our research at their tribal archives. We regret, however, that the

documents we requested have not been located to date. We did find in other repositories

copies of many important documents prepared by the tribes, and these helped greatly in

understanding their concerns in relation to the management of Lake Roosevelt. Lake

Roosevelt National Recreation Area staff submitted draft copies of this report to the Colville

Confederated Tribes and the Spokane Tribe of Indians but received no comments or

corrections.

Both authors of this report live on tributaries to the Columbia River: Kathy on the Flathead

River in northwestern Montana and Nancy along the Clark Fork-Pend Oreille system in

northern Idaho. When we began this project, we spent one day late in the fall of 1998 driving

around Lake Roosevelt. We watched the landscape change from arid lands near the dam to

forests at the upper end of the lake and then back to arid as we returned to Coulee Dam.

Despite the changes in the landscape, one force tied it all together: the Columbia River

flowing slowly through the land as it flows through our lives. The story we uncovered during

the course of this project is one of high hopes, grand plans, insufficient funding, conflict,

challenges, mistakes, and successes. Many players have been involved in creating and

operating the national recreation area, making its history rich and complex. We hope you

enjoy exploring the story as much as we have.

Kathryn L. McKay

Tracks of the Past

Columbia Falls, Montana

Nancy F. Renk

Flume Creek Historical Services

Sandpoint, Idaho

January 2002

Note: The unit of the National Park System discussed in this report was known as the Coulee

Dam National Recreation Area (CODA) from the 1940s until 1997, when its name was

changed to the Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area (LARO). The current name, LARO,

is used throughout this report except in direct quotes or citations, regardless of the year in

which the event or activity occurred.

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

laro/adhi/adhip.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Introduction)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi0.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:05 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

INTRODUCTION

For thousands of years, the upper Columbia River sustained the people living within its

watershed. Early people established camps and homes along the river, followed in more

recent times by others who also built houses and communities along the banks of the wide,

flowing river. By 1941, however, the federal government had dammed the river at the north

end of Grand Coulee, creating a man-made reservoir named Lake Roosevelt that inundated

homes, farms, and businesses and disrupted the lives of many. But government officials also

envisioned the new lake's potential to attract visitors and residents for a new purpose —

recreation — and National Park Service representatives began to plan for recreational use of

the area.

Park Service employees of the 1940s, from people in the field on up to the Director himself,

argued the merit of including "national recreational areas" within the National Park System.

After considerable hesitation and disagreement, the Park Service determined that Lake

Roosevelt was nationally significant, paving the way for it to become a National Recreation

Area (NRA). Although Congress never enacted specific authorizing legislation to create the

park, it passed generic legislation that gave the Park Service authority at the NRA. In

addition, Congress has recognized the unit with line-item appropriations since 1949, and in

1970 it became a unit of the National Park System.

Many challenges face the managers of Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area. Some result

from the boundaries of the park, established in the late 1930s and modified in later years.

The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) acquired all land above the water, which is at

1,290 feet at full pool, up to the "taking line" at the 1,310-foot contour line; this strip is often

referred to as the freeboard lands. Because it was often easier and in some cases cheaper

simply to purchase entire parcels rather than partial tracts of land, the boundary line for the

NRA is irregular and sometimes goes above the 1,310-foot taking line. The width of the

shoreline strip administered by the Park Service thus varies from about fifty to several

hundred feet, depending on the steepness of the slope.

Lake Roosevelt's shoreline totals more than five hundred miles of cliffs and gentle slopes.

Today, the Park Service manages 61 percent of the narrow strip of federal land along the

shoreline of Lake Roosevelt and 58 percent of the total water surface area. The Colville

Confederated Tribes and the Spokane Tribe of Indians manage most of the remainder of the

land and water. Reclamation retains management of the dam, its immediate area, and a few

other locations considered necessary for reservoir operations. Management of the reservoir

and its resources is complicated by the fact that nine federal agencies, two tribes, four state

agencies, six counties, and four cities have interests in various aspects of this essentially

linear resource.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Introduction)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi0.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:05 PM]

Map of Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area. Map courtesy of

National Park Service, Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area.

Physical Characteristics of Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area

The 1,259-mile Columbia River flows out of Canada and across eastern Washington and then

forms the border between Washington and Oregon. The river contributes some 89 percent of

the water that flows into Lake Roosevelt today, most of it from the portion of the watershed

north of the international boundary. Two major tributaries to Lake Roosevelt - thirty-mile

Spokane River and fifteen-mile Kettle River - contribute about 10 percent of the inflow to

Lake Roosevelt. The upstream flow is regulated by nine major reservoirs and numerous

smaller reservoirs and associated power plants. From its source in British Columbia to its

mouth near Astoria, Oregon, the Columbia falls 2,600 feet, thus providing many potential

hydropower sites. There is often an observable current in the upper stretches. Of the thirty
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Introduction)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi0.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:05 PM]

The general scenic effect

of the Reservoir Area is

pastoral rather than

spectacular, and a

variety of conditions

present ever-changing

effects. Vistas tend

toward broad landscapes

with long stretches of

the reservoir flanked by

green rolling hills

receding toward distant

mountains. 

-- NPS, "Columbia

River Reservoir Area,"

1944 [1]

dams operating on the Columbia River in 1997, Grand Coulee Dam is the largest storage

structure. [2] The terms "lake" and "reservoir" are used interchangeably in this report.

The primary attraction of LARO is the 132-mile-long manmade reservoir behind Grand Coulee Dam, first filled in June

1942. The reservoir's surface area is about 81,000 acres, and

its recreation potential in this arid landscape was recognized

from the beginning. Little Falls Dam on the Spokane River

and the town of Barstow on the Kettle River mark the upper

limits of the NRA on those two tributaries. The width varies

from about 0.5 to 1.5 miles, and only two ferries and two

bridges provide crossings for vehicles. The reservoir is drawn

down each winter in varying amounts, generally not more than

fifty feet. It is normally near full from July through the

summer and fall recreation season, and the water depths range

from four hundred feet upstream of the dam to fourteen feet

near the international border. The reservoir ends some thirty

miles short of the border. The national recreation area includes

shoreline along about twenty-five miles of the Spokane River

Arm of the lake and about seven miles along the Kettle River

Arm.

Lake Roosevelt lies in two strikingly different physiographic provinces: the Columbia Plateau

in the southern half of the lake and the Okanogan Highlands in the northern half. In the

southern portion, lava flows and Ice Age Flood events have shaped sheer basalt cliffs that

often rise nearly one thousand feet above the lake surface. In many locations, the geology is

completely different on each side of the lake. Occasional lichen growths on terraced basalt

cliffs provide bright splashes of color in brilliant yellows, reds, and greens. The mountains in

the northern portion are largely comprised of metamorphic rock and Pleistocene sedimentary

features, and limestone cliffs rise above the lake as it narrows near the northern boundary of

the NRA.

The Columbia Plateau region covers the area south of the Spokane and Columbia rivers. This

area is generally treeless, hot, and arid, and the vegetation is characterized by semi-arid

grasslands and sagebrush communities altered by irrigated agricultural lands. The Okanogan

Highlands have a more mountainous topography, with a transitional ponderosa pine and

Douglas-fir forest community. Ponderosa pine becomes more dense the farther north one

goes along the lake. Rocky benches with a growth of scattered ponderosa pine are interrupted

by rolling grasslands that in places slope gently towards the water's edge. The bordering hills

become steeper to the north, with outcroppings of limestone and granite.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Introduction)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi0.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:05 PM]

Spring Canyon beach in the arid Columbia Plateau part of the

national recreation area, ca. 1972. Photo courtesy of National Park

Service, Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area ("A Boater's

Guide to Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake," draft, ca. 1972).

Ground-hugging fog occurs frequently during the winter, and summer lightning storms are

common. Precipitation ranges from ten to twenty inches per year and snow cover from four

to thirty-six inches, both increasing as one moves northward.

Open-water habitat in the lake and its tributaries supports a variety of aquatic vascular plants.

Because of the fluctuating lake levels, perennial marshes along the lakeshore are few;

intermittent wetland areas that flood seasonally are more common. They are dominated by

reed canary grass.

Wildlife in the Lake Roosevelt area is plentiful. Larger animals include whitetail and mule

deer, elk, black bear, and coyote, with smaller mammals represented by porcupine,

chipmunks, marmot, beaver, and ground squirrel. Large numbers of ducks, geese, and other

waterfowl use the Pacific Flyway, and various resident and migratory birds are seen,

including shorebirds and gallinaceous birds such as native grouse, raptors, and passerines.

Bald eagles winter and nest in the area, and peregrine falcons have recently been

reintroduced. Few if any of the large mammals are permanent residents of the strip of

shoreline under Park Service jurisdiction. Non-native fauna includes cattle, horses, ringnecked pheasant, Merriam turkey, chukar partridge, and California quail.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Introduction)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi0.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:05 PM]

Clover Leaf Beach in the Okanogan Highlands part of the national

recreation area. Photo courtesy of National Park Service, Harpers

Ferry Center.

Most species of fish that currently inhabit Lake Roosevelt have been introduced except for

cutthroat trout and sturgeon. Sport fish include rainbow trout, native whitefish, kokanee,

walleye, cutthroat trout, Dolly Varden trout, and largemouth and smallmouth bass. Until at

least the 1960s, "scrap fish" were much more abundant than sport fish in Lake Roosevelt;

these included such species as carp, squawfish, chub, sucker, shiner, perch, tench, sunfish,

and sculpin.

Long-lived Issues

LARO was officially created in 1946, although the National Park Service had taken the lead

in managing the area and drawing up plans for recreational sites along the lakeshore since

1941. As soon as the lake started to form, area residents began testing the waters with small

watercraft. Because of severe budget limitations, LARO was unable to provide visitor

facilities until the early 1950s. The slow development angered some area residents and

hindered private development by concessionaires. In 1949, the Park Service first began to

propose regulations governing a wide variety of uses of the lake and the surrounding strip of

federal land. The controversy that developed over these regulations in the next couple of

years left a legacy of resentment and bitterness among some area residents that has been

passed down to the younger generations and persists today.

Even more significant has been the major disruption of the traditional lifeways of native

peoples of the area. Euroamericans took traditional tribal lands, pushing tribal members onto

reservations. The salmon fishery, an extremely important source of nourishment and cultural

identity for American Indians of the region, began to diminish in the late 1800s and then

abruptly ended in the upstream waters when Grand Coulee Dam was constructed. The

Colville Confederated Tribes and the Spokane Tribe of Indians eventually demanded

compensation for the loss of their fishery and lands, and in the 1970s they began to take over
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Introduction)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi0.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:05 PM]

the management of recreational facilities on their respective reservations. Until then, all

recreation facilities had been administered by the Park Service. After years of difficult

negotiations, a new multi-party agreement for managing the federal lands and waters at Lake

Roosevelt was finally signed in 1990. This agreement gave the Colville and Spokane tribes

control over the "Reservation Zone," land and water on each reservation that comprises about

45 percent of the total. But here again, resentment stemming from decades of

misunderstanding lingers on.

Developing recreational facilities for the public proved difficult in the early years, chiefly due

to the inability of the Park Service to provide much funding to the new NRA for necessary

developments such as access roads, bathhouses, campgrounds, and comfort stations. Early

staff became expert at putting government surplus materials and equipment to good use. The

pace of development picked up considerably in the late 1950s and 1960s, as a result of the

Park Service's Mission 66 program. LARO was developed with Mission 66 monies, but these

did not come near the amount that had been hoped for. The success and popularity of many

of the early facilities depended on the creativity and "can do" attitude of Park Service staff. In

more recent years, major concessionaires have begun to play an important role on the lake,

offering rental houseboats and extensive marina facilities to visitors.

Cultural resource management, essentially a non-issue at LARO until the 1960s, has become

one of the most critical management issues in recent years, especially since the 1980s. Both

the Colville Confederated Tribes and the Spokane Tribe of Indians have asserted their rights

to manage cultural resources, not only on lands within the Reservation Zone but also on lands

throughout the NRA that they consider to be their area of traditional use. The Bonneville

Power Administration began funding cultural resource work at Lake Roosevelt in 1991,

adding another federal agency to the complex jurisdictional situation. These changes have

strained relations among the managing partners at LARO and ultimately have led to a new

approach to cultural resource management.

Until the 1980s, interpretation at LARO was focused on water-based recreation. A secondary

theme was the military period at Fort Spokane. Since then, interpretation has received more

funding, and the focus has shifted away from teaching recreational skills to visitors to

encompass stories of the Ice Age Floods, the natural environment, and various aspects of the

broad story of cross-cultural interactions.

Park involvement with natural resources issues broadened greatly in the 1990s, when LARO

created a Natural Resources Manager position and tried, sometimes successfully, to obtain

Park Service and outside funding for various natural resource-related projects. When

developing management policies for natural resources such as the fishery, forests, noxious

weeds, and water quality, the Park Service focused on cooperation with other agencies, some

with much more developed research programs and technical staff than the Park Service could

support.

More recent conflicts over special park uses mirrored the earlier ones, pitting nearby residents

against the Park Service. Early park staff signed many recreational, industrial, agricultural,

and other short-term and long-term special use permits in the years when park use was

relatively light. Inadequate staffing, along with boundaries that were either ignored or

unmarked, led to many encroachments over time. Eventually these early uses came back to

haunt the Park Service, and LARO personnel began tightening policies and enforcement in

line with Servicewide directives. Local people resisted the changes, however, and took their

complaints to high political levels. The Park Service recognized the need for adequate lake

access and offered permittees the opportunity to convert community docks to community

access points. Most special use permits have now been phased out.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Introduction)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi0.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:05 PM]

Some issues that were once major concerns of LARO personnel have now become less

significant or have been taken over by other agencies. These include landslides and the

removal of floating woody debris on the lake. Fluctuating lake levels have caused

management headaches since the late 1960s, particularly during and after the 1980s, when

significant drawdowns during the summer recreation season began to occur. Although often

blamed for these disruptions, the Park Service has a voice but is not a decision-maker in the

process that leads to such fluctuations. Instead, those decisions are made by the National

Marine Fisheries Service, whose primary concern is downstream salmon recovery; the Army

Corps of Engineers for flood control; the Bonneville Power Administration for efficient

power generation; and the Bureau of Reclamation for irrigation. LARO employees have had

to deal with changes in lake levels, with the primary solution being retrofitting lakeshore

recreational facilities to handle lower water levels.

Over the decades, LARO has shared many of the management dilemmas faced by other units

of the National Park System. How can the park develop necessary visitor facilities and

services when only limited budgets are provided? How should an area best be managed when

many governmental, tribal, and private entities have an interest? What role should the Park

Service play in the many resource issues facing the park? The answers to these questions

often have not come easily. Some challenges have been resolved; others remain to be

addressed. LARO's first Superintendent, Claude Greider, mentioned in 1948 the "long road

ahead" facing Park Service managers of the new recreational area. Many miles on this road

have already been traveled, and current and future employees will make their own way along

many more miles in the years to come — meeting obstacles, establishing landmarks, and

moving forward.

This study documents the long and complex story of the establishment of LARO and how it

has been managed since its creation. First and foremost, it is a record for park staff — new

and old — so they can gain an understanding of how things "came to be" in this Park Service

unit. The authors have tried to strike a balance in presenting various perspectives on the

management of the NRA. They have endeavored to tell the full story of Lake Roosevelt

National Recreation Area, including the perspectives of the tribes, using the materials

available to them. Perhaps future researchers with better access to tribal resources will be able

to further fill in the picture and add to our understanding of the complex history of this unit

of the National Park System.

Endnotes

1 NPS, "Columbia River Reservoir Area, Washington: General Report and Development

Outline," June 1944: 1, LARO.HQ.100-USA.3.1.

2 Jon L. Riedel, "Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area, Washington, Water Resources

Scoping Report," NPS, March 1997, p. 25.

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

laro/adhi/adhi0.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 1)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi1.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:07 PM]

This was our country. God

created this Indian Country,

and it was like he spread out a

big blanket, and he put the

Indians on it. The Indians were

created here in this country,

truly and honestly, and that was

the time our rivers started to

run. Then God put fish in the

rivers, and he put deer and elk

in the mountains and buffalo

upon the plains, and roots and

berries in the field, and God

made laws through which there

came the increase of fish and

game. When the Creator gave

us Indians life, we awakened

and as soon as we saw the fish

and the game we knew that

they were made for us. For the

men God gave the deer, the elk

and the buffalo to hunt for food

and hides; for the women God

made the roots and the berries

for them to gather, and the

Indians grew and multiplied as

a people, and gave their thanks

to the Creator. When we were

created we were given our

ground to live on, and from that

time these were our rights. 

--Statement of Colville and

Okanogan Chiefs, 1925 [1]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 1:

When Rivers Ran Free

Native or aboriginal people have lived in the Upper

Columbia region for over 9,000 years. Extensive

archaeological excavations of several sites at Kettle

Falls suggest seven distinct periods that show times of

relative abundance alternating with periods of scarcity.

The salmon fishery at Kettle Falls, so significant in

historical times, varied in importance for these early

people; during one prolonged period, heavy flooding

interrupted the salmon runs, forcing people to depend

on other available food sources. Approximately 3,400

years ago, however, after salmon reestablished their

runs as far as Arrow Lakes and eventually to

Columbia Lake in British Columbia, people once again

exploited this resource at Kettle Falls. The activity

increased dramatically about 2,600 years ago, and the

fishery became a prominent gathering place where

people from a wide region came to fish, trade, and

socialize. By the time of contact (when Indians first

encountered non-Indians), Salish speakers at the falls

included the Shwayip (Colville), whose territory

encompassed the Columbia River from the fishery at

Kettle Falls upriver to the Little Dalles (south of

Northport) and downriver to the Inchelium area; the

Sinaikst (Lakes) people, with lands to the north; the

Sanpoil, with lands to the southwest; and the

Okanogan even farther west. Those speaking Flathead

dialects of the Salish language included Spokane,

Kalispel, Flathead, and Chewelah, while the Kutenai

spoke a language unrelated to others in the region. [2]

Indians of the Upper Columbia region felt the impact

of Euroamericans long before contact. Horses, first

brought to the American Southwest by Spaniards,

gradually moved north through inter-tribal trading and

arrived in the Columbia Plateau region ca.1730-1750.

These animals dramatically increased the mobility of

many tribes and enabled some to travel east to the Plains region to hunt buffalo. A more

insidious harbinger of Euroamericans arrived in the form of epidemics that decimated large

numbers of native people. The first outbreak of smallpox in the Colville region hit in 1782-

1783, prior to any direct contact with non-Indians. In the mid-nineteenth century, a rapid

succession of both smallpox and measles epidemics between 1846 and 1853 killed many

Indians and further weakened the tribes. [3]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 1)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi1.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:07 PM]

Following early Spanish and Russian claims along the Pacific coast, American and British

interests spent several decades vying for control of valuable lands and resources of the

Pacific Northwest. The initial attraction was furs, especially for the lucrative sea otter trade

with China. Farther inland, beavers were prized for their pelts; the soft underfur was felted

and turned into top hats, a popular fashion accessory of the day.

Fur traders approached the Inland Northwest from both east and west. The first to document

his travels through the region was David Thompson, an experienced explorer, map maker,

and trader with the Canadian-based North West Company. He had two primary objectives as

he moved into the region: establishing a chain of trading posts and exploring the Columbia

River to its mouth. Thompson and his small group of men built Kullyspell House on Lake

Pend Oreille and Saleesh House farther up the Clark Fork River in the fall of 1809. Spokane

House, near the junction of the Little Spokane and Spokane rivers, followed the next year.

[4]

Thompson spent his limited time in the region exploring and mapping trails and river courses.

His arrival at the Columbia River in June 1811 added Euroamericans to the diverse mix of

cultures already found at Kettle Falls. The salmon season was about to begin, and Thompson

was impressed with the village he found at Ilthkoyape (his transcription of the native name

for Kettle Falls). He described sheds about twenty feet wide and from thirty to sixty feet

long, made from boards hand-split from large cedar logs. These structures had a covering of

boards and mats to protect the salmon being smoke-dried on poles inside. [5]

Indians fishing from platform and rocks at Kettle Falls, no date.

Photo courtesy of National Park Service, Lake Roosevelt National

Recreation Area (LARO 3245).

Later observers described the activities at the fishery. Artist Paul Kane visited in August 1847

at the height of the salmon run when the fish moved in "one continuous body . . . more

resembling a flock of birds than anything else in their extraordinary leap up the falls,

beginning at sunrise and ceasing at the approach of night." Father Pierre Jean DeSmet

watched men catching up to three thousand salmon each day, using spears and J-shaped

baskets placed in the falls. After cleaning and filleting the catch, the women hung the fish to

dry in the sheds. Excess fish were used later for trading. [6]

Thompson built a canoe while visiting the busy fishery and then launched his voyage down
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 1)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi1.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:07 PM]

the Columbia, reaching the Pacific Ocean in July 1811. To his great disappointment, he found

that upstart Americans from the Pacific Fur Company already had established Fort Astoria.

Two Astorians who accompanied him on his return trip up the Columbia built three posts,

two of which competed directly with ones previously established by Thompson. These

included Fort Okanogan (1811) at the mouth of the Okanogan River; Fort Spokane (1812),

just a stone's throw away from Spokane House; and another post (1812) near Saleesh House.

The rivalry was short-lived, however. The outbreak of the War of 1812 helped convince the

Astorians to sell their assets to the North West Company, which in turn merged with the

Hudson's Bay Company (HBC) in 1821. [7]

Within a short time, HBC officials decided to cut expenses by moving the district

headquarters from Spokane House to Kettle Falls. Sir George Simpson, HBC Governor in

North America, preferred the new location for its easy access to the Columbia River as well

as its agricultural potential. He negotiated with an Indian leader who gave a tract of land for

a trading post but refused to share the Kettle Falls fishery. The Spokane Indians were

unhappy with the loss of a post in their territory. "The Spokans [sic] will not be pleased at

the removal of the fort," Simpson wrote to HBC employee John Work in April 1825. "You

must secure the Chiefs with a few presents besides fair words." [8]

Construction of Fort Colvile began in August 1825 but proceeded slowly, due in part to the

apparent ineptitude of some of the crew. The new quarters were ready by the following

spring and provided a log stockade surrounding a number of log buildings, constructed in the

post-and-sill style common to HBC posts. Simpson described Fort Colvile in the early 1840s

as "cleaner and more comfortable" than any other fort between there and the Red River. [9]

Simpson's belief in the agricultural potential of the Colville Valley proved accurate. By 1841

the HBC farm spread over two hundred acres, two-thirds of which grew crops of wheat,

potatoes, barley, oats, corn, peas, and garden produce. The company's cattle herd had

increased from the initial bull and two heifers in 1825 to nearly two hundred by 1841. Farm

facilities expanded in 1830 with the construction of a water-powered grist mill on the

Colville River. In addition to supplying its own needs, Fort Colvile sold cheese, butter, and

pork to the Russians at Sitka, Alaska, and sent flour, cornmeal, pork, and other products to

HBC operations throughout the Pacific Northwest. [10]

Fort Colvile buildings, no date. Note the post-and-sill construction of

the log structures. Photo courtesy of National Park Service, Lake

Roosevelt National Recreation Area (LARO 2443).
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 1)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi1.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:07 PM]

HBC's principal business was not farming, of course, but furs, and it enlisted the local Indian

population in this endeavor. Indians did most of the trapping in the Colvile District, trading

pelts from beaver, otter, muskrat, bear, marten, and other animals for weapons (knives, guns,

and ammunition), tools (traps, axes, and firesteels), domestic items (wool blankets, cotton

cloth, mirrors, and beads), and tobacco. HBC generated considerable money from this trade.

"We made an enormous profit on the Indian trade," wrote HBC employee Ross Cox in 1832.

Traders would exchange a gun, worth approximately $6, for twenty beaver pelts, worth $40

to $50 each. Similarly, a couple of yards of cloth, worth less than $1, traded for eight skins.

[11]

The trade relationship altered many aspects of traditional native life. Indians quickly became

dependent on traders for material goods, particularly ammunition and tobacco. Although Fort

Colvile was not a traditional winter camp, it attracted Indians who began to winter nearby,

taking food from the traders during hard winters such as 1830-1831. Gifts of food and

tobacco to chiefs and other Indian leaders gradually eroded the power of traditional leaders

until the HBC traders became authority figures in the region. HBC employees encouraged the

men to trap during the usually sedentary winter months, with varying success. Prostitution,

drinking, and gambling-induced poverty all had negative impacts on traditional culture. On a

more positive side, intergroup warfare appears to have decreased after traders arrived.

Paradoxically, the acquisition of guns and ammunition put the Interior Salish on a more even

footing with the Plains tribes. [12]

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

laro/adhi/adhi1.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 2)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi2.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:10 PM]

Roll on, Columbia, roll on,

Roll on, Columbia, roll on,

Your power is turning the

darkness to dawn

Roll on, Columbia, roll on.

And far up the river is Grand

Coulee Dam,

The mightiest thing ever built

by a man,

To run the great factories and

water the land,

It's roll on, Columbia, roll on.

-- "Roll On, Columbia," words

by Woody Guthrie, 1941

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 2:

The River Becomes a Lake

The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) began constructing Grand Coulee Dam in the

late 1930s after years of studies to determine the best ways to irrigate the Columbia Basin.

The government purchased the land that would be flooded, and several thousand laborers

cleared the reservoir area. During the summer of 1942, the reservoir behind the dam filled

with water, and a 132-mile stretch of the mighty Columbia River became Lake Roosevelt.

Construction of Grand Coulee Dam

The decision to build the massive Grand Coulee Dam was not made casually. The

controversy revolved around the location, design, and ultimate purpose of such a structure,

not over its impacts upon humans and the natural environment. The dam was ultimately built

as part of the Columbia Basin Irrigation Project, a huge federal project designed to irrigate

much of the arid land in eastern Washington.

Two methods of irrigating the Columbia Basin were

proposed and examined. The idea to build a large dam

on the Columbia River and pump water into a storage

reservoir in the Grand Coulee for irrigation was first

proposed in the 1890s. It was countered by a rival plan

to bring water to the Columbia plateau by a 134-mile

gravity-flow canal from the Pend Oreille River in

northern Idaho. The controversy over the relative

benefits of these two schemes, the "pumping plan" and

the "gravity plan," polarized Washington and national

reclamation politics through the 1920s. Rufus Woods

and the Columbia River Development League

promoted the idea of a dam at the head of the Grand

Coulee that would generate hydroelectric power to

pump water above the dam into the Grand Coulee.

In 1918, Woods published an influential story on the

idea in his newspaper, the Wenatchee Daily World.

Washington power companies and the city of Spokane favored diverting water to the

Columbia Basin, and they created the Columbia Basin League to promote that concept. Each

side acted in its own self-interest, and the bitter debate lasted from 1918 until 1933. [1]

The Reclamation Service (now the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation), the Army Corps of

Engineers, and engineers sponsored by the state of Washington and by private organizations

spent over thirty years surveying the area and preparing reports on the feasibility of the two

methods of irrigating the Columbia Basin. A decisive study known as the Butler Report,

completed in 1931, provided an honest assessment of the two plans, coming out on the side of
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 2)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi2.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:10 PM]

the pumping plan largely for economic reasons. Once the "pumpers" had won the prolonged

debate, however, they still were faced with the daunting task of finding state or federal

funding for the costly project. [2]

Site of Grand Coulee Dam looking north across the Columbia River,

January 23, 1934. Note the ferry crossing. Photo courtesy of

National Park Service, Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area

(LARO 2622).

The federal role in damming the Columbia tied in well with the New Deal belief that the

government should stimulate economic recovery by putting people to work and encouraging

the creation of public utilities. Franklin D. Roosevelt, elected president of the United States in

1932, asked for plans for a low dam with foundations strong enough to support a higher dam

later, one that would back water up to the Canadian border. In July 1933, Public Works

Administration funds were allotted for the state to build a low dam at the Grand Coulee, and

a few months later it became a federal project to be built by Reclamation. The cost was to be

repaid from net revenues obtained from the sale of hydroelectric power. Within a few years,

four gigantic concrete dams were all being constructed at the same time: Hoover (Boulder),

Shasta, Bonneville, and Grand Coulee. Hoover Dam, authorized in 1930, set the stage for

integrated river basin planning. The New Deal backed the multiple-purpose concept for dams

and also emphasized federal control and planning for the development of entire river basins.

The Columbia River was soon well on its way to becoming an orderly and regulated

waterway, managed to meet the needs of humans. [3]

Congress created the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) in 1937. Although public

power advocates had hoped for a Columbia Valley Authority modeled after the Tennessee

Valley Authority, the BPA was not given such comprehensive authority. Its role was to

market the power generated at federal dams, including Grand Coulee Dam. Because the BPA

is charged with repaying the investment the federal government made in constructing the dam

and the annual maintenance and operations costs, that agency also is involved in the

operational aspects and the associated effects on cultural resources, recreation, endangered
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 2)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi2.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:10 PM]

species, and other resources. Reclamation, however, operates and maintains Grand Coulee

Dam and associated facilities. Title to all the land is held by the United States of America.

[4]

Aerial view of the towns of Mason City (foreground), Engineers

Town (across the river), and Grand Coulee (background), April

1940. The Grand Coulee extends to the right in the distance. Photo

courtesy of U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Grand Coulee (USBR

Archives 536).

The project of building Grand Coulee Dam is remarkable for its magnitude but not for any

strikingly original technical accomplishments. The dam is a concrete, straight, gravity-type

dam that rests on bedrock granite. Work began in 1933. Frank A. Banks was appointed

Construction Engineer, and he stayed with the project until he retired in 1950. Soon some

eight thousand workers, many of them young, single men, were employed on the dam

construction project. Reclamation and the contractors constructed towns on both sides of the

river close to the dam site to house their employees. By the end of 1937, the east and west

sections of the dam had met. [5]

The decision to build Grand Coulee Dam higher than had originally been planned determined

the size of the reservoir behind the dam. In 1933, the dam was designed to be a 200-300-foot

low dam that would generate power and help in regulating navigation flows but would not aid

in the proposed irrigation project. The reservoir created by the low dam would have reached

1,111 feet in elevation. In June 1935, Reclamation issued a change order for construction of

the 500-foot high dam, which allowed for a reservoir reaching 1,290 feet in elevation and

extending to the Canadian border. The Rivers and Harbors Act, signed August 1935,

authorized the dam for the purposes of flood control, navigation, stream flow regulation,

storage and delivery of stored waters, reclamation of public lands and Indian reservations,

and the generation of hydroelectric power. Grand Coulee Dam had evolved into a major

national project, not just a local New Deal relief measure. [6]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 2)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi2.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:10 PM]

Drawing, ca. 1933, showing the difference in reservoir size between

the low and high dams proposed for the Grand Coulee project. Photo

courtesy of Washington State University (Grand Coulee Dam Site

file, box 2A, Bridges and Dams, PC2).

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

laro/adhi/adhi2.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi3.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:11 PM]

The issues studied by the Joint

Investigations included types of

farm economy (Problems 1-3);

water requirements (Problems

4-5); size of farm units

(Problems 6-7); farm layout

and equipment (Problems 8-

10); allocation of costs and

repayments (Problems 11-14);

control of project lands

(Problems 15-16); rate of

development (Problem 17);

villages (Problem 18); roads

and other transportation

facilities (Problems 19-21);

underground waters (Problem

22); rural and village

electrification (Problem 23);

manufactures (Problem 24);

recreational resources and

needs (Problems 25-26); rural

community centers (Problem

27); and governmental

organization: public works

programming and financing

(Problem 28). [1]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 3:

A Long Road Lies Ahead: Establishing Lake

Roosevelt National Recreation Area

The gates on Grand Coulee Dam had closed by 1939, starting the impoundment of the

Columbia River that became Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake. Although federal and state planners

envisioned recreational development for the reservoir from the beginning, they faced many

other pressing issues with the massive Columbia Basin Irrigation Project, a major

development designed to benefit from the dam and reservoir. Recreation planning was

hindered initially by indecision over which agency should guide and manage recreation for

the area. Later planning and development efforts were retarded by a chronic lack of funding

and marred by interagency disputes. This made the early years of Lake Roosevelt National

Recreation Area (LARO), from the 1940s through the early 1950s, a constant struggle for

basic existence.

As the waters rose in the new lake, government

officials began comprehensive planning for the

Columbia Basin Irrigation Project. The U.S. Bureau of

Reclamation (Reclamation) hired Dr. Harlan H.

Barrows, head of the University of Chicago

Geography Department, as a planning consultant to

work with William E. Warne, Reclamation Director of

Information, and Dr. Edward N. Torbert, an economic

geographer with Reclamation. The outcome was the

Columbia Basin Joint Investigations that divided the

planning process into twenty-eight problems to study.

Over the next several years, nearly three hundred

people from forty local, state, and national agencies

worked on the planning. [2]

Early Planning: Committee on Problem No.

26

Two of the study problems dealt with recreation.

Reclamation headed up the committee for Problem No.

25 to locate and plan rural parks and recreation areas

within the boundaries of the irrigation project. Other

agencies on the committee included the National Park

Service (Park Service), Washington Department of

Highways, and the Washington State Planning

Council. The Park Service was asked to lead the much

larger Problem No. 26 committee with a mission "to

formulate plans to promote the recreational use of the reservoir above Grand Coulee Dam
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi3.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:11 PM]

The Problem No. 26 Committee,

headed by the National Park

Service, included eight other

federal agencies (Reclamation,

Army Corps of Engineers, Fish

and Wildlife Service, Office of

Indian Affairs, National

Resources Planning Board,

Public Roads Administration,

U.S. Bureau of Fisheries, and

U.S. Forest Service), nine

Washington state agencies

(Department of Conservation

and Development, Department

of Game, State Planning

Council, Department of Health,

Department of Highways,

Department of Public Lands,

State Game Commission, State

Progress Commission, and State

Parks Committee), two outdoor

organizations (Federation of

Western Outdoor Clubs and

Northwest Conservation

League), three chambers of

commerce (Seattle, Spokane,

and Ephrata), and the

Associated Chambers of

Commerce of Washington. [6]

and its shorelines, not in isolation but in effective inter-relationship with the other diversified

recreational assets of the Inland Empire and of contiguous areas, from all significant local,

regional, and national points of view." [3] The committee grew to include nine federal

agencies, nine state agencies, two outdoor organizations, and four chambers of commerce.

[4]

The Park Service moved rapidly to designate the investigation leader for the Problem No. 26

committee. "We believe that the best man to handle this work . . . will be Mr. C. E. Greider,"

advised Conrad L. Wirth, National Park Service Assistant Director. [5] At the time of his

appointment, Claude E. Greider was a State Supervisor with the agency in Portland, Oregon,

and he was later promoted to Associate Recreation Planner in the San Francisco office.

Greider took charge of the Problem No. 26 investigations in November 1939, beginning an

association with Lake Roosevelt that lasted nearly fourteen years and encompassed the initial

planning, establishment, and early development of LARO. [7]

Recreation planning for federal reservoirs was a new

direction for the Park Service at this time. During the

1930s, the agency administered the work of the

Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) at state parks

around the nation. Since most states had no

comprehensive planning for their parks, the Park

Service supported the Park, Parkway, and Recreation

Study Act of 1936 that enabled it to work with other

agencies nationwide to coordinate planning for parks

at local, state, and federal levels. By 1941, thirty-four

states, including Washington, had produced detailed

recreation reports. That same year, the Park Service

published its comprehensive report, A Study of the

Park and Recreation Problem of the United States,

outlining the state of parks nationwide and

recommending directions for the future. [8]

As part of its expanded duties during the 1930s, the

Park Service began working with Reclamation to

develop recreation plans for reservoirs administered by

the latter agency. Although it did not intend to remain

involved in reservoirs of lesser importance, the Park

Service recognized the nationally significant recreation

potential of larger reservoirs behind major dams, such

as Boulder Dam on the Colorado River. Nonetheless,

there was considerable disagreement within the agency

for many years over adding reservoir recreation sites to

the National Park System. Many questioned the

national significance of such areas, and some agency

stalwarts believed that Lake Mead, behind Boulder

Dam, was essentially a commercial playground. The

National Park System had never included parklands where recreation, not preservation, was

the primary focus; purists were further dismayed with the acceptance of hunting inside the

boundaries of these new areas. Secretary of the Interior Harold Ickes shared these concerns

but also saw the potential increases in appropriations if the Park Service assumed

responsibility for reservoir recreation. Reclamation also saw good potential in interagency

collaboration, and when it announced major investigations in 1945 to expand development of

western river systems, it asked the Park Service to do a systematic survey of the recreation

potential for all proposed projects. [9]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi3.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:11 PM]

As it undertook this new role, the Park Service looked to other recreational areas for

guidance. Regional Director John E. White requested enough copies of "Recreation

Development of the Tennessee River System" (House of Representatives Document No. 505)

for each member of the Problem No. 26 Committee. White had seen the report and told an

official of the Tennessee Valley Authority that "it appears that the problems you have solved

at TVA are quite identical with those facing our committee." [10] Four years earlier, R. F.

Bessey, a consultant with the Pacific Northwest Regional Planning Commission, heard about

the recreational development being done at reservoirs along the Mississippi River and noted

the parallels with Bonneville Dam and its reservoir. He requested information on the

planning and administration of the proposed park system. [11]

Before the committee could do much planning, its members needed to see the future reservoir

area. Greider visited Grand Coulee Dam in January 1940 for a firsthand look, touring parts of

the recreation area with Frank A. Banks, chief construction engineer for the dam. Later,

members of the committee spent a day in mid-April traveling to several prospective

recreation sites. They started up north at Kettle Falls, toured down to Hunters for lunch, and

then ended with a boat trip to the dam. Despite their initial work, the committee made little

progress during 1940 because the reservoir had not yet reached full pool. The terrain was

rugged, and the only way to reach most of the potential recreation sites was by boat. The

water was expected to reach close to maximum level early in 1941, leading to increased use

of the area. Committee members recognized the need to develop policies as soon as possible

to control this expected rise in visitation. Reclamation suggested using topographical maps,

supplemented by a few field examinations, to develop a plan outline over the winter to

coordinate both public and private developments. [12]

At this point, the committee recognized that it had gone as far as it could go by itself and

could make no further progress without field investigations and plan preparations. Since

neither the committee nor any of the cooperating agencies had funding for this work, all

agreed to recommend that the Park Service be designated as the agency in charge of

recreation planning, development, and administration of the reservoir. "They feel that the

Service will undoubtedly have this responsibility eventually," wrote Greider, "so why not

now at the beginning of planning and development work." [13] The suggestion was not

unexpected, and the Park Service Regional Director forwarded the idea to Washington, D.C.,

with his full support. At its November 1940 meeting, the committee made its official

recommendation that the Park Service assume responsibility for doing field studies and plans,

but it held off designating any agency for future development and administrative work. The

Park Service agreed to undertake field studies and Master Plans later that month. Banks

immediately squelched any attempt to appoint Reclamation as the ultimate administrator for

recreation at the reservoir because this was not a function of his agency and its personnel did

not want the responsibility. [14]

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

laro/adhi/adhi3.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:12 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 4:

Agreements and Disagreements: From TriParty Agreement to Multi-Party Agreement

From the beginning, National Park Service administration at Lake Roosevelt National

Recreation Area (LARO) has been entwined with the interests of the United States Bureau of

Reclamation, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and two federally-recognized tribes — the

Colville Confederated Tribes and the Spokane Tribe of Indians. The resulting complex

jurisdictional situation has changed considerably over the years and continues to evolve

today. Sometimes the three agencies, all siblings within the Department of the Interior, have

worked cooperatively toward common goals while at other times they have squabbled like a

dysfunctional family. The addition of the tribal voices, on equal footing with the three

agencies, has altered the balance, and all five parties have been adjusting to new roles over

the past decade.

The most complex administrative relationship at LARO is that between the Park Service and

the two tribes. Historians Robert H. Keller and Michael F. Turek have noted that Park

Service-Indian relations nationwide generally fall into four stages: "(1) unilateral

appropriation of recreational land by the government; (2) an end to land-taking but a

continued federal neglect of tribal needs, cultures, and treaties; (3) Indian resistance, leading

to aggressive pursuit of tribal interests; and (4) a new NPS commitment to cross-cultural

integrity and cooperation." [1] There are variations in this pattern at LARO, of course; for

instance, although Reclamation purchased Indian lands for reservoir purposes, it soon turned

these lands over to the Park Service to administer for recreation. Despite these variations, the

same general stages appear to hold true, from acquisition of Indian lands for Grand Coulee

Dam and its reservoir through the 1990 Lake Roosevelt Cooperative Management Agreement

(or Multi-Party Agreement) to the present.

Indians had accumulated numerous grievances well before their lands were condemned for

the Grand Coulee project. Their losses began decades earlier with the establishment of

reservations and subsequent forced land cessions. Federal policies around the turn of the

century encouraged assimilation of Indians into mainstream non-Indian culture. For instance,

Indian children were sent to boarding schools in an effort to suppress traditional Indian

culture. Similarly, allotment of reservation lands was supposed to encourage Indians to

become farmers; it also freed up "excess" land for non-Indian settlement.

During the 1920s, Indian poverty caught the attention of some whites and spawned a number

of organizations interested in Indian welfare. Concurrent with the interest of private groups,

the federal government began a slow reversal of its assimilation policies. Secretary of the

Interior Hubert Work designated the independent Institute of Government Research to report

on reservation conditions and federal policy. The group published its report, "The Problem of

Indian Administration," known simply as the Meriam Report, in 1928 and set the stage for

future reforms. Evidence of desperate health and economic conditions suggested that

established Indian policy had done little to create self-sufficient citizens. To counter this

dismal situation, the Meriam Report offered ideas to improve education and health programs.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:12 PM]

The authors also recommended a whole different approach to native people, one that showed

respect and understanding of their Indian culture. These conclusions and suggestions repeated

those made by other reform groups. Change began with President Herbert Hoover's

appointees in the Department of the Interior and accelerated when John Collier was appointed

Commissioner of Indian Affairs in 1933. [2]

The most important legislation to come out of this period was the Indian Reorganization Act

(IRA) of 1934, also known as the Wheeler-Howard Act. It called for tribal elections to either

accept or reject the requirements to write a tribal constitution and establish self-government.

For those tribes that voted to accept these, the act called for an end to land allotment and

provided for additional purchases of lands to replace some of those lost under the Dawes Act.

In addition, any lands that had not been allotted were to be returned to the tribal

governments. The IRA also established a revolving loan fund for community development,

provided educational loans for Indian students, and allowed Indian preference for jobs in the

Office of Indian Affairs (OIA). [3]

Although two-thirds of the tribes nationwide voted to accept the provisions of the IRA, not

all tribes were pleased with the choice. Among these were both the Colville and Spokane

tribes. The Colvilles rejected the IRA in an election in April 1935, with 421 voting in favor

and 562 against. Tribal members also rejected a constitution in June 1936, but after revisions,

those who came to the polls in February 1938 voted heavily in favor. This established the

Colville Business Council with fourteen members from four districts. In addition, it gathered

the eleven separate bands of the reservation and renamed them the Colville Confederated

Tribes (CCT). The Spokane Tribe of Indians (STI) also voted down the IRA but did not

approve its tribal constitution until May 1951. [4]

Loss of Lands to Grand Coulee Dam Project

The Indian Reorganization Act came too late to help the CCT or STI in their dealings with

the government during construction of Grand Coulee Dam. With the Colville Business

Council just recently organized and the Spokane Tribe still without any officially recognized

form of tribal government, neither was in a strong position when Reclamation began the

massive Columbia Basin Irrigation Project. Instead, they relied on the OIA to look out for

their interests. At the start of dam construction in July 1933, Harvey K. Meyer,

Superintendent of the Colville Indian Agency, warned OIA officials that the Indians claimed

half of the river. After thorough study, Assistant Commissioner William Zimmerman, Jr.,

agreed, and he promised that the Federal Power Commission would pay careful attention to

protecting Indian rights. He asked Meyer to keep him "advised of any important development

affecting the Indians' interest." [5] Later that fall, Frank R. McNinch, Chairman of the

Federal Power Commission, asked for information on how the project at Grand Coulee would

affect Colville and Spokane Indian rights. Zimmerman responded that the enormity of the

project made it difficult to advise at that point, but he described the potential power

production from the dam and concluded that it "could bear a reasonable annual rental . . . for

the Indians' land and water rights involved." According to Zimmerman, the Solicitor's Office

stated that Reclamation would take care of tribal interests. [6]

Reclamation tried to get a handle on the monetary value of Indian losses. In 1934, L. M.

Holt, Supervising Engineer in Salt Lake City, made an initial estimate of the value of Indian

lands and timber. He also recognized the importance of salmon to the Colville Tribe and

noted that while the value of the annual catch was difficult to determine, $15,000 per year

seemed like "the proper figure" to use. More importantly, he acknowledged only the Colville

Indians' rights to a share of the undeveloped power, estimating the compensation due at $1

per horsepower, or a total one-time payment of $345,000. He claimed that the amount of
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:12 PM]

water needed for power generation that originated on both reservations was negligible when

compared to the total flow of the Columbia. In addition, the dam's location on the north bank

was on a white homestead rather than Indian land. He figured that annual payments to the

Colville Tribe of $34,419 and just $690 to the Spokane Tribe would compensate them both

fairly for the loss of lands and timber and would further compensate the Colville Tribe for

their loss of salmon and undeveloped water power. Reclamation, however, found by 1937

that it was busy with other urgent matters, and concern for Indian rights to power revenue and

compensation for loss of the salmon runs fell by the wayside. The Indians remembered this

promise, though, and in January 1941 Mr. Adolph reminded the Colville Business Council

saying, "One of our Indians asked Mr. Wheeler about our royalty. Mr. Wheeler stated that we

would be entitled to royalty." [7] Despite these promises, the settlement would take decades

to resolve.

Reclamation and the OIA worked together to acquire Indian lands needed for the project.

During 1937, the General Land Office surveyed Colville Indian allotments and tribal lands

along the projected high-water line. The following year, Reclamation drafted legislation that

allowed it to obtain rights-of-way across Indian lands. With the legislation evidently delayed

and waters starting to rise behind the dam, Reclamation grew anxious to resolve the issue. It

negotiated a memorandum of understanding with the OIA, signed on April 6, 1939, to

purchase Indian lands. The MOU noted that some of these lands had already been inundated

and the water was approaching others, necessitating the immediate purchase of all Indian

interests in these tracts. It stipulated that Reclamation's appraisals be adopted over those of

the OIA since they were more favorable to the Indians. Other interbureau agreements during

this period covered additional lands as well as relocation of utility lines and roads. [8]

Payment was slow in coming, however, causing worry for Louis Balsam, who served at the

Colville Indian Agency as Field Representative in Charge. He claimed that each day of delay

caused genuine harm to many tribal members, and he urged prompt payments so that people

could afford to relocate at upper elevations. Most of the condemned lands were used for

agriculture and grazing and thus were important for subsistence, so Balsam recommended

that both commissioners of Reclamation and Indian Affairs consider the annual crop cycle

when acquiring lands. "The taking of these lands for clearing, which is absolutely necessary,

is causing unrest among the Indians," he wrote. "Any delay now in paying for these lands

means that starvation conditions may result during the 1940 crop year." He urged prompt

settlement and noted Reclamation had been making payments to fee title holders, most of

whom were non-Indians, for more than four years. Doing the same for tribal allottees would

help "allay understandable charges that Indians have not been accorded equality in these right

of way matters." [9]

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

laro/adhi/adhi4.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:14 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 5:

Charting the Course: Managers and

Management Issues

Park managers and employees have guided the development and operations of Lake

Roosevelt National Recreation Area (LARO) from its inception. The initial skeleton staff had

the monumental task of establishing a recreation area where there had been neither a park nor

even a lake before. Over the years the staff has multiplied and the jobs have specialized.

Working first under the 1946 Tri-Party Agreement and now under the 1990 Cooperative

Management Agreement, eleven superintendents and their staffs have built and maintained

facilities, developed and run a wide variety of programs for the public, and enforced an

increasingly complex set of regulations, laws, and agreements. This chapter profiles park

managers and discusses selected management issues, some resolved and others ongoing, that

have helped shape LARO and its daily operations over the years.

Superintendent Highlights

The National Park Service began working at Lake Roosevelt in 1941, five years before it

accepted management responsibilities for the area. After nearly thirty years under Park

Service direction, LARO officially became a unit of the National Park System following

passage of the Act of August 18, 1970 (Public Law 91-383).

During the sixty years of Park Service management at LARO, there have been eleven

superintendents. Three of them (Claude E. Greider, Homer W. Robinson, and Gary J. Kuiper)

had relatively long tenures, ranging from nine to twelve years; two (Howard H. Chapman and

David A. Richie) remained for brief terms of less than two years; and the remaining six

(Hugh Peyton, Wayne R. Howe, William N. Burgen, William W. Dunmire, Gerald W. Tays,

and Vaughn L. Baker) have led the park for periods of three to five years.

Claude E. Greider, the first superintendent at LARO, guided the park through the entire

planning stage and into the initial development. Greider was a State Supervisor with the Park

Service in Portland when he was appointed in November 1939 to head the Problem No. 26

committee that was looking into the recreational potential for the lake that would form behind

Grand Coulee Dam. He secured the services of Philip W. Kearney, Associate Landscape

Architect, who became the first Park Service employee at the slowly rising reservoir in March

1941. Greider joined him in late December 1942, doubling the staff. With the arrival of

Frances Fleischauer, a clerk-typist, in March 1943, the initial Park Service office was

complete. Budgets were equally small, with just $10,000 a year supplied from Reclamation.

Because it came from project funds, the appropriation could be used only for administration

and planning, with nothing for construction or development work. [1]

Both personnel and budgets increased by the late 1940s. Greider's staff grew following the

signing of the Tri-Party Agreement in December 1946 that established the Park Service as

the agency in charge of administering the national recreation area (NRA). LARO gained an
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:14 PM]

engineer, landscape architect, chief ranger, and clerk-stenographer by May 1947, but Greider

still termed this number "barely adequate" to do the current work. [2] By mid-1950, another

ranger and a boat operator had joined the staff, bringing the total to eight. The initial

Congressional appropriation of $26,000 for LARO came in FY1949. Greider knew he needed

much more money to start development work at the park. He was particularly concerned that

the Park Service get basic road and utility work completed to encourage private development

with concessionaires. In addition, he recognized the need to do a massive debris cleanup on

the lake to clear the waters for boating. Greider told the Regional Director that he had no

suggestions for the Physical Improvements budget "other than to triple the amount of funds"

if possible. [3] The following year did indeed bring a sizeable increase, with $48,600 for

Administration, Protection, and Maintenance, and $137,200 for development, including roads,

employee housing, and reservoir cleanup. [4]

During his eleven-year stay at the NRA, Greider worked "by the book" in planning,

development, and regulations. When wartime rationing was lifted, local residents were ready

to take advantage of camping and boating opportunities on the new lake. Lack of

appropriations had prohibited any Park Service developments, however, and Greider

discouraged recreational use of the area until the federal agency could proceed with "a

conservative and orderly program." [5] This eventually caused resentment toward the Park

Service, which was compounded during the prolonged fight over regulations for the new

NRA. Much of this may have been due to Greider's personality, which one long-time

employee described as "kind of . . . pompous." [6] He was less of a field person than later

superintendents, but his office and organizational skills may have been what were needed to

get the park started. Greider transferred to the Portland Office on August 12, 1953, where he

took charge of the Rogue River Recreation Survey. [7]

Hugh Peyton arrived August 16 to replace Greider. He had experience at one of the two other

recreation areas at the time, having been Custodian and Superintendent at Millerton Lake in

Friant, California. Peyton was familiar with some of the issues facing LARO, particularly the

controversy over regulations, since he and Greider had worked together to revise the rules in

1951. In contrast to the "spit-and-polish" style of the first superintendent, Peyton was a

down-to-earth leader who let the employees know he was on their side. "He just turned us

loose," remembered Don Everts. "Do it right or else you'll get your butt chewed." [8] Peyton

was "a junk gatherer" like Everts, and the two of them procured many vehicles and loads of

materials from their regular scanning of General Services Administration catalogs. These

surplus materials were used throughout the park, from liners in pit toilets to the radio system.

Park construction really began under Peyton, and he won the approval of many local people

who were pleased to see any development at LARO. One man reported that the

superintendent and his crew were "doing miracles with small money," well beyond anything

Greider had done. Park supporters were pitching in to help with privately owned bulldozers

and donated labor to provide "Free access to Roosevelt Lake for every body." [9] Peyton

retired in January 1958. [10]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:14 PM]

Superintendent Homer Robinson, January 1960. Photo courtesy of

National Park Service, Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area

(LARO.FS).

Homer W. Robinson replaced Peyton as Superintendent, arriving at LARO February 10,

1958. Robinson began his federal career working on fire lookouts for the U.S. Forest Service

in Oregon. He then transferred to the Park Service and was assigned to Yosemite, where he

worked as Assistant Chief Ranger. He then served as Superintendent at Millerton Lake

Recreation Area in California, followed by national monuments in Colorado. During his

tenure at LARO, he guided the park during the major development work of the Mission 66

period. Robinson is remembered as a "hands-on" superintendent who liked to get out of the

office and into the field where the action was. He particularly enjoyed running heavy

equipment and periodically would "relieve" a LARO employee using a bulldozer during road

or campground construction. His involvement continued with other types of work as well.

For instance, during the restoration at Fort Spokane, Robinson fabricated the posts for the

guardhouse veranda. Under Robinson's administration, LARO undertook major restorations

of the historic buildings at Fort Spokane, acquired for the NRA in 1960. The park also

developed its first interpretive program at the fort during this time. [11]

Even with the increased funding of the Mission 66 program, LARO still felt the pinch of too

little money. As Sis Robinson, Homer's widow, remembered, "you were just working on a

shoestring all the time." The Robinsons and other staff donated time to the park, helping with

tree planting at the North Marina or clearing rocks and brush at Keller Ferry on a Sunday.

Like Peyton before him, Robinson stretched the park budget by taking advantage of

government surplus materials available through GSA catalogs. [12]

Although LARO was still a small, relatively isolated unit of the National Park System in the

1960s, Robinson and his wife believed it was important for the staff to understand their part

in the larger system. Thus, whenever members of the regional office came to LARO, the

Robinsons would gather their staff for a picnic with the visitors. "And we thought . . . that our

people ought to know who all these supposedly important people were," Sis Robinson

remembered. "We wanted our people to know . . . the people . . . who were making the rules

and telling us what they wanted done. And I think we did that." A side benefit of these
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:14 PM]

gatherings was giving the Regional staff a favorable impression of Coulee Dam and the

NRA. After nine years at LARO, Superintendent Robinson retired from the Park Service in

1967. He and Sis lived in Myrtle Point, Oregon, for thirteen years and then returned to

Coulee Dam in 1980. [13]

Howard H. Chapman served a brief stint as LARO Superintendent in 1967. After graduating

with a degree in forestry from Colorado State University, he started as a ranger with the Park

Service at Saratoga National Historic Park in New York. He later moved on to Shenandoah

National Park in Virginia, the Northeast Regional Office in Philadelphia, Yellowstone

National Park, and Albright Training Center in Arizona. He came to LARO in late February

from Blue Ridge Parkway where he had been Chief Park Ranger. Chapman had considerable

management training and evidently needed experience as a Superintendent before moving on

to a higher position. In November 1967, he transferred to Grand Teton National Park where

he served as Superintendent until December 1971. He then accepted an appointment as

Regional Director for the Western Region, remaining in that position until May 1987. During

his brief time at LARO, the park began to formalize policies for managing the NRA lands,

including private docks. These issues got more attention during the next decade. [14]

Chapman was followed by David A. Richie, who came to LARO in November 1967 with a

background in law. He graduated from Haverford College and followed it with a law degree

from George Washington University in Washington, D.C. His initial years of government

service included work as Assistant Superintendent at Mount Rainier National Park. He

remained at LARO until August 1969, when he resigned to teach history at Westtown

School, a private Quaker school in Pennsylvania. He then returned to the Park Service in July

1971 as the Superintendent for the George Washington Memorial Parkway. He followed this

with an appointment as Deputy Regional Director of the North Atlantic Region from January

1974 to March 1976. Richie then transferred to the Appalachian National Scenic Trail where

he served as Project Manager from March 1976 until July 1987. [15]

Superintendent David A. Richie presenting awards to LARO

employees Don Everts, Bert Norton, and Lee Randall, April 1969.

Photo courtesy of National Park Service, Lake Roosevelt National
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:14 PM]

Recreation Area (LARO.FS).

Wayne R. Howe replaced Richie at LARO in August 1969. He had been with the Park

Service since 1946, working at Crater Lake, Olympic, and Sequoia-Kings Canyon. He was

then promoted to Chief Ranger at Bryce Canyon, followed by Assistant Chief Ranger at

Yosemite and Chief Ranger at Yellowstone. He had most recently headed the Branch of

Visitor Activities Management at Park Service headquarters in Washington, D.C., since 1966.

When he arrived at LARO, he was excited about what he perceived as the park's untapped

recreational possibilities. Fishing enthusiasts had discovered walleye pike in Lake Roosevelt

by the mid-1960s, and the popularity of this fish increased rapidly by the next decade,

bringing recognition — and visitors — to LARO. [16]

One of the most challenging issues for Howe was the ramifications of the Red Power

movement on the local reservations that took the form of disagreements over fishing rights as

well as physical confrontations at the Sanpoil campground. He became the initial Park

Service representative to the Secretary of the Interior's Task Force that formed in 1972 to

investigate complaints from both the Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) and the Spokane

Tribe of Indians (STI). After he transferred to the regional office in July 1972, Howe

represented that office on the Task Force. He continued to work as the Associate Regional

Director for Management and Operations for the Pacific Northwest Region until February

1976. [17]

Following Howe's reassignment to the regional office, William N. Burgen took over as

LARO Superintendent in July 1972. His previous station had been the Albright Training

Academy at Grand Canyon, Arizona. His four-and-a-half year stay at LARO saw visitation

rise once again, after falling during construction of the third powerhouse for Grand Coulee

Dam. This increase in visitors was reflected in the budgets as well. The appropriation for

FY1975 totaled just over $425,000. This increased dramatically the following year to

$1,187,580, which included funding for FY1976 as well as the Transition Quarter as federal

budgets made the change from calendar to fiscal year. Once back to the twelve-month

appropriation in FY1977, the budget still showed a considerable increase over FY1975, with

a total of $976,820. [18]

Under Burgen's leadership, the seasonal work force expanded to a total of seventy-two in

1976, with one in Administration, thirty-five in Maintenance, and thirty-six in the Ranger

Division. These included six minority men and nineteen women (four of whom were

minority). Burgen reported that the park had recruited a higher than average number of

minorities for the Region but was lower than average with female recruits, "probably because

we hire so few temporaries or seasonals in clerical positions." [19] The park also increased

its participation in programs under Title I of the Comprehensive Employment and Training

Act (CETA). Eight enrollees worked with Maintenance all summer, but the park had mixed

reviews for the program. Even though the salaries were paid with CETA funding, the

teenagers needed considerable supervision, and staff viewed the program "more as a service

to the community than a benefit to the Area." [20]

During Burgen's tenure at LARO, tensions continued between the Park Service and the

neighboring CCT and STI. Incidents on both reservations suggested to Burgen that the

Indians were attempting to seize control of all the lands in the Indian Zones. The 1974

Solicitor's Opinion concerning tribal rights at Lake Roosevelt caused the Secretary of the

Interior to order the Park Service, Reclamation, and Bureau of Indian Affairs to negotiate a

new management agreement that would include the tribes. Negotiations stalled almost

immediately, but the Park Service worked out an agreement with the tribes to return the

federal campgrounds within the Indian Zones to tribal ownership.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:14 PM]

Another trend that began under Burgen's leadership was the move to get control over special

use permits and encroachments. The park hired its first Land Management Specialist in 1974,

who began full-time work to inventory permits and check transgressions. This effort

increased considerably a decade later.

Burgen transferred to Yosemite in January 1977 and was replaced by William W. Dunmire,

who had been serving as chief of the Interpretation Division at the Washington Support

Office. The budget increased regularly during Dunmire's tenure, rising from a total of

$1,060,120 in FY1978 to $1,245,579 in FY1981. During the same time, the cost per visitor

dropped from $1.40 to $1.34. By 1980, LARO had twenty-five permanent employees and

seventy seasonals, in addition to twenty-four young people in the Youth Conservation Corps

(YCC) during the summer and another ten youths year-round in the Young Adult

Conservation Corps (YACC). [21]

Dunmire led the team that wrote the first General Management Plan (GMP) for LARO in

1980. The Park Service moved away from Master Plans in the late 1970s because it found

that it was often spending considerable money on elaborate plans that were never completed.

The agency instead instituted biennial Statements for Management to supplement the more

complete GMP, which ideally was updated every fifteen to twenty years. The GMP provides

overall direction and management philosophy for individual units of the National Park

System. During the GMP process, the Park Service consults with other agencies and

members of the public to develop an approach to managing the park and its resources.

Dunmire and LARO staff, assisted by the Denver Service Center (DSC), began work on the

GMP in 1978. Information gained from a visitor-use survey that summer and four public

meetings in 1979 provided direction for four proposed alternatives. The final document,

approved in July 1980, described park facilities; provided visitor statistics and priority needs;

and outlined directions for park programs. [22]

After Dunmire left LARO in February 1981 to take a position as Superintendent of Carlsbad

Caverns, he was replaced by Gary J. Kuiper, who arrived in May 1981 from the Grand

Canyon. After his graduation from the University of Montana, Kuiper transferred from

seasonal work with the Forest Service to full-time employment with the Park Service. His

first job in 1961 was at Natchez Trace Parkway in Mississippi where his work as a ranger

started his career-long interest in reversing trends of inappropriate use of park lands. The

Parkway, like LARO, was plagued by its narrow strip of federal land, lack of well-marked

boundaries, and multiple encroachments by neighboring landowners. Kuiper worked with the

park's neighbors to begin to turn the situation around. After a stint at Blue Ridge Parkway, he

served as Chief Ranger at Lava Beds, where relations with the neighboring gateway

community were poor. Kuiper liked the challenge of public relations and believed he helped

the Park Service there to improve its image within the community. Then, from 1973-1977, he

worked as the Assistant Superintendent/Chief Ranger at North Cascades National Park in

Washington, where the North Cascades Highway had recently opened. Kuiper then served as

Chief Ranger at the Grand Canyon until coming to LARO. "After the hectic life in the Grand

Canyon," Kuiper remembered, "I came here and said, 'Is this all there is?' There was nothing

in my 'in' box." [23]

LARO staff dealt with two major issues during Kuiper's time at LARO: special park uses and

renegotiation of the Tri-Party Agreement. Starting with the 1982 Resources Management

Plan, Kuiper and his staff began to identify the underlying problems with special park uses

and moved to resolve scores of illegal uses of NRA lands. These efforts culminated in the

Special Park Use Management Plan in 1990, LARO's effort to bring the NRA into line with

the Servicewide policies of NPS-53. These changes in policy were unpopular with many

neighboring landowners who had their long-time permits phased out for docks, buoys,

stairways, and lawns. The controversy continued well into the 1990s after Kuiper retired.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:14 PM]

Superintendent Gary J. Kuiper, no date. Photo courtesy of

National Park Service, Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area

(file H18 Biographical Data and Accounts, LARO.HQ.ADM).

While negotiations for a new management agreement were on the back burner during the

early 1980s, the three agencies and two tribes actually sat down to talk in October 1985. The

next several years were a rocky ride for the Park Service as the parties met periodically to

listen to long-standing concerns. Negotiations moved from the local to national level in 1987,

and a final round of meetings from 1988 into 1990 resulted in the Lake Roosevelt

Cooperative Management Agreement, also known as the Multi-Party Agreement, signed on

April 5, 1990.

Superintendent Kuiper was actively involved in the negotiations for the new agreement, but

the primary negotiator for LARO was Kelly Cash, Assistant Superintendent. The park added

this position in 1983 at the request of Regional Director Jim Tobin, and Cash filled it until

his retirement in January 1995. His early career had been at Shasta Lake NRA. He then

transferred to the Department of the Interior in 1968, working as a management intern in

Washington, D.C. He followed this with assignments as a recreation planner in regional

offices in San Francisco and Seattle. Cash then served as a Division Chief for Water

Resources and, later, as Chief of Planning for the Pacific Northwest Region. After coming to

LARO, Cash helped develop and implement policy on special park uses, in addition to his

key role in negotiations for the Multi-Party Agreement. Kuiper came to count on Cash's good

legal mind and clear grasp of policy for drafting a wide variety of documents. [24]

One of the most striking features of Kuiper's term as Superintendent was the dramatic rise in
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:14 PM]

visitation that occurred in the late 1980s. The totals rose from just over 500,000 in 1985 to

more than 1.7 million in 1991. This placed a strain on staff and facilities, made even more

acute by the lack of budget increases. LARO received a base funding increase for the

FY1985 budget but no further increases during the period of rapid growth, causing the NRA

in 1989 to cut all funding for seasonal lifeguards, cancel some interpretive programs, and

close the Fort Spokane visitor center one day each week. Congressman Tom Foley helped

secure an additional appropriation of $570,000 for LARO for 1991, bringing the budget to

over $2 million for the first time. The extra monies were earmarked for additional staff

($300,000) and for retrofit design work for boat launches to accommodate fluctuating lake

levels ($270,000). Growth at the park had finally caught the attention of Congress and the

Park Service, and LARO budgets increased to more than $2.5 million during CY1993. [25]

Gerald W. Tays arrived at LARO in July 1993 to take over as Superintendent after Gary

Kuiper's retirement from the Park Service in April 1993. Following graduation from the

University of Maine with a Master's degree in geology, Tays taught school in Switzerland for

a year. He began his career with the Park Service in 1968, working at Glen Canyon National

Recreation Area until transferring to Yellowstone in 1972. A meeting with Park Service

Director George Hartzog led to Tays' transfer to Washington, D.C., where he worked in the

Office of Legislative and Congressional Affairs for five years. During the last two years in

the capital, he served as Executive Assistant to Gary Everhart, the director of the agency,

tracking legislative issues and advising Everhart on legislation. After leaving the capital, he

served three years as District Ranger at Mount Rainier and three years as District Manager at

Marblemount in the North Cascades. Tays then went to Shenandoah National Park in

Virginia, where he served as both Assistant and Acting Superintendent. He returned to

WASO in 1988, where he helped reestablish the Office of Legislation after it had been

dismantled under Secretary of the Interior James Watt. Tays worked there for five years

before transferring to LARO in 1993 to become Superintendent. [26]

Two critical issues, special park uses and management of cultural resources, had been

heating up at LARO prior to Tays' appointment. During his tenure, however, a number of

factors converged to create a contentious situation that contributed to his removal as

Superintendent. The controversy over special use permits dated from Kuiper's term, when

LARO instituted its Special Park Use Management Plan that mandated the eventual removal

of all private docks on Lake Roosevelt. Some permittees vocally opposed these changes.

During this same period of time, the CCT and STI had assumed responsibility for

archaeological surveys on tribal lands within the Reservation Zone. When they tried to extend

this to Park Service lands that encompassed their area of traditional use, Tays insisted that the

tribes meet professional standards, as specified in the Archaeological Resources Protection

Act and the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, and follow the

provisions of the National Historic Preservation Act.

The tribes resented Park Service demands and found common ground with local county

commissioners who wanted greater influence over management decisions at Lake Roosevelt.

While their concerns were quite different, they agreed that Superintendent Tays, with his

insistence on following federal law and Park Service regulations, was a roadblock to

resolving these issues. They joined forces to generate political pressure to bring change to

LARO, voicing their concerns to both the Park Service and their representative to Congress.

The congressional delegation was already well aware of tensions at Lake Roosevelt from

several years of constituent complaints over special park uses. In March 1996, the Park

Service decided that Tays could no longer be effective as Superintendent at LARO and

transferred his position to the Seattle Support Office, working under Deputy Field Director

William Walters. The Park Service then re-assigned Tays, under the Intergovernmental

Personnel Act, to work with Washington State Parks in Olympia. He retired from the Park

Service two years later and signed on with State Parks, first as a volunteer and then as an
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:14 PM]

employee to begin a new program of historic preservation. [27]

The issues that led to the removal of one superintendent did not go away and soon faced

Vaughn L. Baker, who was appointed Superintendent at LARO in 1996. After graduating

from Montana State University with a degree in earth sciences, Baker took a job with the

Bureau of Outdoor Recreation. He then transferred to the Bureau of Land Management and

finally to the Park Service. His first Park Service job was at the Alaska Regional Office in

1984, followed two years later by a position at Wrangell-St. Elias in Alaska. In 1989, he was

appointed Assistant Superintendent at Mammoth Cave where he stayed until taking a position

at WASO in 1992. He then served as Assistant Superintendent at Shenandoah from 1994-

1996. Baker was asked to take the position of Superintendent at LARO in 1996 and was able

to move laterally into the job. [28]

Baker had some serious public relations issues to deal with as soon as he arrived. When he

talked with others in the area, he found that relations between the Park Service and

surrounding county and tribal governments were "pretty strained." In addition, he found the

LARO staff "fairly demoralized . . . , especially at the management level." Baker and the Park

Service decided that the best way to begin to deal with the ongoing controversies at LARO

was to update the 1980 GMP, a move that had been recommended during an Operations

Evaluation in 1994. Senator Slade Gorton earmarked $180,000 in the FY1997 budget to

begin two years of planning. "We needed a process to re-engage everybody," said Baker,

"and the planning process was the way to do it." The Park Service invited the tribes, various

state and federal agencies, county and city governments, conservation groups, citizens

groups, and individuals to participate in the GMP planning. [29]

The draft GMP was essentially done "in house." The primary responsibility fell to a Park

Service planner, Harold Gibbs, who came from the DSC to LARO for the two-year process.

Baker believed that having Gibbs live in the area would enable him to get to know the staff

and the many other players at Lake Roosevelt while still having the support of the Denver

office. The new plan classified all the lands around the lake into Management Areas and

specified the type of development allowed. In addition, it reviewed the controversial issue of

special use permits, most of which were phased out by that time. The idea proposed in the

draft GMP for community access points, in lieu of private and community docks, was a new

approach to this contentious issue that offered the potential to solve complaints about lack of

access. In addition, such access points would lessen the Park Service's responsibility for

building and maintaining public lake access. If approved, community access points would not

go into effect until 2001. After numerous public meetings to discuss the draft GMP, Baker

believed the process had helped address many concerns. "We weren't able to necessarily do

what people thought we should do," said Baker, "but I think at least people by and large feel

they . . . were heard." [30]

The controversy over phasing out special use permits, especially docks, has largely died out

during Baker's administration. He and his predecessors shared the same Park Service

guidelines, particularly NPS-53, but they differed some in their approach to enforcement. "A

lot of this requires having great patience," noted Baker. "You always try to get people's

cooperation." For instance, in 1996 eleven of the fourteen owners due to remove their private

docks chose to cooperate with the Park Service. "That's pretty good," remarked Baker.

Another owner went to federal court where his case was dismissed in September 2000,

ending the uncertainty surrounding the remaining two docks. Similarly, the concern over

cultural resource management has lessened as the Park Service found ways that Baker

believes meet the intent of the laws through working with both tribes. [31]

By the late 1990s, LARO was once again feeling the pinch of a tight budget. The park had

received no base funding increase since FY1995. Within two years, LARO had to cut some
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:14 PM]

popular interpretive programs, and the draft GMP in 1998 noted that lack of money led to the

staff being spread too thin, as well as reduced maintenance, decreased ability to protect

resources, fewer programs for visitors, and reduced visitor safety. The park base was

$3,321,000 in FY1998, and LARO was given a park increase in FY2000 and FY2001 to be

used for protection of archaeological resources. The NRA receives additional income each

year through its designation as a fee demonstration area. It collected approximately $320,000

in fees in 1999 and was allowed to keep close to 80 percent, providing extra funds for

projects such as expanding launch ramps, improving accessibility in rest rooms and

rehabilitating picnic shelters. [32]

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

laro/adhi/adhi5.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:16 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 6:

Family Vacation Lake: Recreation Planning

and Management

Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area (LARO) is primarily a place for people to play. A

high proportion of its visitors has always been local residents, and in recent years more and

more people are choosing to build homes adjacent to the recreation area boundary to take

advantage of the many and varied opportunities for recreation on water and land. Recreation

areas have sometimes been facetiously described within the National Park Service as "places

to get wet," and even recent LARO Superintendents have viewed Lake Roosevelt in this way.

[1]

LARO's recreational visitors focus on the water - on boating and swimming and on camping

close to the lake shore during the short summer season. Land-based activities, too, have

traditionally been aimed at outdoor fun. In the early years, playgrounds and horseshoe

pitching areas were popular. Naturalists taught recreational skills such as snorkeling, and

Disney movies were shown in the amphitheaters. Fishing has grown in popularity, and new

opportunities such as rental houseboats and personal watercraft are increasingly popular with

visitors.

Recreation planning and management at the national recreation area (NRA) have had to adapt

to challenges such as low funding, jurisdictional disputes, and changing visitor activities over

the decades.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:16 PM]

The people of no other country

and no other age had ever had

anything like the leisure, the

discretionary income, or the

recreational choices of the

American people in midtwentieth-century. It was

overwhelming. . . . Even though

they might not always have

used this leisure to the best

advantage, the American people

had learned to play. 

-- Foster Rhea Dulles, History of

Recreation, 1959 [2]

Swim beach at Kettle Falls, 1965. Photo courtesy of SpokesmanReview archives.

Who Visits Lake Roosevelt?

Over the decades, LARO managers have initiated a

number of studies to learn more about the "typical"

visitor to Lake Roosevelt. What attracts people to the

area, who are they, and what do they do once they

arrive? The popularity of the nation's national

recreation areas has grown significantly since the

1940s. By 1990, visits to NRAs accounted for 14

percent of total National Park System visits. [3]

After World War II, outdoor recreation increased

tremendously nationwide, particularly water-based

forms of recreation such as boating and water skiing.

Causes of this growth included increases in the total

population, per capita income, proportion of income

spent on recreation, and leisure time, along with

improved transportation. [4]

Visitation to Lake Roosevelt, however, was very light through the 1940s and the early 1950s,

mostly because the reservoir was new, facilities were minimal, and area population was low.

For example, in July of 1950 approximately 13,100 recreational visits were made to the

NRA. About 90 percent of the use was by local people using simple temporary facilities

constructed by the communities of Kettle Falls and Colville for picnicking and swimming.

During the fall and winter months, hunters and float-plane pilots and passengers accounted

for most of the recreational visits to Lake Roosevelt. Lake Roosevelt was simply

overshadowed by Grand Coulee Dam, which was recording well over 300,000 visitors

annually at that time. [5]

Visitation rose as Congress began to provide more funding for construction of visitor

facilities. The area's population remained essentially rural, although in 1968 some 525,000

people lived within two hours of Lake Roosevelt. In the mid-1950s, Lake Roosevelt -

promoted by the Park Service as the "Family Vacation Lake" - began to be discovered by

travelers from outside the immediate area, sometimes by accident as they traveled through. In

the north half, many of the visitors were from nearby Trail, British Columbia. In 1957, most

of the visitors came from a fifty- to one hundred-mile radius, arriving on weekends by car.

Day use remained primary; only 25 percent of LARO visitors remained more than one day.

By 1962, over one thousand people per day were spending time at swim beaches. [6]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:16 PM]

Traveling through the

Roosevelt Lake country, in the

northeast corner of Washington

state, is enough to make a

modern motorist nervous. No

view is blocked by a billboard, a

hot dog stand or a Kozy Kabin

Kamp. He may cross two

Indian reservations without a

LARO Recreational Visits (top), Grand Coulee Dam Visitors

(bottom).

LARO staff has tried to increase and regulate

visitation through management actions such as

construction of visitor facilities, removal of floating

woody debris from the lake, and enforcement of

regulations. In some years, visitation to LARO has

been noticeably affected by events outside the control

of the Park Service. Such events and circumstances

include the 1962 Seattle World's Fair, opening of the

highway through the North Cascades in 1973, Spokane
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:16 PM]

chance to buy native beadwork

from Japan. If he stops to eat

lunch or take a swim, nobody

shows up to tell him he's on

private property or to collect

for parking. Most travelers just

aren't used to such treatment. .

. . As tourists discover Roosevelt

Lake — and as the small towns

discover the tourist — the

freshness of the country may

disappear. Meanwhile the

sightseer finds himself in an

anachronistic setting, removed

by many years from today's

formal 'recreational area,'

where he can enjoy an

uncluttered view and can stop

to fish or camp where he

pleases. 

-- Byron Fish, Ford Times, 1954

[7]

Visitor Activities at LARO

1958 1976

sightseeing 26,000 172,000

picnicking 112,000 191,000

camping 93,000 108,000

swimming 90,000 130,000

boating 43,000 19,139

fishing 0 19,000

hunting 1,000 400

water

skiing unknown 6,500 [9]

Expo '74, eruption of Mt. St. Helens in 1980, value of

the Canadian dollar, severe lake drawdowns, national

gasoline shortages, improvement of the walleye fishery

in the 1970s, overcrowding at other recreation facilities

in eastern Washington, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation

(Reclamation) visitor facilities and attractions at Grand

Coulee Dam, population shifts, and the weather.

In general, the majority of LARO's early visitors were

day users, mostly family groups who lived in the

vicinity of the lake. In 1962, park staff estimated that

10 percent of all visitors were in the area one hour or

less, 50 percent spent one to four hours, 25 percent

spent four to eight hours, and 15 percent spent one or

more days within the recreation area. The peak period

of use has always been from May to September. In

more recent years, as the Spokane and Seattle-Tacoma

populations have grown, a higher percentage of LARO

visitation is drawn from these urban areas. [8]

A formal visitor survey conducted in 1978 through the

University of Washington Cooperative Park Studies

Unit helped LARO managers better understand the

typical visitor. The study found that regional visitors

chose to visit Lake Roosevelt in order to sightsee, visit Grand Coulee Dam, camp, and picnic.

Family groups comprised 83 percent of the visitors. Most visitors had been to LARO six or

more times and tended to visit the same site regularly. Thirty-two percent were from Spokane

(and primarily used the central part of the recreation area), and 14 percent were local, but

only 2.8 percent identified themselves as farmers or ranchers. About 13 percent were from

Canada. At least half the campers and boaters fished during their visit. Only 15.7 percent

camped in tents, and 17 percent of the boaters used non-power boats. In 1981, over half of

LARO's visitors were children or teenagers, and 12 percent were Native American. [10]

A 1996 visitor use survey found similar patterns.

Washington residents made up 74 percent of the

visitors, with only about 7 percent from the United

States outside of the Pacific Northwest. About 46

percent were repeat visitors. The most popular

activities were camping, swimming, motor boating,

and fishing, followed by family gatherings,

picnicking, sightseeing, and water skiing. Nearly 75

percent of the use still occurs between June and

September, and the late afternoon and evening hours

are the busiest. [11]

Visitation to LARO has increased dramatically since

the 1950s, when the Park Service first began to

provide facilities and access roads along the shores of

Lake Roosevelt. Keeping statistics on visitor use is

important in every park unit: visitation figures identify trends that help in making

management decisions such as planning visitor facilities and as justification for requests for

budget increases.

At LARO, the lack of entrance gates makes obtaining accurate estimates of visitation
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:16 PM]

difficult. From the early 1940s until 1955, LARO's visitation was estimated as a percentage

(10 or 20 percent) of the visitation figures kept by Reclamation for Grand Coulee Dam. Since

then, more accurate visitation figures have been obtained by counting vehicles (using a

varying person-per-vehicle multiplier) combined with actual counts or estimates at places

such as boat launches, concessionaire facilities, private docks and mooring buoys, and

campgrounds. In recent years, reductions are made for nonrecreational users. The counting

methods were modified in 1957, the early 1970s, and 1992. In 1988, traffic counters replaced

the older tube counters park-wide. Park staff is "very, very confident," according to LARO

Program Assistant Roberta Miller, that they are understating and not overstating the visitation

to the recreation area. [12]

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

laro/adhi/adhi6.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:17 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 7:

Building and Maintaining the Park:

Administrative and Visitor Facilities

The administrative and visitor facilities at Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area (LARO)

range from headquarters to employee housing to a wide range of visitor facilities. Each new

building or developed area has required planning, construction, and maintenance. Besides the

facilities constructed by the Park Service, concessionaires also provide certain visitor

facilities within the national recreation area.

Headquarters

The first official National Park Service facility in the Lake Roosevelt area was workspace for

Park Service staff that the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) provided under the

terms of the 1941-1946 interbureau agreements. Between 1942 and 1952, Park Service

personnel worked out of several rooms on the second floor of a temporary general store

building in Coulee Dam, located near today's public rest area. The best location for

permanent administrative headquarters was discussed at great length during the 1940s and

1950s. Proposed locations included Coulee Dam, Colville, Fort Spokane, Kettle Falls, Spring

Canyon, and South Marina (Crescent Bay). Under the terms of the 1946 Tri-Party

Agreement, Reclamation agreed to provide facilities in the Reclamation Zone for Park

Service administration of the national recreation area (NRA). In 1947, Reclamation provided

LARO staff with a new warehouse, four-car garage, and a small shop building next to the

Coulee Dam theater to supplement the existing 600 square feet of office space. Reclamation

planned to raze the temporary office building in 1952, so by the late 1940s LARO's

Superintendent Claude Greider was searching for funding for the construction of a new

building for NRA headquarters. [1]

LARO headquarters (in front of sand pile) and six employee houses

on Crest Drive (curved road in fore-ground), 1967. The three houses

on the right were constructed in 1966. (File A94 3rd Power Plant:
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:17 PM]

Other Ramifications 1966-76, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250,

LARO.HQ.PAO.)

In January 1952, the small Park Service staff moved temporarily into the Reclamation field

office on the main highway to Coulee Dam. A week later, Greider commented approvingly to

the Regional Director that the modern building overlooked Lake Roosevelt, was convenient to

the public, and was "all that can be desired." [2] LARO's new offices consisted of three

rooms totaling 1,138 square feet. The Park Service paid Reclamation an annual fee for

utilities and other services for these and other facilities at Coulee Dam. LARO's stay in this

building was short-lived, however. In late 1953 or early 1954, LARO headquarters moved to

a building that had been occupied by Reclamation's Parks and Street crew on Crest Drive.

The Park Service also used adjacent outside storage space. LARO agreed to maintain the

building and Reclamation to provide electricity, sewer and water service, and garbage

collection, for which it was reimbursed. [3]

Women landscaping LARO headquarters, 1960s. Photo courtesy of

National Park Service, Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area

(LARO.FS).

LARO staff continued to examine the possibility of relocating headquarters to a more central

location. During the Mission 66 period, LARO personnel favored Fort Spokane, but the

Regional Office favored retaining headquarters in Coulee Dam, partly because of the

continuing possibility of LARO taking over the administration of recreation on Banks Lake.

In the spring of 1959, as part of the privatization of the town of Coulee Dam, LARO received

jurisdiction and control over the headquarters building on Crest Drive and an adjacent 5.7

acres of land. The Park Service paid Reclamation over $93,000 for the administration

building and almost $37,000 for a garage and shop in Coulee Dam. LARO used Accelerated

Public Works money in the fall of 1962 to convert the attached glass greenhouse into 2,250

square feet of additional office space. [4] This complex still serves as LARO's administrative

headquarters.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:17 PM]

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

laro/adhi/adhi7.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi8.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:19 PM]

There are no outstanding

natural, historic, archeological,

or other features deemed

sufficiently important to attract

visitors. However, the features

that do exist are of sufficient

note that their proper and

adequate "interpretation" will

make the visitors' stay much

more interesting and

meaningful. 

-- CODA, "Statement for

Interpretation type document,"

1957 [1]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 8:

Changing Stories: Interpretation

The National Park Service has long considered basic

interpretation of a park's natural and cultural resources

an essential tool for enhancing public enjoyment of the

park. The agency also believes that when visitors

understand an area's resources through good

interpretation, they are more likely to be concerned

about protecting those resources. Until the early 1960s,

however, the only interpretation available to visitors in

the Lake Roosevelt area was that provided by the U.S.

Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) at Grand Coulee

Dam with only minimal input from Lake Roosevelt

National Recreation Area (LARO) personnel.

From the 1960s until the 1980s, much of the

interpretation provided by LARO naturalists and

rangers focused on recreational skills. When

Interpretive Specialist Dan Brown arrived in 1988, the

interpretive program was "not really all that well developed." He recalled that the park was

"treated kind of like an urban recreation area — kite flying," with classes in skills such as

paddling canoes and snorkeling. The focus of interpretation at Fort Spokane was on the

military period only, leaving out many other important aspects of the site. Former

Superintendent Gerry Tays agrees that interpretive efforts were "not getting their fair

treatment." [2] The interpretive program at LARO has changed greatly since then.

Interpretation by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation

Americans and foreigners alike are fascinated by the story of Grand Coulee Dam. Since the

1930s, publicity has made it truly larger than life. Reclamation, having already experienced

the public's great interest in the construction of Boulder Dam, built a grandstand for visitors

to view the construction activity at Grand Coulee Dam. In 1936, two parking lots and vista

points, one on each side of the Columbia River, provided vantage points of the construction,

and eloquent guides lectured on the art and science of dam building. A construction model

and a hydraulic model of the dam were displayed. Several hundred thousand people came to

the site each year, and Reclamation made them feel welcome. From then until today, the

emphasis of interpretation at the dam is upon the engineering achievements that the dam

represents. For example, a 1998 Reclamation handout at the Visitor Arrival Center proclaims,

"The creation of Grand Coulee Dam is a story of developing and using equipment of gigantic

proportions, breaking records, taking risks and reaching unique and innovative solutions to

build a giant among dams." [3]

In 1941, Reclamation began planning a museum to
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi8.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:19 PM]

The public provided a

seemingly insatiable appetite

for statistics about "the eight

wonders of the world." People

loved to hear how many

pancakes the 3,000 to 6,000

workers ate each morning at

breakfast or how many miles of

tubes ran through the dam.

They devoured pictures of the

great structure, as high as a

forty-six-story building, just

five feet shorter than the

Washington Monument, and

they saw drawings of the 12.5

million barrels of concrete or

envisioned them together in a

train 500 miles long. Most

popular were comparisons with

the Great Pyramid of Egypt, or

two, or three, or even four of

them. 

-- Paul Pitzer, Grand Coulee,

1994 [4]

I have the feeling that the

National Park Service

interpretive program should be

centered upon the recreational

area and that all lectures and

interpretive devices around and

in the vicinity of the Dam

should be left to the Bureau of

Reclamation. There appears no

way to integrate the different

procedures practiced. A distinct

personality is to be expected

from our presentation and it

can only be achieved out in the

field area assigned for

administration to the Service. . .

. The story of the Coulee Dam

interpret the construction and purposes of Grand

Coulee Dam. The agency offered space in the facility

to the National Park Service for natural history

exhibits and an office. Under the first interbureau

agreement for managing Lake Roosevelt, signed that

year, Reclamation agreed to provide guides and lecture

services at the dam and to coordinate that activity with

related services established elsewhere by the Park

Service. This was reaffirmed in the 1946 Tri-Party

Agreement. [5]

World War II curtailed tourism at the dam, however.

Beginning in 1941, federal guards protected the dam

day and night from sabotage, theft, and military attack.

Fences blocked entry at both ends of the dam, and

boats patrolled the waters of Lake Roosevelt. After the

war ended, Reclamation built a tourist railroad (flatcars

pulled by an engine) that carried tourists from the west

vista house to the powerhouse to see the generators

and then back to the west vista house. In 1950,

Reclamation transferred the Crown Point site, which

has marvelous views of the dam and of Lake

Roosevelt, to the State Parks and Recreation

Commission, with the understanding that any

development of the site would be coordinated with the

Park Service. [6]

Claude Greider, LARO's first superintendent, encouraged Reclamation guides to mention the

Park Service and the national recreation area in their talks. He even provided several draft

paragraphs outlining the recreational development the Park Service hoped to achieve along

Lake Roosevelt. Frank Banks, Reclamation District Manager, felt that the lecturers should

provide information in their own words, but he did approve one sentence stating that the

reservoir was under the jurisdiction of the Park Service. Perhaps this rather uncooperative

attitude of Reclamation was responsible for Greider's feeling that the Park Service interpretive

program should be "completely independent" of Reclamation. [7]

To encourage visitors to stay overnight, Reclamation

created a very popular thirty-minute display of colored

lights playing on the water spilling over the face of the

dam. The seasonal light show began in 1957, the same

year Reclamation opened its new tour center. These

developments led LARO Superintendent Hugh Peyton

to anticipate increased visitation to the national

recreation area's facilities at Spring Canyon and North

Marina. Although the tour center focused on telling the

story of the construction of Grand Coulee Dam,

Reclamation did invite LARO to provide a large map

of the national recreation area (NRA) for the lobby and

one or two photographs for a slide show. When LARO

personnel requested Park Service help with this

project, however, they were told to wait until the

Western Museum Laboratory (where exhibit specialists

were located) was in operation. The work was done in

1960, with detailed directions provided by LARO
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi8.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:19 PM]

had best be left to the builders. 

-- John E. Doerr, Park Service

Chief Naturalist, 1949 [8]

Superintendent Homer Robinson, who asked that

visitor facilities be shown by symbols and activities by

cartoon characters. Although visitors had no trouble

finding the Reclamation tour center, they had more

difficulty finding Park Service facilities along the lake

because of the lack of signs on approach roads. [9]

In 1961, Reclamation replaced its guided tours of the powerhouse with a free self-guided tour

of the powerhouse and later of the pumping plant, too, with taped talks at a number of

locations. During the 1960s, the Reclamation tour center was staffed jointly by Reclamation

and the Park Service. LARO Park Naturalist Paul McCrary wrote, "The interests of the

Bureau of Reclamation and the Service at [Coulee Dam] go hand-in-glove. It is undesirable

and impractical for the Service to establish separate visitor center facilities." During this

period, up to four hundred people an hour entered the tour center. The Park Service evening

programs there brought together North Marina and Spring Canyon campers and people

staying in local motels, providing an opportunity for LARO personnel to emphasize the

recreational opportunities of the area. But by 1967, Park Naturalist Arthur Hathaway was

suggesting that these duties at the dam revert to Reclamation. [10]

The construction of the third powerhouse at Grand Coulee Dam required Reclamation to

reconsider its visitor facilities. In 1967, Reclamation contracted with Spokane architect

Kenneth Brooks to design ways to showcase Grand Coulee Dam. His proposal included an

Arrival Center on the left bank below the left powerhouse, an exterior elevator from the top

of the forebay dam to the third powerhouse, and an aerial cable car to an exhibit center high

above the river that would interpret geology and human history. Most of these elaborate ideas

never made it into reality. [11]

The third powerhouse construction required that the 1957 tour center be removed in 1968,

and a temporary visitor center was constructed with advice from LARO Superintendent

Howard Chapman. The bust of Franklin D. Roosevelt that had been dedicated in 1953 also

had to be removed because of the construction. It was relocated in 1974 from the site of the

forebay of the third powerhouse on the east end of the dam to its present site on the left bank

just upstream of the dam. The Spokane World's Fair of 1974 led to very high visitation; over

468,000 people came to the dam that year. [12]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi8.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:19 PM]

Slide show being given inside Reclamation's Visitor Arrival Center,

1962. Photo courtesy of National Park Service, Lake Roosevelt

National Recreation Area (LARO.FS).

Ever since the 1940s, LARO staff had been urging Reclamation to provide more information

to dam visitors on the recreational facilities along Lake Roosevelt. During the planning for

the existing Reclamation Visitor Arrival Center (VAC), which opened in 1981, the Park

Service expected to have significant input in exhibit planning. LARO staff proposed

producing a joint film that would describe both the dam tours and other recreational activities.

LARO hoped to be able to provide "short, but pleasant and light" exhibits in the new facility,

along with a publication sales outlet and evening programs. [13] LARO's suggestions were

not always adopted, however. When LARO Superintendent William Dunmire reviewed the

exhibit plan for the new VAC, he wrote, "I am astonished to find no focus on Coulee Dam

National Recreation Area in this plan other than as a minor element of the CRT units

[television or computer screens]. . . . I had discussed the desirability of having an orientation

sequence to recreational opportunities on Lake Roosevelt a year or so ago with Bob Evans

and understood that it would be incorporated in the plan." [14]

The spillway colored lighting program was discontinued in 1977 because the new

powerhouse required more water for power generation (spilling water over the face of the

dam thus became wasteful). The light show was replaced by lectures and movies sponsored

by the Park Service and Reclamation. Because of public demand, in 1989 Congress

authorized a laser light show to be played across the face of the dam, a program that requires

much less water to be spilled. The show runs every night from May until September. The

laser light show uses popular music and a human voice speaking as the Columbia River to

provide a thumbnail history of the river and the people who have lived along it and used its

waters. Although it does mention recreation as a benefit of the Columbia Basin Irrigation

Project, the only reservoir it mentions by name is Banks Lake; Lake Roosevelt and the NRA

are not specifically mentioned. [15]

Even though the planning documents written in the 1970s and 1980s called for the Park

Service to partner with Reclamation, this did not happen until the early 1990s. LARO staff

felt that the 1981 VAC did not lend itself to much more than dispensing park brochures and

program schedules and providing recreational information at computer stations. Often even

these methods of getting out the word about LARO failed, such as when the computer

printers were down or the folders had all been handed out. The new 1990 Multi-Party

Agreement, however, mentioned that interpretation at the Reclamation VAC should address

the impact of the Columbia Basin Irrigation Project on the tribes and also should inform

visitors of available recreational resources. Chief of Interpretation Dan Brown approached

Reclamation officials with a proposal based partly on the interpretation program at Glen

Canyon National Recreation Area, where the Park Service, not Reclamation, led interpretive

tours through the dam's powerhouse. According to Brown, Reclamation was reluctant to have

LARO personnel share the same information desk because "our uniforms were more official

looking and they felt that visitors would come to us rather than to them, and they were right."

[16] Personnel of both agencies shared the same information desk in 1990 and 1991, but then

the Park Service was relegated to a small desk that was not easily visible, so less than 10

percent of the nearly 500,000 annual visitors stopped at it. [17]

LARO had had an agreement with Reclamation that a blind vendor would sell LARO books

at the VAC; these sales contributed significantly to the park's total sales. (Blind vendors, by

law, are given priority rights to provide concession services in appropriate federal buildings).

When LARO personnel began staffing the VAC, Reclamation relocated the vendor to a

trailer in the parking lot because the vendor was not willing to share the inside space with the
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi8.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:19 PM]

Park Service. The State Department of Services for the Blind contended that the Northwest

Interpretive Association (LARO's cooperating association) was a vending facility in direct

competition with the displaced visually impaired vendor and should be prohibited from

selling books. Dan Brown and others were called to Seattle in 1995 to testify regarding the

case. An arbitration board decided in favor of the blind vendor, and the Park Service had to

move out of the VAC. If the Park Service continued to sell publications in the VAC, the

agency would have to give a percentage of sales to the blind vendor. The Park Service

decided not to continue its presence and sales items there. Brown summarized, "We

essentially just closed up shop and went home. It was a four-year challenge." He felt that it

was difficult to make a strong case for the Park Service without more support from within the

agency, from Reclamation, and from the cooperating association. Today, the blind vendor in

the VAC sells a few LARO items; he buys them from the Northwest Interpretive Association

and sets his own prices. [18]

Current LARO Superintendent Vaughn Baker does not plan to have Park Service interpretive

personnel work at the VAC. "Frankly, I wouldn't want to be there," he said. "The purpose of

the VAC is to tell the story of the dam, and that's not why we're here. That's Reclamation's

story; that's not our story." Currently the only Park Service "presence" in the Reclamation

facility is a large map of the national recreation area. Present interpretive staff remains

interested in helping Reclamation "flesh out their story," but whether this will occur remains

to be seen. [19]

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

laro/adhi/adhi8.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 9)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi9.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:20 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 9:

From Simple to Complex: Cultural Resource

Management

Cultural resource management at Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area has been fraught

with challenges. Initially the needs of recreation and industry took precedence. Early park

managers were not much concerned with cultural resources because the two obvious historic

sites, Fort Spokane and St. Paul's Mission, were outside the original boundaries and most

archaeological sites were hidden under reservoir waters. This changed in the 1960s with the

acquisition of Fort Spokane, passage of the National Historic Preservation Act and

subsequent legislation, and the start of drawdowns for construction of the third powerhouse

at Grand Coulee Dam. Today there are four federal agencies, two Tribal Historic Preservation

Offices, and one State Historic Preservation Office — with the shared goal of resource

protection but often differing agendas — who participate in some capacity in the complex

task of cultural resource management at Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area (LARO).

Grave Removal and Columbia Basin Archaeological Survey, 1939-1940

Archaeological investigations of the reservoir area were essentially an afterthought in the late

1930s, during the bustling period of construction at Grand Coulee Dam and the associated

reservoir clearing. Elsewhere in the country, the Tennessee Valley Authority had conducted

salvage archaeology operations at each of its major reservoirs during the 1930s, but the

United States Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) did not play any serious role in

archaeological investigations until the (Missouri) River Basin Surveys Program in the mid1940s. Nonetheless, Reclamation got involved, at least peripherally, with a hurried program

of archaeological salvage at the Columbia River Reservoir (Lake Roosevelt) in 1939-40. [1]

One non-archaeological aspect of the project began ca. 1938 when the tribes became

concerned about the imminent flooding of their cemeteries at various locations along the

Spokane and Columbia rivers. The Office of Indian Affairs (OIA) intervened on their behalf

and began negotiations with Reclamation for relocation of known cemeteries as well as

isolated burials. This function was later formalized in the Act of June 29, 1940 (Acquisition

of Indian Lands for Grand Coulee Dam, 54 Stat.703). That legislation authorized the

Secretary of the Interior to acquire Indian cemeteries, essentially trading them for new lands

to be used for the same purpose. All human remains, grave markers, and "other

appurtenances" were to be removed to the new site, with costs borne by the Grand Coulee

project. [2]

Work began in September 1939 when the Spokane undertaking firm of Ball & Dodd was

awarded the contract to relocate both Indian and non-Indian graves away from the area to be

flooded; this was strictly a burial relocation project, separate from the subsequent

archaeological investigations. The locations of most Euroamerican cemeteries were known,

but Reclamation hired non-Indian resident Cull White and knowledgeable tribal members to

help locate Indian burial sites. Other Indians worked for Ball & Dodd building wooden boxes
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 9)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi9.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:20 PM]

to hold human remains; these containers were small, just long enough for the leg bones and

deep enough for the skull. (It is not known if the remains of non-Indians were reboxed in the

same fashion or not.) During the process of exhumation of Indian burials, workers discovered

hundreds of artifacts that had been buried with the deceased. Many of these were not reburied

with the bones and instead were collected for their intended return to the tribes.

Archaeologists who followed Ball & Dodd a year later called the undertakers' work a "major

calamity, from the archaeological point of view" because their methods of exhumation

completely destroyed all scientific evidence. [3]

Accounts vary concerning the total number of graves that were relocated with such haste in

late 1939. Reclamation reported a total of 915 graves moved at a cost of $19,642.60; another

source listed the reburial bid as $10,728. Howard T. Ball, who supervised the field work,

initially reported that his crews relocated 1,027 graves, but he later changed this figure to

1,388. Tribal leaders reported another 2,000 sites in the fall of 1940, with additional

discoveries expected, but Reclamation refused to continue the relocation. All remaining

graves were soon covered with water. [4]

Archaeological recovery was first considered when the Inland Empire Indian Relics Society

approached Reclamation in 1939 with a plan to have an archaeologist supervise a crew hired

by the Work Projects Administration (WPA) to conduct salvage archaeology in the reservoir

area. Neither Reclamation nor WPA had funds for such work, however. The Relics Society

then joined with the Eastern Washington State Historical Society, which provided funding for

a reconnaissance survey of the reservoir area from the dam to the Canadian border. When

that was completed, the University of Washington and State College of Washington (later

known as Washington State University) accepted archaeological oversight of the Columbia

Basin Archaeological Survey (CBAS). The Historical Society also interested the National

Youth Administration in providing manual labor and camp costs for field work that began in

the fall of 1939 and continued for a year, with numerous test excavations at promising

locations. Crews concentrated on three kinds of locations: habitation sites, shell middens, and

burial sites; the last contained the most artifacts. [5]

This first archaeological project has been strongly criticized by recent archaeologists for both

its methods and conclusions, but it is clear that the staff struggled with a difficult situation in

1939-1940. Time was limited as the waters rose relentlessly, forcing the inexperienced crews

to move farther up the reservoir. They were pushed to work rapidly and often "superficially . .

. as the water lapped about our heels," they reported. Supervisory personnel changed several

times, and those remaining had trouble making sense of others' field notes. Heavy sod cover

protected and hid many sites that have been found by subsequent archaeologists. The CBAS

conclusions that the area was sparsely populated and the cultures were "simple" have since

been disproved. More recent archaeologists have been able to find many additional sites that

have been exposed after decades of water fluctuations and wave action eroded banks. The

layers of stratigraphy have been destroyed, however, making interpretation difficult. [6]

Cemetery removal continued to be a problem for Reclamation, especially during the first

decade of the reservoir when the banks continued to shift as they sought a stable angle of

slope. Crews moved forty burials, for under $725, from the Klaxta cemetery in 1941 when

the site was at considerable risk of sliding into the water. Another 850 graves from four slide

areas were located in 1949 and removed the following year for approximately $20,000.

Reclamation placed riprap on part of the Spokane Arm to protect a cemetery in 1965, slowing

erosion at the site. In a much smaller project in April 1972, Barnes Funeral Home in Grand

Coulee removed parts of sixteen burials in scattered graves along the Spokane River and

reburied them in a common grave in the Westend Presbyterian Cemetery, at the request of the

Spokane Tribe of Indians (STI). The tribe also asked that any artifacts found with the graves

be turned over to the tribe. Some high banks continue to slump as they erode toward a new
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 9)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi9.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:20 PM]

angle of repose. Such activity threatens the sites at Mission Point, requiring regular

monitoring by the LARO archaeologist. [7]

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

laro/adhi/adhi9.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 10)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi10.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:21 PM]

[Coulee Dam Recreational

Area] is not a national park or

a national monument since the

preservation of superlative

natural scenery, the

conservation of outstanding

plant and animal life, or the

safeguarding of nationally

important historic or scientific

objects are not factors.

Therefore policies of

development and use which

govern National Park Service

areas do not necessarily apply

on this area. 

-- Claude E. Greider, LARO

Superintendent, 1946 [1]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 10:

An Uphill Struggle: Natural Resources

Management

When Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area

(LARO) was created in 1946, National Park Service

management focused on its recreational and industrial

resources. The natural resources of primary interest

were the visual, aesthetic aspects of the scenery and

the fishery, which at that time was very poor. The

1965 Master Plan for LARO stated summarily that

"There are no ecological or wildlife problems and

hunting is permitted according to state regulations."

[2] At that time, natural resources management

Servicewide involved direct manipulation of natural

elements, including nurturing favored species and

reducing problem species such as predators. Research,

when it was funded, was generally seen as a tool for

solving immediate management problems. Resource

problems were often ignored until they reached a crisis

point, and they were hardly ever viewed in an

ecosystem context. [3]

Over the following decades, the trend within the Park

Service has been to progressively minimize management interference and to allow natural

ecosystem processes to operate freely. The Leopold Report of 1962 recommended that

management of natural resources be based on scientific research and that the Park Service

should maintain or recreate the biotic associations within each park to the conditions that

existed when Euroamericans first visited the area. These recommendations greatly affected

subsequent Park Service natural resources management policy and operations. Scientific

research began to get more funding, mostly because of increased environmental awareness.

The passage of the National Environmental Policy Act in 1969 led to policy revisions. [4]

The creation of Lake Roosevelt had many effects on the natural resources of the area. Home

ground, grazing land, and migratory resting areas were eliminated for some 350 species of

wildlife, and fluctuating lake levels prevented vegetation from establishing along the

shoreline. Resource consumption, such as grazing and hunting, has been allowed within the

national recreation area (NRA) boundaries. [5]

Even so, the first interbureau agreement draft of 1941 and the Tri-Party Agreement of 1946

gave the Park Service the responsibility of conserving and protecting the scenic, scientific,

and aesthetic values of the area, along with the "flowers, shrubs and trees, historic or

archeological remains." LARO staff were further charged with preventing water and air

pollution and protecting health, plants, fish, and wildlife. The Park Service had to coordinate

its efforts with a variety of agencies, including the Washington Pollution Control
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 10)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi10.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:21 PM]

The issue of the role and

function of the National Park

Service, particularly as it

relates to the management of

fish and wildlife resources,

continues to surface, much to

my concern. It has been my

observation in the one year I

have been the Superintendent of

Coulee Dam National

Recreation Area that we have

not done a good job of

informing interested publics

about who we are and what our

mission is. 

-- Gerry Tays, LARO

Superintendent, 1994 [7]

Commission, Washington Department of Health, U.S. Public Health Service, U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service, Office of Indian Affairs (OIA), and Washington Department of Fish and

Wildlife. LARO also consulted with other agencies as necessary, such as the U.S. Forest

Service. LARO's status as a national park unit, subject to the purposes and mission of the

Park Service, became official in 1970, when Congress defined national recreation areas as

part of the National Park System. [6]

Park Service science and natural resources

management received a boost from a 1979 National

Parks and Conservation Association report that

emphasized external threats. The 1980 State of the

Parks report called for a comprehensive inventory of

natural resources, monitoring programs, park plans for

managing natural resources, and increased staffing and

training in science and natural resources management.

Resource Management Plans (RMPs) have been

required since the 1960s. These plans define a strategy

and program for stewardship of a park's natural and

cultural resources, and they are used as budget

documents with prioritized projects. LARO developed

a Natural Resources Management Plan, probably its

first, in 1973, with help from other federal and state

agencies. RMPs were again prepared in 1982, 1988,

and 1997. [8]

During the 1970s, natural resources management at

LARO was performed by rangers as a collateral duty

and did not receive much emphasis. Likewise, funding for natural resources management in

the 1980s covered personnel costs for rangers and little else. Funding for necessary projects

was obtained by dropping maintenance projects, using reprogrammed salary lapses, or

drawing from the park base. Most of the responsibility for monitoring natural resources

continued to rest with the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), with the exception of

visitor health and safety, early warning programs, and Park Service compliance with the

National Environmental Policy Act for its own projects. Gordon Boyd, LARO's Chief

Ranger, commented in 1986, "I strongly support the Service's efforts to increase our [natural]

resource management capabilities. It can only pay long range dividends." [9]

LARO's staffing has reflected the increasing emphasis on natural resources management.

Until 1990, the Visitor and Resource Protection Division took care of all natural resources

management programs at LARO as a collateral duty of rangers and interpreters. Newly

arrived Chief Ranger Darrell Cook realized that the park needed a more professional resource

management program with staff with subject-matter expertise, and he knew funding was

available for established programs. He created a natural resource specialist position by

converting a vacant park ranger position, and Karen Taylor-Goodrich filled this position in

1990 as a Park Service natural resources management trainee. In 1992, she became the

manager of LARO's natural and cultural resource programs, and two years later a separate

Resources Management Division was established to handle these resource programs. Funding

and staff shortages, however, have continued to limit the program. According to a 1994

report, the park had less than one-third the staffing it needed for the natural resource

program. Servicewide, the initiative to increase resource management programs occurred

simultaneously with the push for government downsizing, and this hurt the resource

management thrust. The program currently depends on partial funding from outside entities to

support special resource management projects. Recently, the scope of the Chief of Resource

Management position was broadened to include planning functions. The park still has a
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 10)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi10.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:21 PM]

Natural Resource Specialist. [10]

The Park Service's 1991 symposium in Vail, Colorado, recommended that the primary

responsibility of the Park Service should be protecting park resources from internal and

external threats. In line with this recommendation, LARO's objectives for natural resources

management as defined in the 1997 RMP include preserving, protecting, and managing

natural resources through planning, inventorying, monitoring, and implementation of plans;

maintaining or restoring a semblance of indigenous flora and fauna and natural communities

in natural or undeveloped zones of the NRA; mitigating or preventing resource-damaging

activities inside or outside the NRA; incorporating resource protection in all development

planning documents such as environmental assessments; working with other resource

managers in the area; developing a Geographic Information System; and balancing visitor

use with resource protection. [11]

LARO's current Natural Resources Specialist, Scott Hebner, exchanges information with his

counterparts in the neighboring tribes. He acknowledges that the tribes have developed a

more sophisticated approach to natural resources management than the recreation area has

because they are responsible for much larger geographic areas and have more funding and

staffing. They have more of a multiple-use philosophy than the Park Service in some ways,

but they also state that they try to consider the impacts of their actions on seven generations

into the future. [12]

To aid in scientific research, the Park Service established a number of special universitybased research offices in the 1970s. These are known as Cooperative Park Studies Units. In

1992, LARO resource management staff worked with the unit at the University of

Washington to complete resource databases on flora, fauna, soils, air, water, and geographic

information and planned to develop long-term monitoring projects to protect the park's

resources. In the late 1990s, park staff identified a number of inventories that were needed to

help manage LARO's natural resources, including data on vegetation, soils, geology, and

paleontological resources. Much baseline research and surveys are still needed. Special

Congressional funding for level one biological inventories of vertebrates and vascular plants

may become available soon as part of the Servicewide Natural Resources Initiative. This is an

effort to bring all park units up to a certain standard for inventorying and monitoring natural

resources. [13]

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

laro/adhi/adhi10.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 11)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi11.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:22 PM]

As a general policy it is agreed

that a special use of the

Reservoir Area by an individual

is a privilege and not a right,

and that each special use must

be justified in the public

interest. Inquiries proposing

apparent detrimental uses of

the Area will be rejected by the

Park Service without the

formality of preparing standard

applications. 

-- Claude E. Greider, NPS

Recreation Planner, April 23,

1943 [4]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 11:

Regaining Ground: Leases and Special Use

Permits

Many types of special use permits and leases soon will be a thing of the past at Lake

Roosevelt National Recreation Area (LARO). Once considered a useful way to encourage

development and use of federally owned lands, they are now seen as encouraging

privatization of public lands. Over the years, such permits have allowed individuals and

companies to use Lake Roosevelt shore lands for industrial, agricultural, and recreational

activities. Applications for special use permits began before the National Park Service had

even taken responsibility for the recreational development of the new reservoir, and uses

gradually multiplied in the ensuing decades. Along with permitted activities came illegal use

of federal lands, either through encroachment (an unauthorized use of public lands) or

trespass (a more serious violation that usually is handled through the legal process). The

problem with encroachments can be attributed partially to the physical configuration of the

park, a narrow strip of land sandwiched between the high-water line and a largely unmarked

boundary generally twenty feet higher in elevation. Lack of consistent policies and

enforcement also contributed to the eventual proliferation of encroachment cases. Park

Service philosophy and policies changed by the 1980s to restrict special uses on park lands.

When LARO began to revise its policies to bring them into conformance with Park Service

guidelines, the park met strong resistance from permittees, adjacent property owners, and

local officials. The resulting struggle tested wills, tempers, and managerial skills and

ultimately changed the appearance and operating philosophy of the park. [1]

Developing Policy for Special Park Uses, 1940s

Requests for special use permits began arriving before

water filled the newly cleared reservoir behind Grand

Coulee Dam. At that time, the Park Service was

working on field studies and initial plans for the

recreation area, but it had not yet been assigned the job

of development and administration. The U.S. Bureau

of Reclamation continued to administer the area until

the two agencies signed a memorandum of agreement

in July 1942. During negotiations for the interagency

agreement, Reclamation insisted that all funds

generated by special use permits go to a special

account to benefit the Columbia Basin Project. [2]

Even after the agreement was signed, the Park Service

did not immediately take over the administration of

special use permits. In August 1942, Landscape

Architect Philip Kearney, the sole Park Service
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 11)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi11.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:22 PM]

Special use permit fees, 1943:

Minimum fee $5

Private boat

dock

$5

Commercial

boat dock

$25

Boat and

barge

construction

 Pleasure

craft

$5

 Commercial

craft

$25

Boat service

 Gas and oil $10

 Gas, oil,

supplies, boat

storage

$50

Grazing

 Sheep 5

cents/head/month

 Cattle and

horses

25

cents/head/month

Watering

stock with

necessary

fencing

$5

Livestock $5

employee then at the reservoir, reported that there had

been several applications for permits in the past few days, including one for a sawmill and

tramway at Kettle Falls on lands considered for recreational development. F. A. Banks,

Reclamation Supervising Engineer, was pressuring the Park Service to handle these permits,

but Kearney did not yet have either authority or a formal policy. He appealed to the regional

office for help. Claude E. Greider, Park Service Recreation Planner and later first LARO

Superintendent, suggested that Kearney send all applications to the Regional Director with a

full report and recommendations. When considering the sawmill application, he should assess

the need for a mill in that location, the integrity of the applicant, and the possibility of

finding an alternate location that would not compromise recreational values. [3]

Greider's arrival at the reservoir in late December 1942 doubled the Park Service staff in the

area. He took over administrative responsibilities and by early 1943 had developed guidelines

for special use permits. Greider's primary concerns were that no special use should conflict

with Reclamation's primary project needs or the Park Service's plans for recreational

development. He laid out a general policy with the underlying premise that a special use of

federal land was a privilege instead of a right. Did it contribute to needs of area residents

economically, socially, or for recreation? Was it safe and fair? Would it set a bad precedent?

What were the potential effects on wildlife and scenery? Was there an area outside the

reservoir that would fill the applicant's need equally well? [5]

During the next year, Greider worked on both the

permit application form and a schedule of fees, both

of which needed Reclamation approval. After the

form worked its way through various levels of

bureaucracy, Banks informed Greider in April 1944

that it had been approved and he would soon be

receiving five hundred mimeographed copies. The

only major change was the deletion of grazing and

agricultural permits for lands adjoining reservations

pending determination of Indian rights to these areas.

The Reclamation counsel also added a standard clause

releasing the United States from responsibility for any

damage the permittee might incur from fluctuating

lake levels. The initial fee schedule covering six

possible uses quickly expanded to eleven as requests

rolled in during 1943. Greider recommended the fees

apply to permits of one year or less, with applicants

having the option to renew for an additional four

years. He believed that anything longer than five years

needed to be covered under a license, lease, or

easement, with the fee based on the current value of

the land. [6]

The 1946 Tri-Party Agreement mandated that the

Park Service take primary responsibility for special

use permits involving federal lands and waters. The

agency was instructed to issue permits for legitimate

industrial and recreational purposes, along with

agricultural and grazing uses, for lands in the Coulee

Dam Recreational Area. The Office of Indian Affairs

(OIA), however, handled all agricultural, grazing, and

log dump permits in the Indian Zones. The Park

Service also assumed responsibility for all permits
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 11)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi11.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:22 PM]

drift fence

Pumping

plant and

pipe line

 Private,

domestic and

irrigation

$5

 Public,

town or

resort

$25

Agriculture,

cultivation

$2/acre but

not less than

$5 total

Log dump

and log

loading

$25 [8]

and leases issued by Reclamation to date. Each permit

had to contain clauses to protect Reclamation from

responsibility for damages and to place the interests

of the Columbia Basin Project above all other uses.

Finally, all payments collected by the Park Service

were to be deposited into a special account that was

conveyed periodically to Reclamation. [7]

Although the two agencies discussed transferring all

special use permits to the Park Service in 1943,

LARO did not assume full administrative control

until 1947. The transfer eliminated the need for

Reclamation's concurrence on any permits. The Park

Service notified all permittees and leaseholders of this

change. The administration of permits was not as well

coordinated between LARO and OIA, however, and

in May 1950 two LARO rangers met with the

Superintendent of the Colville Agency to discuss his

policy of allowing use of Indian Zone lands without

permits. "This inconsistency in administration of area lands has caused us some

embarrassment with the public," admitted Superintendent Greider. The two agencies took

steps to apply permit policies more consistently. [9]

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

laro/adhi/adhi11.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 12)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi12.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:23 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 12:

Echoes of the Past: Future Issues

Through more than fifty years of operations at Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area

(LARO), a number of issues have proved persistent; some provide continuous challenges

while others lie dormant and emerge periodically. Other challenges are fresh, brought on by

changing recreation habits, emerging technologies, and new legislation. Future managers will

face both old and new issues as LARO moves into the twenty-first century.

Lake Roosevelt currently has five managing partners: three federal agencies and two Indian

tribes. While relations have been rocky at times, there also has been great cooperation on

lakewide issues, from reservoir cleanup to concessions management. Regional counties have

pushed for inclusion in management decisions in recent years, and LARO and the other

managing partners will be challenged to find ways to work cooperatively with county

officials, within the parameters of the 1990 Cooperative Management Agreement. According

to LARO Superintendent Vaughn Baker, relations with tribal and local governments will

always be a challenge due to periodic changes in politics and elected officials. "That always

will be a thing that needs a lot of care and feeding," he said. [1]

In addition to agencies and governments, LARO also works with adjoining property owners,

whose numbers are increasing in response to the rising popularity of Lake Roosevelt. The

Park Service has been perceived as autocratic at times in the past, such as during the push

from 1948-1952 to approve regulations for the new recreation area. At that time, many

individuals spoke out against rules they viewed as overly restrictive. More recently, LARO

officials have come under fire for restricting special uses, particularly private docks, within

the park. The Park Service has been trying to find a balance between park needs and

landowner wishes. "They all feel like we're the eight hundred pound elephant, that every time

we do something it impacts them," noted Baker, "but it's usually the other way around. But

that's the perception because we're federal. [2]

Initially, the Park Service was the sole recreation manager at Lake Roosevelt, responsible for

planning facilities lakewide. The agency worked with the Bureau of Indian Affairs in the

Indian Zones and with U.S. Bureau of Reclamation in the Reclamation Zone. This broke

down in the 1970s when campgrounds in the Indian Zones were returned to the tribes. Since

then, both the Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) and Spokane Tribe of Indians (STI) have

developed their own park programs. In addition, the CCT operates concessions on the lake

through its Roosevelt Recreation Enterprises. With three parties now working in recreation,

lakewide coordination becomes more critical. The 1991 Concession Management Plan is a

good example of such cooperation.

The rapid increase in visitation in the early 1990s posed a challenge for all managing partners

at Lake Roosevelt. Visitation has since leveled off, but if it rises once again, LARO and the

tribes will need additional funding for new facilities. LARO has identified Keller Ferry and

Porcupine Bay as popular sites that need additional or redesigned facilities, and the park may

need to find more areas for the increasingly popular group camping sites. The alternative -
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 12)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi12.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:23 PM]

limiting visitors - is already practiced at LARO, where campgrounds are closed when they

reach capacity. The 1998 Draft General Management Plan allows personal watercraft on the

lake. If, however, they begin to negatively affect the quality of recreational experience for

other visitors, the Park Service may decide to limit their use.

Water quality has been an issue at Lake Roosevelt since the reservoir first filled. At that time,

pollution on the Spokane Arm was so great that the Park Service decided not to develop any

recreational sites there until the river was clean enough for swimming. While the sewage

pollution is no longer a problem there, state and federal agencies are now testing the river for

possible heavy metal contamination from mines farther upstream in Idaho. Pollution from

sources in British Columbia has decreased in recent years but will remain a concern on the

Columbia River. The Crown Jewel Mine, at the headwaters of the Kettle River, has proposed

cyanide treatment for its gold ore. Although the Washington Pollution Control Hearings

Board ruled against the mine, the ruling may be appealed. Another threat to the Kettle River

comes from the proposed Cascade Falls Dam, 1-1/2 miles north of the international boundary

in British Columbia. [3]

Some natural resource issues have been with the park since the beginning. Noxious weeds

plagued the Kettle River area in the late 1940s; fifty years later, the problem is clearly

regional in scope. Although the Park Service controls just a narrow strip of land along the

lake, it cooperates with other governmental entities to combat a wide variety of weeds.

Fluctuating lake levels also have been part of the national recreation area since the 1940s, but

they came to the forefront with major drawdowns during construction of the third

powerhouse in the late 1960s and early 1970s. While Reclamation and the Bonneville Power

Administration used to keep the lake level high during the recreation season, competing

demands for water have made this more problematic. In addition to flood control, the lake

level is also regulated to fill peak power needs. Another serious issue concerns water needed

downstream to aid salmon recovery. The National Marine Fisheries Service is considering

drawing down Lake Roosevelt during summer months to augment the flow of the Columbia

River in low-water years. This could lower the lake level as much as ten feet below the

current minimum summer level. If this occurs, the severe drawdowns will have a drastic

impact on recreation at Lake Roosevelt, closing some boat launches like the popular one at

Hawk Creek. In addition, the lake fishery would be hurt. LARO Superintendent Baker said

that while the park has learned to deal with the annual spring drawdowns, summer ones are

"a different matter." Regional Director John Reynolds has warned the National Marine

Fisheries Service of the potential severe impacts this action would have on recreation at Lake

Roosevelt. [4]

Lake-level fluctuations also affect cultural resources, an issue that has increased in

importance since the mid-1960s. Increased lake drawdowns will expose archaeological sites

to potential vandalism, especially during summer months when visitation is high. Within the

past decade, the tribes have taken over a major portion of the archaeological work for the

entire reservoir. Their views on appropriate methodology have not always meshed with the

Park Service's view of its mandated responsibilities, and the challenge will be to maintain an

appropriate balance between the different perspectives.

The Committee on Problem No. 26 first envisioned the recreation potential of the reservoir

behind Grand Coulee Dam. They believed that visitors would come to the new area - and

they have. Park Service staff at Lake Roosevelt have guided, developed, and defended the

national recreation area through the years as it has evolved into one of the most popular

vacation areas in the region. Their many and varied skills will continue to be needed as the

Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area moves into the twenty-first century.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 12)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi12.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:23 PM]

Endnotes

1 Vaughn L. Baker, interview with Nancy F. Renk, 9 Dec. 1999, Tape 2-B, tape and index on

file, LARO.HQ.

2 Ibid.

3 Tim Coleman, "A crowning achievement in riskiness," Letters to the Editor, SpokesmanReview, 29 Feb. 200, p. B5; Dan Hansen, "Foes of dam on Kettle River hit dead end,"

Spokesman-Review, 26 Feb. 2000, p. B5; Baker interview, Tape 2-B.

4 Baker interview, Tape 2-B; Dan Hansen, "Drawdowns may hit lakes," Spokesman-Review,

9 July 2000, p. A-1.

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

laro/adhi/adhi12.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Appendix A)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhiaa.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:24 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

APPENDIX A:

LARO Superintendents

Claude E. Greider* 12/26/42 to 8/15/53

Hugh Peyton 8/13/53 to 1/31/58

Homer W. Robinson 2/10/58 to 12/30/66

Howard H. Chapman 2/27/67 to 10/22/67

David A. Richie 10/22/67 to 8/22/69

Wayne R. Howe 9/07/69 to 7/04/72

William N. Burgen 7/05/72 to 1/29/77

William W. Dunmire 1/30/77 to 2/07/81

Gary J. Kuiper 4/17/81 to 4/93

Gerald W. Tays 7/93 to 1996

Vaughn L. Baker 1996 to

* Greider's title until 1948 was Recreation Planner or Supervisor rather than Superintendent.

note: A list of LARO employees for the years 1941-2000, prepared for this project, is on file

in the LARO archives.

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

laro/adhi/adhiaa.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Appendix B)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhiab.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:25 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

APPENDIX B:

Acquisition of Indian Lands

June 29, 1940

ACQUISITION OF INDIAN LANDS FOR GRAND COULEE DAM

An act for the acquisition of Indian lands for the Grand Coulee Dam and Reservoir, and for other purposes. (Act of June 29, 1940, ch. 460, 54

Stat. 703)

SEC. 1. [Indians' rights to lands granted for Grand Coulee Dam—No lands taken above

elevation 1310—Interests granted for pipe lines, highways, railroads, telegraph and

telephone, electric transmission lines.]—That, in aid of the construction of the Grand Coulee

Dam project, authorized by the Act of August 30, 1935 (49 Stat. 1028), there is hereby

granted to the United States, subject to the provisions of this Act, (a) all the right, title, and

interest of the Indians in and to the tribal and allotted lands within the Spokane and Colville

Reservations, including sites of agency and school buildings and related structures and

unsold lands in Klaxta town site, as may be designated therefor by the Secretary of the

Interior from time to time: Provided, That no lands shall be taken for reservoir purposes

above the elevation of one thousand three hundred and ten feet above sea level as shown by

General Land Office surveys, except in Klaxta town site; and (b) such other interests in or to

any of such lands and property within these reservations as may be required and as may be

designated by the Secretary of the Interior from time to time for the construction of pipe

lines, highways, railroads, telegraph, telephone, and electric-transmission lines in connection

with the project, or for the relocation or reconstruction of such facilities made necessary by

the Construction of the project.

NOTE

In connection with the relocaton of roads made necessary by the construction of the project, the Secretary has on

occasion designated, at the request of the Bureau, "all right, title and interest of the Indians," rather than designating

a lesser interest. Letters approved November 18, 1940, and December 31, 1940, by the Secretary.

[One-quarter reservoir to be set aside for Indians for hunting, fishing and boating—Indians'

rights not to interfere with project operations.]—The Secretary of the Interior, in lieu of

reserving rights of hunting, fishing, and boating to the Indians in the areas granted under this

Act, shall set aside approximately one-quarter of the entire reservoir area for the paramount

use of the Indians of the Spokane and Colville Reservations for hunting, fishing, and boating

purposes, which rights shall be subject only to such reasonable regulations as the Secretary

may prescribe for the protection and conservation of fish and wildlife: Provided, That the

exercise of the Indians' rights shall not interfere with project operations. The Secretary shall

also, where necessary, grant to the Indians reasonable rights of access to such area or areas

across any project lands.

ACQUISITION OF INDIAN LANDS FOR GRAND COULEE DAM

SEC. 2. [Secretary to determine equitable compensation—Compensation for tribal lands to be
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Appendix B)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhiab.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:25 PM]

deposited in Treasury to credit of appropriate tribe—Compensation for individuals to be paid

to superintendent of the Colville Indian Agency for individuals.]—As lands or interests in

lands are designated from time to time under this Act, the Secretary of the Interior shall

determine the amount of money to be paid to the Indians as just and equitable compensation

therefor. As to the tribal lands, the amounts so determined shall be transferred in the Treasury

of the United States from the funds now or hereafter made available for the construction of

the Grand Coulee Dam project to the credit of the appropriate tribe pursuant to the provisions

of the Act of May 17, 1926 (44 Stat. 560). The amounts due individual landowners or their

heirs or devisees shall be paid from funds now or hereafter made available for the

construction of said project to the superintendent of the Colville Indian Agency or such other

officer as shall be designated by the Secretary of the Interior for credit on the books of said

agency to the accounts of the individuals concerned.

SEC. 3. (Funds of allottees may be used for acquisition of other lands—Lands thus acquired

to be held in same status—Nontaxable until otherwise provided by Congress]—Funds

deposited to the credit of allottees, their heirs or devisees may be used in the discretion of the

Secretary of the Interior, for the acquisition of other lands and improvements, or the

relocation of existing improvements or construction of new improvements on the lands so

acquired for the allottees or heirs whose lands and improvements are acquired under the

provisions of this Act. Lands so acquired shall be held in the same status as those from

which the funds were derived, and shall be nontaxable until otherwise provided by Congress.

SEC. 4. (Secretary to select other cemetery lands—authorized to remove bodies and markers

there to—Costs to be paid from project appropriations—Rights of Indians in cemeteries

relocated to terminate—Sites of relocated cemeteries shall be held in trust by United States

for Indians.]—As to any Indian cemetery lands required for the project, the Secretary of the

Interior is authorized, in his discretion, in lieu of requiring payment therefor, to establish

cemeteries on other lands that he may select and acquire for the purpose, and to remove

bodies, markers, and other appurtenances to the new sites. All costs incurred in connection

with any such relocation shall be paid from moneys appropriated for the project. All right,

title, and interest of the Indians in the lands within any cemetery so relocated shall terminate

and the grant of title under this Act take effect as of the date the Secretary of the Interior

authorizes the relocation. Sites of the relocated cemeteries shall be held in trust by the United

States for the Spokane or Colville Tribe, as the case may be, and shall be nontaxable.

SEC. 5. The Secretary of the Interior is hereby authorized to perform any and all acts and to

prescribe such regulations as he may deem appropriate to carry out the provisions of this Act.

NOTE

Regulations governing the designation of lands, the determination of compensation, and related problems were

approved by the Department September 3, 1940.

Legislative history.—H. R. 9445, Public Law 690 in the 76th Congress. House Report 2350 with amendment. 86

Congr. Rec. 7411; 8838.

December 16, 1944

ACQUISITION OF INDIAN LANDS FOR GRAND COULEE DAM AND RESERVOIR

An act to amend section 1, Act of June 29, 1940 (54 Stat. 703), for the acquisition of Indian lands for the Grand Coulee Dam and Reservoir, and

for other purposes. (Act of December 16, 1944, ch. 601, 53 Stat. 813)
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Appendix B)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhiab.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:25 PM]

[In special circumstances lands may be taken above elevation 1310—Lands taken for

operation and maintenance.]—That the first paragraph of section 1 of the Act approved June

29, 1940 (54 Stat. 703), be amended to read as follows: "That, in aid of the construction,

operation and maintenance of the Columbia Basin project (formerly the Grand Coulee Dam

project), authorized by the Act of August 30, 1935 (49 Stat. 1028), the Act of August 4, 1939

(53 Stat. 1187), and the Columbia Basin Project Act (Public, Numbered 8, Seventy-eighth

Congress, first session, 57 Stat. 14), there is hereby granted to the United States, subject to

the provisions of this Act, (a) all the right, title, and interest of the Indians in and to the tribal

and allotted lands within the Spokane and Colville Reservations, including sites of agency

and school buildings and related structures and unsold lands. in the Klaxta town site, as may

be designated therefor by the Secretary of the Interior from time to time: Provided, That no

lands shall be taken for reservoir purposes above the elevation of one thousand three hundred

and ten feet above sea level as shown by General Land Office surveys except in Klaxta town

site and except where in the judgment of the Secretary of the Interior, special circumstances

concerning the reservoir or its operation and maintenance require the taking of land above

that elevation; and (b) such other interests in or to any such lands and property within these

reservations as may be required and as may be designated by the Secretary of the Interior

from time to time for the construction of pipe lines, highways, rail roads, telegraph,

telephone, and electric-transmission lines in connection with the project, or for the relocation

or reconstruction of such facilities made necessary by the construction of the project."

Legislative history.—S. 1597 (H.R. 3869), Public Law 497 in the 78th Congress, Senate Report 827 with

amendment; House Report 2003. 90 Congr. Rec. 5053; 9320.

From Federal Reclamation Laws Annotated, Vol. 1 (file Copy - CODA Historical Files #2,

LARO.HQ.SUP).

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

laro/adhi/adhiab.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Appendix C)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhiac.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:27 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

APPENDIX C:

Memorandum of Agreement

COPY

MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT AMONG THE BUREAU OF RECLAMATION,

NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, AND OFFICE OF INDIAN AFFAIRS RELATING TO THE

PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT, AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE COULEE DAM

RECREATIONAL AREA

Recitals

1. Whereas, the Bureau of Reclamation (herein called Reclamation) in connection with its

responsibility for the construction, operation, and maintenance of the Columbia Basin Project

has withdrawn or acquired lands and will acquire additional lands under the Federal

Reclamation Laws, being the Act of June 17, 1902 (32 Stat. 388) and acts amendatory thereof

and supplementary thereto, including the Columbia Basin Project Act (57 Stat. 14) and the

pertinent portion of section 2 of the Act of August 30, 1935 (49 Stat. 1028, 1039) for the

construction, operation, and maintenance of the Grand Coulee Dam and the reservoir formed

thereby;

2. Whereas, the Committee for the Study of Problem No. 26, Joint Investigations, Columbia

Basin Project, has found that the recreational and other natural resources of the Franklin D.

Roosevelt Lake and adjacent lands under the jurisdiction of Reclamation, which together

comprise the reservoir area, offer unusual opportunities through sound planning,

development, and management for health, social, and economic gains for the people of the

Nation;

3. Whereas, approximately one—fourth of the reservoir area is contiguous to Indian lands in

the Spokane and Colville Reservations under the jurisdiction of the Office of Indian Affairs

(herein called the Indian Office), which area has potential uses for recreation and other

beneficial purposes;

4. Whereas, there is an inter—relationship between the development of recreational and other

natural resources of the reservoir area and the contiguous Indian lands;

5. Whereas, the Congressional Act, approved June 29, 1940 (54 Stat. 703), for the acquisition

of Indian lands for the reservoir area and for other purposes, provides, among other things

(paragraph 2 of section 1), as follows:

"The Secretary of the Interior, in lieu of reserving rights of hunting, fishing, and

boating to the Indians in the areas granted under this Act, shall set aside

approximately one—quarter of the entire reservoir area for the paramount use of

the Indians of the Spokane and Colville Reservations for hunting, fishing, and

boating purposes, which rights shall be subject only to such reasonable

regulations as the Secretary may prescribe for the protection and conservation of
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Appendix C)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhiac.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:27 PM]

fish and wildlife: PROVIDED, That the exercise of the Indians' rights shall not

interfere with project operations. The Secretary shall also, where necessary, grant

to the Indians reasonable rights of access to such area or areas across any project

lands;"

and the Solicitor of the Department of the Interior has written an opinion under date of

December 29, 1945, M. 34326, construing the same;

6. Whereas, the use of the portion or portions of the reservoir area set aside for the paramount

use of the Indians for hunting, fishing, and boating purposes under authorization of said Act

will vitally affect planning and use of the area by others for recreation and other purposes;

7. Whereas, the National Park Service (herein called the Service) is specialized and

experienced in planning, developing, maintaining, and managing areas devoted to

recreational uses, among others, and by the Act of June 23, 1936 (49 Stat. 1894), is

authorized to cooperate with other Federal agencies in developing recreational programs; and

8. Whereas, the respective parties to this agreement are in a position to supply the services

herein provided and, in accordance with the provisions of Title VI of the Act of Congress of

June 30, 1932 (47 Stat. 417), it has been determined to be in the interest of the Government

to use such services;

NOW THEREFORE, Reclamation, the Service, and the Indian Office, with the approval of

the Secretary of the Interior, do hereby mutually agree as follows:

PART I

General Provisions

1. There is attached hereto a set of maps marked "Exhibit A"*, comprising 4 sheets numbered

RA—CD—7001—l, 2, 3, and 4, dated April 15, 1946, on which are shown by general

location: (a) the entire reservoir area; (b) the portion thereof comprising the Coulee Dam

Recreational Area (here in called the Recreational Area); and (c) the portions of the reservoir

area, within the outer boundaries of the Recreational Area, hereby set aside, in accordance

with the provisions of section 1 of the Act of June 29, 1940 (54 Stat. 703), for the paramount

use for hunting, fishing, and boating purposes by, respectively, the Indians of the Spokane

Reservation and of the Colville Reservation. The latter portions are designated herein,

respectively, the Spokane Indian Zone and the Colville Indian Zone. Detailed data as to the

boundaries of the Recreational Area and of the Indian Zones, as they may hereafter be

modified by proper authority, will be kept available in the files of Reclamation.

*A copy of "Exhibit A" is available in the Director's Office, National Park

Service.

2. The dominant consideration in the administration and utilization of the Recreational Area

under this agreement shall be the purposes for which the Grand Coulee Dam is being

constructed, operated, and maintained; these purposes being controlled floods, improving

navigation, regulating flow of the streams of the United States, providing for storage and for

the delivery of the stored waters thereof, for the reclamation of public lands and Indian

Reservations, and other beneficial uses, and for the generation of electrical energy.

3. As between the agencies party to this agreement, Reclamation shall retain: (a) complete

and exclusive control of the flow and utilization of water at Grand Coulee Dam and of all

public access to Grand Coulee Dam and appurtenant works; and (b) complete jurisdiction and

authority over and responsibility for Grand Coulee Dam and appurtenant works, the town of
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Appendix C)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhiac.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:27 PM]

Coulee Dam, and such project lands adjacent thereto as the Commissioner of Reclamation,

with the approval of the Secretary, may determine to be necessary for the construction,

operation, and maintenance of the Dam and appurtenant works. As of the date of this

agreement, the lands coming within the scope of (b) of this article are shown on the attached

map No. B—3153, dated October 7, 1941, marked "Exhibit B"*, and are herein called the

Reclamation Zone.

4. The Service, acting for Reclamation and in accordance with the provisions of the Federal

Reclamation Laws, shall have jurisdiction and authority over the Recreational Area, and of

all developments and activities and responsibilities under this agreement, subject:

(a) to the privileges and uses for hunting, fishing and boating accorded to the

Indians of the Spokane and Colville Reservations within the Indian Zones,

including such rights of access thereto as may be provided by the Secretary of

the Interior under the Act of June 29, 1940; and

(b) to the right of Reclamation to make such use of the Recreational Area as is

required in carrying out the purposes of the Columbia Basin Project.

5. The Indian Office shall have jurisdiction and authority over the Indian Zones: (a) to the

extent necessary to administer the paramount uses for hunting, fishing and boating accorded

to the Indians therein, subject to such rules and regulations as may be prescribed with respect

thereto by the Secretary of the Interior under the Act of June 29, 1940; (b) to the extent

necessary, acting for Reclamation and in accordance with the Federal Reclamation Laws, to

administer grazing and agricultural uses of lands within the designated Indian Zones; and (c)

to the extent necessary to issue permits for and to administer log dumping operations within

the designated Indian Zones, under conditions mutually agreed to with the Service.

*A copy of "Exhibit B" is available in the Director's Office, National Park

Service.

6. The desirability of the Service participating in the planning and development of the

Recreational Area is recognized because of its experience and the trained personnel at its

command. The Service will be agreeable, however, with the consent of Reclamation and the

Indian Office and with the approval of the Secretary, to transferring to any State or other

local qualified and responsible political subdivision, the development, operation, and

management of facilities that may have been installed.

7. Undertaking to perform the necessary functions relating to the planning, development, and

management of the Recreational Area by the Service in no way implies that this Area is a

part of, or intended to become a unit, the National Park System or that the basic preservation

policies under which the National Parks and Monuments are administered shall necessarily

be applied in the planning, development, and management of the recreational resources of the

Recreational Area.

8. The Service will periodically submit itemized estimates of the cost of carrying out its

functions and responsibilities hereunder and Reclamation, within the limits of funds that are

available for these purposes, will advance to the Service sufficient funds to cover these

estimates.

9. The Indian Office and the Service shall submit periodically to Reclamation such reports of

their activities hereunder as may be mutually agreed upon by each with Reclamation.

10. All undertakings of the agencies party hereto are contingent on funds required therefor

having been made available by Congress.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Appendix C)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhiac.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:27 PM]

11. This agreement, while delineating the Zones within the Reservoir Area for the paramount

use of the Indians of the Spokane and Colville Reservation for hunting, fishing, and boating

purposes, and while providing for certain other rights to be exercised by these Indians, shall

not be construed as waiving any other rights of those Indians within the Reservoir Area,

which they might have under the Act of June 29, 1940.

PART II

Functions of the Bureau of Reclamation

Subject to the other provisions of this agreement. Reclamation will:

1. In connection with its operation and administration of the Reclamation Zone, have the

responsibility for all recreational activities therein.

2. Consult with the Service on all matters in connection with the recreational development of

the Reclamation Zone.

3. Provide such facilities in the Reclamation Zone as are mutually agreed on by Reclamation

and the Service for use by the Service in connection with its administration of the

Recreational Area.

4. Establish and enforce rules and regulations governing public access to Grand Coulee Dam

and appurtenant works.

5. Provide directly or by contract, such skilled guide and lecture service at the Dam as may

be necessary to give the visiting public the important facts regarding the project, including

geology of the region, the history and purposes of the Dam's construction, and coordinate

such activity with any related service which may be established elsewhere in the Recreational

Area by the Service.

6. Establish and, in cooperation with the Service, enforce such limits of approach to the Dam

or to the Recreational Area as may be necessary either for its efficient functioning or

protection or for the safety of the public.

PART III

Functions of the National Park Service

Subject to the other provisions of this agreement, the Service will:

1. Be responsible for the preparation of all plans for the development of facilities required for

recreational and other uses of the Recreational Area; and arrange for the construction,

operation, and maintenance of recreational facilities, except those which may be provided

under the direction of the Indian Office in accordance with Part IV hereof.

2. Establish and effectuate policies regarding all uses of the lands of the Recreational Area,

except within the Indian Zones with respect to the agricultural and grazing uses and to the

hunting, fishing, and boating rights of the Indians.

3. Negotiate contracts for supplying the necessary public services related to any recreational

use of the Recreational Area, except such facilities as may be provided for the Indians under

Part IV hereof; and prescribe and enforce reasonable rates and standards for the supplying of
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Appendix C)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhiac.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:27 PM]

such services not inconsistent with controlling rates and standards adopted by State and

Federal regulatory authorities.

4. Issue permits granting the right: (a) to use lands in the Recreational Area for legitimate

industrial and recreational purposes, including the construction operation, and maintenance of

suitable facilities therefor, except those which may be issued by the Indian Office within the

Indian Zones, under this agreement; and (b) to make agricultural and grazing uses of lands in

the Recreational Area, exclusive of the Indian Zones.

5. Cause to be included in every permit, license, lease, contract, or other instrument which it

executes providing for the use of lands in the Recreational Area, provisions, satisfactory in

form to Reclamation, recognizing that the purposes for which the project was authorized are

dominant with respect to the lands involved, and effecting releases and indemnifications to

and for the United States, its successors and assigns, and its officers, agents, employees, and

contractors engaged in the construction, operation, and maintenance of the project works.

6. Assume the responsibility for the administration of all contracts, leases, licenses, permits,

and other instruments outstanding as of the date of this agreement under which rights to the

use of lands within the Recreational Area have been granted under the Federal Reclamation

Laws.

7. Collect all payments due from permits, licenses, leases, contracts, or other instruments for

which the Service is responsible providing for use of lands within the Recreational Area, and

deposit in a special deposit account for transfer periodically to Reclamation for credit as

required by law.

8. Designate, in consultation with the Indian Office, those sites within the Indian Zones that

are well—suited to development for recreational purposes; and designated sites mutually

agreed on by the Service and Indian Office shall be deemed to be public recreational sites and

may be fenced or otherwise protected by the Service to prevent interference therewith.

9. Make and enforce such rules and regulations, not inconsistent with controlling rules and

regulations of State or Federal regulatory authorities:

(a) As appear necessary or desirable concerning the recreational use of the

Recreational Area by the public;

b) As appear necessary or desirable for the prevention of water and air pollution

and for the protection of health, plants, fish, and wildlife; its activities in this

regard to be coordinated with those of the United States Public Health Service,

the State Department of Health, the State Pollution Control Commission, or other

regulatory bodies;

(c) As appear necessary or desirable for the conservation and protection of

scenic, scientific and aesthetic values, flowers, shrubs and trees, historic or

archeological remains, and for control of all archeological research; and

(d) Within the limits of its jurisdiction, for the preservation of law and order and

in the interest of public safety.

10. Coordinate its activities with those of the Fish and Wildlife Service, the Indian Office,

and the Washington State Game Commission for the conservation of fish and wildlife in the

Recreational Area.

11. Cooperate with all duly constituted authorities in the control of all transportation on the
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Appendix C)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhiac.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:27 PM]

Recreational Area, whether by land, water, or air.

12. Establish and maintain supervisory, informational, and protective services as may be

necessary for the safe and full use of the Recreational Area for recreational purposes; and

correlate the fire prevention and suppression activities of all agencies having responsibility

within the Recreational Area, except the Indian Zones, to the end that such regulations and

agreements as are necessary therefor shall be made and carried out.

13. Extend advice and counsel (a) to Reclamation in connection with any park, museum,

landscape, resort, or recreational development within the Reclamation Zone whether intended

primarily for the use of the residents of that area or the visiting public; and (b) when

requested to do so, to the Indian Office in connection with its planning or development and

use of the recreational resources of the Colville and Spokane Indian Reservations.

PART IV

Functions of the Office of Indian Affairs

Subject to the other provisions of this agreement, the Indian Office will:

1. Have the responsibility for administration of the Indians' paramount uses for hunting,

fishing, and boating in the Indian Zones, under such rules and regulations as may be

promulgated by the Secretary of the Interior with respect thereto.

2. Issue and administer agricultural and grazing permits or leases for lands within the Indian

Zones, except with respect to public recreational sites mutually agreed on with the Service

and, in consultation with the Service, issue and administer log dumping permits at locations

mutually agreed to, within the Indian Zones. Where permits are issued to Indians for dumping

Indian—owned logs, within Indian Zones, no charge will be made.

3. Transfer to Reclamation periodically the gross revenues realized from agricultural permits

or leases and log dumping permits involving lands within the Indian Zones.

4. Be responsible for fire prevention and suppression activities within the Indian Zones.

5. Arrange for the construction and maintenance, under general plans prepared and mutually

agreed upon with the Service, of buildings, floats, and other major structures to be used by

the Indians in connection with their paramount rights for hunting, fishing, and boating

purposes in the Indian Zones.

6. In addition to other responsibilities, assist the Service in its relations with Indians of the

Spokane and Colville Reservations where any of these Indians become involved with the

Service as the result of the activities of the Service anywhere in the Recreational Area.

PART V

Effective Date; Term of Agreement

1. This agreement will become effective on the date of its approval by the Secretary of the

Interior.

2. This agreement will remain in force until terminated by the Secretary of the Interior.

/s/ Michael W. Straus
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Appendix C)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhiac.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:27 PM]

Commissioner, Bureau of Reclamation

/s/ Newton B. Drury

Director, National Park Service

/s/ William Zimmerman. Jr.

Asst. Commissioner of Indian Affairs

Approved: Dec. 18, 1946

 (Sgd) C. Girard Davidson

 Assistant Secretary of the Interior

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

laro/adhi/adhiac.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Appendix D)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhiad.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:28 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

APPENDIX D:

Public Land Order 2087 (May 9, 1960)

Saturday, May 14, 1960

FEDERAL REGISTER

[Public Land Order 2087]

[Washington 03542]

WASHINGTON

Reserving Lands in Old Fort Spokane Military Reservation for Use of National Park

Service, In Connection With Coulee Dam National Recreation Area; Partly Revoking

Executive Orders of January 12, 1882, and November 17, 1887

By virtue of the authority vested in the President and pursuant to Executive Order No. 10355

of May 26, 1952, it is ordered as follows:

Subject to valid existing rights, the following-described public lands are hereby withdrawn

from all forms of appropriation under the public land laws, including the mining and mineral

leasing laws, and disposals of materials under the act of July 31, 1947 (61 Stat. 681: 30

U.S.C. 601-604), and reserved under jurisdiction of the National Park Service for use as an

administrative, museum and historic site in connection with the Coulee Dam National

Recreation Area:

WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN

T. 28 N., R. 36 E.

 Sec. 20, lots 15, 16. 21, 22, and 23:

 Sec. 29, lots 7 to 12, incl.

The areas described aggregate 331.31 acres.

The Executive order of January 12, 1882, establishing the Fort Spokane Military Reservation,

and the Executive order of November 17, 1887, modifying its boundaries, are hereby revoked

so far as they affect the lands.

ROGER ERNST,

Assistant Secretary of the Interior.

MAY 9, 1960

[F.R. DOC. 50-4351; Filed, May 12, 1960; 8:45 a.m.]

[Public Land Order 2088]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Appendix D)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhiad.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:28 PM]

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

laro/adhi/adhiad.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Appendix E)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhiae.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:29 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

APPENDIX E:

Lake Roosevelt Cooperative Management

Agreement (April 5, 1990)

LAKE ROOSEVELT

COOPERATIVE MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT

I. RECITALS

A. Whereas, the Bureau of Reclamation (hereinafter Reclamation) in connection with its

responsibility for the construction, operation, and maintenance of the Columbia Basin Project

has withdrawn or acquired lands or the right to use lands and may acquire additional land

under the federal reclamation laws, Act of June 1902, 32 Stat. 388, and acts amendatory

thereof or supplementary thereto, including the Act of March 10, 1973, 57 Stat. 14, and the

Act of August 30, 1935, 49 Stat. 1028, 1039; and

B. Whereas the parties recognize (1) that some of the land acquired, withdrawn or used by

Reclamation is located within the boundaries of the Colville Indian Reservation and the

Spokane Indian Reservation; (2) that those reservation boundaries were not changed as a

result of the acquisition or use of land within either reservation for the Columbia Basin

Project; and, (3) that the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation and the Spokane

Tribe retain certain governmental authority and responsibility within the exterior boundaries

of their respective reservations; and

C. Whereas, Congress and the President have each recognized certain sovereign and

governmental powers of Indian tribes within their respective reservations, and support the

tribal sovereignty of Indian tribes to exercise their full measure of governmental authority

within their respective reservations; and

D. Whereas, on Lake Roosevelt, consistent with the express policies of the United States, the

Colville and Spokane tribes have an interest in and certain regulatory authority within their

reservations over fish and wildlife harvest and habitat protection, recreation, environmental

protection, protection and management of cultural, historical and archaeological resources,

and the development and utilization of resources on reservation, including economic

development and management thereof; and

E. Whereas, the parties agree that the recreational and other natural resources of Lake

Roosevelt and adjacent lands which through sound coordinated planning, development, and

management of the Lake Roosevelt Management Area (LRMA), offer unusual opportunities

for recreation and other activities for the people of the nation, and the members of the

Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation and Spokane Indian Tribe; and

F. Whereas, lands acquired by Reclamation for Lake Roosevelt within the Colville and

Spokane reservations are available for public recreation and other development; however, the

management and development of those lands may pose unique and difficult problems because
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Appendix E)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhiae.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:29 PM]

of the cultural, religious, and competing social uses to which the tribes have committed their

reservations; and

G. Whereas, the parties recognize that development in areas of Lake Roosevelt located off the

Colville and Spokane Reservations will affect and impact reservation lands and resources,

and because the lake area was the ancestral home of the Colville and Spokane Indians, such

development could impact off—reservation archaeological, historical or religious sites;

likewise, reservation activity will affect similar sites off the reservation within the LRMA;

and

H. Whereas, there is an inter—relationship between the development of recreational and

other natural resources of the LRMA; and

I. Whereas, the Coulee Dam National Recreation Area is an existing unit of the National

Park system and subject to all NPS laws, regulations, policies and guidelines; and,

J. Whereas, the National Park Service has special skills and experience in planning,

developing, maintaining and managing areas devoted to recreational uses, and is authorized

to coordinate with other federal agencies in developing recreational programs (16 U.S.C. §§

17j—2(b), 4601—1); and

K. Whereas, the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation and the Spokane Indian

Tribe have significant interests in the use and development of those lands within the LRMA,

particularly within their respective reservations, and have demonstrated the willingness,

capability and experience to manage those lands and resources within their reservations for

beneficial purposes including public recreational uses, and the conservation of the resources;

and

L. Whereas, the respective parties to this Agreement are in a position to provide the services

herein identified and, it has been determined to be in the interest of the United States

Government to use such services, and the participation of the Confederated Tribes of the

Colville Reservation, and the Spokane Tribe as set out herein is consistent with the Indian

Self Determination Act of 1975, P.L. 93—638, as amended; and

M. Whereas, it is recognized and understood among the parties hereto, that nothing contained

herein shall affect the authority of any party to commit federal funds as provided by law; and

N. Whereas, the protection, curation and ultimate disposition of archeological and historical

resources (hereafter collectively resources) located within the LRMA is an important

responsibility under this Agreement; and in several areas, investigation or preservation

activities have occurred in the past but conditions have since changed; and the parties

recognize it is important to learn more about these resources; and

0. Whereas, there exists a dispute on the extent of the Spokane Indian Reservation on the

Spokane River Arm of Lake Roosevelt; and whereas, nothing in this Agreement shall be

interpreted to affect that issue; and

P. Whereas, the Secretary of the Interior has a trust duty to tribes and has an obligation to

exercise his/her authority consistent with statutory responsibilities and that trust duty, and to

interact, with tribes on a government-to-government basis.

NOW THEREFORE, the parties hereto, hereby mutually agree as follows:

II. AUTHORITY
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Appendix E)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhiae.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:29 PM]

1. This Agreement is entered into by the Department of the Interior pursuant to the authority

of the Act of August 30, 1935, 49 Stat. 1028, 1039, the Act of March 10, 1943, 57 Stat. 14,

43 U.S.C. §§ 373, 485i (1982). Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to modify or

annul the Secretary's authority under these Acts.

2. The Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation has authority to enter into this

Agreement pursuant to Article V, Section 1, Part (a) of the Colville Constitution, adopted

February 26, 1938, and approved by the Secretary on April 19, 1938.

3. The Spokane Tribe has authority to enter into this Agreement pursuant to Article VIII of

the Spokane Tribal Constitution, adopted June 27, 1951, as amended.

III. PURPOSE

The purpose of this Agreement is to allow the parties to coordinate the management of the

Lake Roosevelt Management Area (hereinafter referred to as LRMA), and to plan and

develop facilities and activities on Lake Roosevelt and its freeboard lands. The parties

acknowledge and recognize management of the LRMA is subject to the right of the Bureau

of Reclamation to accomplish the purposes of the Columbia Basin Project.

IV. GENERAL PROVISIONS

A. Parties:

The parties to this Agreement shall include as governmental parties the National

Park Service (NPS), the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), the Bureau of

Indian Affairs (BIA), the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation

(Colville Tribes), and the Spokane Indian Tribe (Spokane Tribe). Unless the

context of the Agreement requires otherwise, the Colville and Spokane tribes

shall be referred to collectively as "tribes."

B. Area Subject to Agreement:

This Agreement shall cover the management of the LRMA as depicted in

Exhibit 1 attached hereto. The LRMA includes Grand Coulee Dam and its

appurtenances on Lake Roosevelt, the surface area of Lake Roosevelt up to

elevation 1290 msl (hereinafter Lake area) and all freeboard lands surrounding

Lake Roosevelt above elevation 1290 msl owned by or used by the United States

pursuant to any agreement for purposes of the Columbia Basin Project.

C. Management Zones:

For the purpose of coordinating the management of the LRMA, and for

allocating the appropriate use of resources available in and around Lake

Roosevelt, three management zones shall be established.

1. Reclamation Zone: That part of the LRMA surrounding Grand

Coulee Dam as set out in Exhibit 1 and marked in blue.

2. Recreation Zone: That part of the LRMA lying outside of the

Reclamation and Reservation Zones as set out in Exhibit 1 and

marked in green.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Appendix E)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhiae.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:29 PM]

3. Reservation Zone: That part of the LRMA lying within the

boundaries of the Colville Indian Reservation or Spokane Indian

Reservation all as set out in Exhibit 1 and marked in orange.

Provided, that for purposes of management only, in those areas

where the Colville Indian Reservation and Spokane Indian

Reservation lie across from each other and on the Spokane River

arm, there shall be a right of navigational passage. This right shall

be defined as the right to pass through that portion of the

Reservation Zone defined in this Part to a destination point outside

that portion of the Reservation Zone.

D. Management and Regulation of the LRMA:

The parties to this Agreement agree that the management and regulation of the

LRMA set out below are not intended to nor shall they interfere with or be

inconsistent with the purposes for which the Columbia Basin Project was

established, is operated and maintained; those purposes being primarily flood

control, improved navigation, streamflow regulation, providing for storage and

for the delivery of stored waters thereof for the reclamation of public and private

lands and Indian reservations, for the generation of electrical power and for other

beneficial uses, nor is it intended to modify or alter any obligations or authority

of the parties. Consistent with the above statement, the management and

regulation of the LRMA shall be as follows:

1. Reclamation shall have exclusive operational control of the flow and

utilization of water at the Grand Coulee Dam and Project facilities operated by

Reclamation, and of all access to the Grand Coulee Dam and Project facilities

operated by Reclamation; and complete and exclusive jurisdiction within the

Reclamation Zone, including authority over and responsibility for the Grand

Coulee Dam and Project facilities operated by Reclamation, and such project

lands adjacent thereto as the Commissioner of Reclamation with the approval of

the Secretary determines to be necessary for Project purposes. Provided, that the

parties shall retain the right to take any action otherwise available to challenge

any action undertaken by Reclamation under the authority recognized under this

Part, including but not limited to action dealing with irrigation, lake level, flows,

and storage.

2. NPS shall manage, plan and regulate all activities, development, and uses that

take place in the Recreation Zone in accordance with applicable provisions of

federal law and subject to the statutory authorities of Reclamation, and consistent

with the provisions of this Agreement subject to Reclamation's right to make use

of the Recreation Zone as required to carry out the purposes of the Columbia

Basin Project.

3. The tribes shall manage as follows:

a. The Colville Tribes shall manage, plan and regulate all activities,

development and uses that take place within that portion of the

Reservation Zone within the Colville Reservation in accordance with

applicable provisions of federal and tribal law, and subject to the

statutory authorities of Reclamation, and consistent with the

provisions of this Agreement subject to Reclamation's right to make

use of such areas of the Reservation Zone as required to carry out

the purposes of the Columbia Basin Project.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Appendix E)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhiae.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:29 PM]

b. The Spokane Tribe shall manage, plan and regulate all activities,

development, and uses that take place within that portion of the

Reservation Zone within the Spokane Reservation in accordance

with applicable provisions of federal and tribal law, and subject to

the statutory authorities of Reclamation, and consistent with the

provisions of this Agreement subject to Reclamation's right to make

use of such areas of the Reservation Zone as required to carry out

the purposes of the Columbia Basin Project.

c. In those portions of the Reservation Zone where the Colville

Indian Reservation and Spokane Reservation abut, the tribes shall

determine as between themselves the allocation of management

responsibility.

4. The BIA shall assist the tribes in carrying out the tribes' management of the

Reservation Zone, and undertake such other activities as are authorized by law in

support of the tribes.

E. Coordination of LRMA.

1. Each party to this Agreement shall designate a representative who will meet

periodically with representatives of the other parties to coordinate the

independent management of each within the LRMA, consistent with this

Agreement.

2. The Parties shall:

a. Review, coordinate, communicate and standardize the

management plans, regulations and policies developed by the tribes

and NPS for their respective management areas to manage and

regulate (1) recreation activities, (2) commercial and private

development, including major new or significantly expanded

development, and (3) the protection of the environment of the

LRMA, all consistent with the special interests identified by the

parties for their respective management areas, to the extent possible.

b. Develop a method to incorporate the plans developed by the tribes

and NPS to provide to the extent practicable uniform management in

the LRMA. Implementation of such plans shall be carried out

consistent with the purposes of the Columbia Basin Project.

c. Review, coordinate, communicate and standardize use permits

within the LRMA to the extent practicable, taking into account the

cultural and religious interests of the tribes and other parties, and the

need to have the standards uniformly applicable in the LRMA.

d. Monitor, once per year, compliance with this Agreement.

e. Involve and receive the comments from other interested state,

local, county or regional governmental entities and private

individuals, or citizen groups or entities with respect to activities

related to the management of the LRMA.

f. Coordinate the development of annual operating budgets and

proposals for funding.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Appendix E)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhiae.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:29 PM]

g. Undertake such other Lake Roosevelt activities that the Parties

agree to undertake consistent with applicable law.

3. Dispute Resolution Process:

a. Any party to this Agreement that is aggrieved by any action of

another party related to this Agreement, or the failure of a party to

act consistent with this Agreement may request that the issue be

resolved under this part.

b. Any party shall prior to initiating any procedure under Part c of

this Part, request: (1) a meeting of all Area/Regional Directors and

tribal council representatives, to see if the problem can be resolved,

and (2) if the process under Part (1) of this subpart is not successful

any party may request that officials of the next higher level of BIA,

NPS and Reclamation and area/regional Directors meet with tribal

council representatives to consider the issue and attempt to resolve

it.

c. The aggrieved party or parties may request that a mediator be

appointed to help resolve the issue. The parties shall agree on a

mediator, or in the absence of agreement, the presiding Judge of the

United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington

shall be requested to appoint a mediator. The parties shall develop

procedures to insure that mediation is expeditious.

d. The dispute resolution process set out in this part shall be in

addition to any other rights of a party to seek enforcement or

interpretation of this Agreement.

F. Funding:

1. All parties shall cooperate in the development of all budget components and

cost data and in the sharing of the necessary technical information so that each

party can make realistic budget estimates necessary for that party to adequately

manage the LRMA.

2. Each party to the Agreement shall seek funding for its share of this

Agreement. The Superintendent of the Coulee Dam National Recreation Area,

the Project Manager of Grand Coulee Dam and the Colville and Spokane

Agency Superintendents of the Bureau of Indian Affairs will make a good faith

effort to request funds needed by them to manage the LRMA. The BIA agency

superintendents shall request funds needed by the tribes to adequately carry out

their management responsibilities as identified under this Agreement. These

requests shall only be developed and proposed consistent with and subject to

budgetary practices and procedures of the United States, including, but not

limited to the direction and policies of the President, OMB, and the Secretary of

the Interior. Except as required under this paragraph or applicable law, parties to

this Agreement shall support the need to provide adequate funding to the tribes

to allow the tribes to carry out their responsibilities under this Agreement.

3. Upon approval of the requests for submission to the Congress as part of the

President's budget, each party shall to the extent practicable, identify these funds

in their respective congressional justifications and continue to support their own
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Appendix E)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhiae.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:29 PM]

and each other's funding requests when testifying before Congress to the extent

that such requirements are identified in the President's budget.

4. This Agreement shall not create an obligation on the part of any party hereto

to expend funds that have not been lawfully appropriated by Congress or the

Colville or Spokane tribes. The failure to take action otherwise required because

funds were not appropriated shall not constitute a breach of this Agreement:

5. Nothing in this part shall prohibit or limit the right of the tribes to

independently seek funding from whatever source is available to carry out their

management and regulation within the Reservation Zone.

6. To the extent allowed by law, and consistent with the activity being

undertaken and the terms of the Agreement, if additional funds from sources

other than congressional appropriation become available to Reclamation, NPS or

the BIA for purposes of undertaking any activity addressed by this Agreement,

the agencies shall attempt to assure an equitable portion of those funds will be

available to the tribes for compliance with this Agreement.

7. When the BIA submits its proposed budget it shall specifically identify for the

Colville and Spokane tribes to Cover the Lake Roosevelt Management

Agreement.

8. Funding for the curation of any Indian resources transferred to the Colville

and Spokane tribes will be included in the tribes' budget for management of

LRMA unless other means become available for curation.

G. Coordination of Recreation:

1. The NPS and tribes shall coordinate their respective activities to the end that

in the implementation of their independent management and regulation of the

LRMA they achieve to the extent practicable, a uniform system of recreation

management including law enforcement throughout the LRMA taking into

account the special needs or circumstances identified by the tribes or the NPS

within the Reservation or Recreation Zones, respectively.

2. The NPS and tribes shall develop and implement a procedure that informs the

recreating public of all facilities, resources, and concessions located within the

LRMA, and the limitations on their use, and further informs the recreating public

of the rules applicable in the various Management Areas of the LRMA,

including anti-pollution rules.

3. The NPS and tribes shall work with Reclamation in the development of any

recreation management or resource plans for the LRMA consistent with Federal

law.

H. Development and Utilization of Resources:

1. The tribes shall retain within those parts of the Reservation Zone within their

respective reservations the right to beneficially develop and utilize the natural

resources and to develop economic enterprises that are compatible within the

character of the LRMA, subject to federal statutory requirements. Use of the

freeboard lands as allowed under this subpart H.l. shall be with the permission of

the United States, which shall not be unreasonably withheld.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Appendix E)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhiae.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:29 PM]

2. Should operations of the Columbia Basin Project cause damage to the natural

resources on the freeboard lands within the Reservation Zone for which

mitigation is required by law, the mitigation shall take place on the Reservation

within which the damage took place to the extent practicable. Nothing in this

part shall relieve any party from liability for past impacts to the natural resources

of any party on either the Colville or Spokane Reservations.

I. Reservation of Rights:

This Agreement shall not be construed as waiving any rights the parties have

under any applicable Act of Congress, Executive Order, treaty, regulation, court

decision or other authority.

J. Protection and Retention of Historical, Cultural and Archaeological Resources:

1. The parties to this Agreement shall prepare a Cultural Resources Management

Plan that provides for the identification, and protection of Indian archaeological

and historical resources (as identified in 16 U.S.C. 470bb(l), and 16 U.S.C. §

470w(5) (hereafter Indian Resources) located within the LRMA, and a procedure

for the most expeditious transfer of title and return to the tribes of Indian

Resources removed from the LRMA by the United States or with the United

States' authority and which are within the United States' possession or under its

control, consistent with the tribes' ability to properly curate or provide for the

curation of the Indian Resources as required by law.

2. The Cultural Resources Plan shall contain provisions requiring the Federal

parties to notify and consult with the tribes during the planning process and prior

to authorizing or undertaking any survey, monitoring, or removal of Indian

Resources from the LRMA, and shall provide an opportunity for the tribes to

participate in, or if consistent with the activity to undertake any such activity.

K. Duty to Comply:

It shall be a violation of this Agreement for any party to take any action or

authorize any other person or entity to take any action that is inconsistent with or

in violation of the terms and conditions of this Agreement, or to fail to take any

action otherwise required by this Agreement.

V. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

A. Effective Date:

This Agreement shall become effective on the date it is approved by the

Secretary of the Interior.

B. Modification of Agreement:

This Agreement may be modified only in writing, signed by all the parties and

approved by the Secretary.

C. Termination:

This Agreement shall remain in effect until terminated by the Secretary of the

Interior. Any party may request that the Secretary terminate this Agreement.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Appendix E)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhiae.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:29 PM]

Within 30 days of the receipt of a request to terminate, the Secretary shall

establish a-mechanism to assist the parties to the Agreement in reconciling

differences under this Agreement or to negotiate a new Agreement. The

Secretary shall terminate this Agreement 180 days after the mechanism required

under this part is established if no agreement between the parties is reached.

D. Judicial Enforcement:

Without regard to any other dispute resolution process set out in this Agreement,

any party may seek review of any provision of this Agreement to determine the

rights or obligations of the parties under this Agreement or to seek judicial

enforcement of any provision of this Agreement or of a party's failure to carry

out any duty provided for under this Agreement. Nothing in this Agreement shall

be interpreted or construed as a limitation upon any party's right to seek judicial

or administrative enforcement or review of any matter based upon treaty, Federal

or state law or Executive Order, or to take any other action allowed by law.

E. Implementation of Agreement:

1. The tribes and the NPS shall independently exercise their individual and

separate management and regulation of the Reservation and Recreation Zones

respectively, consistent with the consultation and coordination responsibilities set

out in this Agreement, and consistent with the legislated purposes of the

Columbia Basin Project and applicable Reclamation Law.

2. Reclamation, in exercising its statutory oversight authority in the LRMA, shall

not interfere with the management and regulation of the tribes or NPS as set out

in Part IV.D of this Agreement except where the actions of either the tribes, the

NPS, or both are inconsistent with the legislated purposes of the Columbia Basin

Project or interfere with the ability of Reclamation to carry out its legislated

responsibility for the Columbia Basin Project.

F. Visitor Center:

Reclamation shall work with the tribes and NPS to incorporate their suggestions

into the development of an interpretive program to the extent of available

resources, for changes to the visitor's presentations. The resulting program should

depict the purpose and operation of the Columbia Basin Project, the Indian

history, government, and culture of the area, the impact of the Columbia Basin

Project on the tribes, and the available recreational resources and benefits. This

may include the display and distribution of literature/information applicable to

the LRMA.

G. Contracting:

There are or may be activities carried out by contract by the Federal parties that

take place within the LRMA under this Agreement that could be contracted by

the tribes. The Federal parties will provide notice to the tribes of all contracting

opportunities within the LRMA and will coordinate on contracting options,

which may be available to tribes, either directly or through another Federal

agency, within the LRMA, prior to the obligation of appropriated funds

consistent with their statutory authorities. The parties to this Agreement shall use

their best efforts to contract with the tribes consistent with the continued

execution of their agency directed duties, to the extent allowed by statutory

authority. Likewise, there may be opportunities for the tribes to contract for
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Appendix E)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhiae.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:29 PM]

services or facilities with the other parties. Nothing in this Part shall limit a party

from utilizing bidding procedures.

APPROVED:

DATED: APR 20 190

Jude C. Stensgar

Chairperson

Colville Business Council

DATED: APR 20 1990

Joe V. Flett

Chairperson

Colville Indian Tribe

DATED: APR 10 1990

James M. Ridenour

Director

National Park Service

DATED: APR 20 1990

John M. Sayre

Assistant Secretary

for Water and Science

DATED: APR 11 1990

Constance Harriman

Assistant Secretary

for Fish, Wildlife and Parks

DATED: APR 20 1990

Dennis Underwood

Commissioner

Bureau of Reclamation

DATED: APR 20 1990

Dr. Eddie F. Brown

Assistant Secretary of for the

Bureau of Indian Affairs

DATED: APR 05 1990

Manuel Lujan, Jr., Secretary

Department of Interior

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

laro/adhi/adhiae.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Appendix F)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhiaf.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:30 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

APPENDIX F:

Edward G. Torrison and Marlene J. Torrison, Husband and

Wife, Plaintiffs v. Vaughn L. Baker, et al., Defendents

(September 27, 2000)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

EDWARD G. TORRISON and MARLENE J.

TORRISON, Husband and Wife,,

Plaintiffs,

v.

VAUGHN L. BAKER, et al.,

Defendant.

No. CS—97—285—

FVS

ORDER

DISMISSING

ACTION

THIS MATTER comes before the Court based upon the parties' cross motions for summary

judgment. The plaintiffs are represented by Linwood D. Sampson; the government by

Assistant United States Attorney William H. Beatty.

BACKGROUND

The State of Washington (hereinafter "the State") was admitted to the Union in 1889. At that

point, the State assumed sovereignty over the beds of navigable waters within its boundaries.

See United States v Alaska, 521 U.S. 1, 5, 117 S.Ct. 1888, 1892, 138 L.Ed.2d 231 (1997)

("Under the doctrine of Lessee of Pollard v Hagan, 3 How. 212, 228—229, 11 L.Ed. 565

(1845), new States are admitted to the Union on an 'equal footing' with the original 13

Colonies and succeed to the United States' title to the beds of navigable waters within their

boundaries."). Since the Columbia River was a navigable water, the river bed became State

property.

In 1935, Congress passed the first of a series of enactments that led to the construction of

Grand Coulee Dam and the creation of a substantial reservoir behind the dam. Act of August

30, 1935, Pub.L. No. 74—409, 49 Stat. 1028. This enterprise became part of what is now

known as the Columbia Basin Project. Act of March 10, 1943, Pub.L. No. 78—8, 57 Stat. 14

(codified as amended at 16 U.S.C. §§ 835—835m).

The reservoir behind Grand Coulee Dam is named Lake Roosevelt.. See Cassidy v. United

States, 875 F.Supp. 1438, 1441 (E.D.Wash.1994). In order to accommodate the creation of

Lake Roosevelt, the Federal Government (hereinafter "the government") began acquiring
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Appendix F)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhiaf.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:30 PM]

property along the banks of the Columbia River. One of the parcels is situated in Lincoln

County, Washington. The property was purchased from Ivah Esther Jump Olsen in 1936.1

In 1939, the State ceded concurrent jurisdiction over certain lands acquired by the

government. Washington Session Laws, ch. 126, § 2 (1939). The Torrisons concede that, at

least initially, the 1939 legislation applied to the land the government acquired from Ivah

Esther Jump Olsen.2

In 1946, Congress authorized the National Park Service to enter into agreements with other

government agencies concerning the administration of land under federal jurisdiction. Act of

August 7, 1946, 60 Stat. 885. Codified as 16 U.S.C. § 17j—2(b), the legislation states:

Appropriations for the National Park Service are authorized for —

. . . .

(b) Administration, protection, improvement, and maintenance of areas, under the

jurisdiction of other agencies of the Government, devoted to recreational use

pursuant to cooperative agreements.

(Emphasis added.) Late in 1946, representatives of the Bureau of Reclamation, the National

Park Service, and the Office of Indian Affairs entered into a cooperative agreement to create

the Coulee Dam Recreation Area.3 Since then, the area has been administered by the Park

Service pursuant to a series of agreements. A few years ago, its name was changed to the

Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area.

In 1981, Edward G. Torrison and Marlene J. Torrison (hereinafter "the Torrisons") bought a

parcel of real property that is situated immediately south of the property which the

government acquired from Ivah Esther Jump Olsen. The federal land lies between the

Torrisons' property and Lake Roosevelt. That part of the Torrisons' property which is closest

to Lake Roosevelt is 370 feet from the water when the lake is at its maximum level.

At about the same time the Torrisons bought their property, they obtained a permit from the

Park Service for a dock. Besides building a dock, they constructed a cabin with a deck. From

1981 through 1996, the Park Service continued to re-authorize the Torrisons' permit.

However, in 1996, the Park Service advised the Torrisons that their permit would not be

renewed, and that they would be required to remove their dock.

The Torrisons filed this lawsuit in 1997. In an effort to resolve the dispute, the parties agreed

to have the relevant property lines surveyed. The surveys indicate that both the Torrisons'

dock and a portion of their deck lie on government property.

AUTHORITY TO REGULATE

The Constitution's Property Clause provides that "Congress shall have Power to dispose of

and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property

belonging to the United States." U.S. Const. art. IV, § 3, cl. 2. Based upon that provision, it is

clear that Congress has the authority to regulate the land it acquired in connection with the

creation of Lake Roosevelt. See Kleppe v. New Mexico, 426 U.S. 529, 542, 96 S.Ct. 2285,

2293, 49 L.Ed.2d 34 (1976) . Neither side disagrees with that proposition. Rather, they differ

with respect to whether Congress has delegated to the Park Service its power to regulate

docks in the Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area. The Park Service insists it possesses

such authority by virtue of the National Park Service Organic Act of 1916, 16 U.S.C. S 1 et

seq. The Torrisons challenge the Park Service's interpretation of that statute. They deny the

Park Service has the power to demand the removal of their dock.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Appendix F)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhiaf.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:30 PM]

The dispute over the Park Service's interpretation of its Organic Act raises two issues.

Chevron. USA, Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837, 842—44, 104

S.Ct. 2778, 2781—82, 81 L.Ed.2d 694 (1984) (hereinafter "Chevron"). The first issue is

"whether Congress has directly spoken to the precise question at issue. If the intent of

Congress is clear, that is the end of the matter; . . . ." Id. at 842, 104 S.Ct. at 2781. However,

if Congress has not spoken directly, a second issue must be considered. The second issue "is

whether the agency's answer (to the unresolved question] is based on a permissible

construction of the statute." Id. Given the framework established by Chevron, it is

appropriate to begin with the text of the Organic Act.

During both 1970 and 1978, Congress amended the Organic Act. National Park System

General Authorities Act, Pub.L. No. 91—383, 84 Stat. 825 (1970); Redwood National Park,

Pub.L. No. 95—250, 92 Stat. 163 (1978). Not only did Congress incorporate recreation areas

into the National Park System, but Congress also required "that they be managed consistently

with the rest of the system." See Bicycle Trails Council of Marin v. Babbitt, 82 F.3d 1445,

1452—53 (9th Cir.1996) (hereinafter "Bicycle Trails Council"). As a result of the 1970

amendment, the National Park System now includes "any area of land and water now or

hereafter administered by the Secretary of the Interior through the National Park Service for

park, monument, historic, parkway, recreational, or other purposes." 16 U.S.C. § 1c(a). The

Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area fits comfortably within that definition.

Since the Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area is part of the National Park System, the

Park Service must manage it in a manner "consistent with and founded in the purpose

established by section 1 of this title, to the common benefit of all the people of the United

States." 16 U.S.C. § la-i. That purpose "is to conserve the scenery and the natural and historic

objects and the wild life therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner

and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations."

16 U.S.C. § 1 (emphasis added).

Section 2 of the General Authorities Act outlines the authority Congress has conferred upon

the Park Service to accomplish its responsibilities. Codified as 16 U.S.C. § 1c(b), the

legislation states in part:

Each area within the national' park system shall be administered in accordance

with the provisions of any statute made specifically applicable to that area. In

addition, the provisions of sections 1b to ld of this title, and the various

authorities relating to the administration and protection of areas under the

administration of the Secretary of the Interior through the National Park Service,

. . . , shall, to the extent such provisions are not in conflict with any such specific

provision, be applicable to all areas within the national park system and any

reference in such Act to national parks, monuments, recreation areas, historic

monuments, or parkways shall hereinafter not be construed as limiting such Acts

to those areas.

(Emphasis added). As can be seen, neither § 1c(b) nor any other section in the Organic Act

specifies how the National Park System is to be managed. The Torrisons interpret the

Organic Act's lack of specificity in that regard as a limitation on the authority of the Park

Service. The Ninth Circuit has not adopted that interpretation, concluding instead that the

absence of specifics means that "'the Park Service has broad discretion in determining which

avenues best achieve the Organic Act's mandate . . .'" See Bicycle Trails Council, 82 F.3d at

1454 (quoting National Wildlife Federation v. National Park Service, 669 F.Supp. 384, 390

(D.Wyo.1987)).

The Park Service has determined it must regulate docks within the Lake Roosevelt National
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Appendix F)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhiaf.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:30 PM]

Recreation Area in order to fulfill its responsibilities under the Organic Act. Given the

structure of the Organic Act, especially after the 1970 and 1978 amendments, this appears to

be precisely the type of determination Congress intended the Park Service to make. Thus,

while the Organic Act does not specifically authorize the Park Service to regulate docks

within the Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area, and while reasonable minds may differ

regarding the wisdom of the policy adopted by the Park Service, its policy reflects a

permissible construction of its Organic Act. If follows that the Park Service does have the

power to demand the removal of private structures that encroach upon the Lake Roosevelt

National Recreation Area.

ESTOPPEL

The Torrisons insist they relied upon Park Service boundary markers in determining where to

construct their dock and their deck. Claiming their reliance was justified, the Torrisons argue

the Park Service should be estopped from disputing the validity of markers that have now

been determined by survey to be incorrect.

The Torrison's argument is unpersuasive. As they concede, "[i]n order for equitable estoppel

to apply against the government, the government must have engaged in 'affirmative

misconduct going beyond mere negligence' and caused 'a serious injustice.'" Cedars-Sinai

Medical Center v. Shalala, 177 F.3d 1126 (9th Cir.1999) (quoting Watkins v. United States

Army, 875 F.2d 699, 707 (9th Cir.1989)). Here, there is absolutely no evidence of misconduct

on the part of the government.

STATE LAW4

The Torrisons insist Congress has decided to defer to the State concerning the existence of

riparian rights5 within the Columbia Basin project. In support of that contention, they cite 16

U.S.C. § 835-1, which is a 1962 amendment to the Columbia Basin Project Act. Section 835

—1 states, "The Columbia Basin project shall be governed by the Federal reclamation laws,

being the Act of June 17, 1902 (32 Stat. 388), and all Acts amendatory thereof or

supplementary thereto." As the Torrisons point out, Section 8 of the Reclamation Act of 1902

states:

"[N]othing in this Act shall be construed as affecting or intended to affect or in

any way interfere with the laws of any State or Territory relating to the control,

appropriation, use, or distribution of water used in irrigation, or any vested right

acquired thereunder, and the Secretary of the Interior, in carrying out the

provisions of this Act, shall proceed in conformity with such laws, and nothing

herein shall in any way affect any right of any State or of the Federal

Government or of any landowner, appropriator, or user of water in, to, or from

any interstate stream or the waters thereof...."

43 U.S.C. § 383. While the Torrisons concede the State does not recognize riparian rights per

se,6 they insist the State has adopted a policy favoring the construction of docks. In light of

that policy, say the Torrisons, they should be allowed to retain their dock.

There are two problems with the Torrisons' argument. First, in Ivanhoe Irrigation Dist. v.

McCracken, 357 U.S. 275, 280, 78 S.Ct. 1174, 1178, 2 L.Ed.2d 13,13 (1958), the Supreme

Court distinguished between the acquisition of water rights and the operation of federal

projects. Section 8 applies to the former, said the Supreme Court, not the latter.7 Second,

even if the Torrisons' interpretation of section 8 is correct, and state law does have some

relevance in this action, the Torrisons cannot save their dock.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Appendix F)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhiaf.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:30 PM]

The Legislature of the State of Washington has enacted a statute giving landowners a

revocable license to build docks on navigable waters. See Caminiti v. Boyle, 107 Wn.2d 662,

668, 732 P.2d 989 (1987). The statute is RCW 79.90.105, and it states:

The abutting residential owner to state-owned shorelands, tidelands, or related

beds of navigable waters, other than harbor areas. may install and maintain

without charge a dock on such areas if used exclusively for private recreational

purposes and the area is not subject to prior rights. This permission is subject to

applicable local regulation governing construction, size, and length of the dock.

This permission may be revoked by the department upon finding of public

necessity which is limited to the protection of waterward access or ingress rights

of other landowners or public health and safety. The revocation may be appealed

as an adjudicative proceeding under chapter 34.05 RCW, the Administrative

Procedure Act. Nothing in this section prevents the abutting owner from

obtaining a lease if otherwise provided by law.

(Emphasis added.) Given the terms of RCW 79.90.105, the Torrisons can qualify for a

license only if their land abuts state-owned "shorelands" or "related beds of navigable

waters." Whether the Torrisons can make the requisite showing depends upon what the key

terms mean.8

Shorelands can be either "first class" or "second class." RCW 79.90.040; RCW 79.90.045. In

either case, shorelands" means "the shores of a navigable lake or river belonging to the state,

not subject to tidal flow, lying between the line of ordinary high water and the line of

navigability, . . . ." RCW 79.90.040; RCW 79.90.045.

Traditionally, the ordinary high water mark has been understood to be the line that separates

the shorelands from the adjoining upland. Cf. Ghione v. State, 26 Wn.2d 635, 651, 175 P.2d

955 (1946) ("accretions, by definition, situate below the line of ordinary high tide or ordinary

high water which marks the boundary between tide or shore land and the adjoining upland") .

At least for purposes of RCW Chapter 79.90, the shorelands extend downward from the

ordinary high water mark to the line of navigability, which separates the shorelands from the

bed of a river. See generally Davidson v. State, 116 Wn.2d 13, 20—23, 802 P.2d 1374 (1991)

(discussing relationship between "inner harbor line" and "line of navigation").

The term "beds of navigable waters" means "those lands lying waterward of and below the

line of navigability on rivers and lakes not subject to tidal flow, or extreme low tide mark in

navigable tidal waters, or the cuter harbor line where harbor area has been created." RCW

79.90.050. Put somewhat differently, "Bedlands are those lands lying beyond the line of

navigability of rivers and lakes and those lands beyond the low tide mark of tidal waters."

Caminiti, 107 Wn.2d at 665 n.4.

The geographic relationship of these terms can be demonstrated in the following manner:

Suppose some curious person gets out of his car and begins walking toward the river. When

he reaches the ordinary high water mark, he has reached the boundary between the upland

and the shorelands. If he steps across the ordinary high water mark, he has stepped from the

upland onto the shorelands. Most times of the year, the actual water level will be lower than

the ordinary high water mark. Thus, most times of the year, our curious observer will have to

walk at least a few steps down the slope before he comes to the edge of the water. If our

observer begins wading out into the water, eventually he will reach the line of navigability.

At that point, he has reached the bed of the river.

In view of the preceding analysis, the dispositive issue for purposes RCW 79.90.105 is

whether the Torrisons' property abuts the ordinary high water mark. If it does their property
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Appendix F)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhiaf.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:30 PM]

abuts shorelands, and they might be able to invoke the statute. By contrast, if their property

does not abut the ordinary high water mark, their property does not abut the shorelands, and

they may not invoke the statute.

As the record now stands, it is not entirely clear where the ordinary high water mark lies

along this stretch of the Columbia River. Presumably, however, it is no further up the river

bank than the point at which Lake Roosevelt reaches its maximum level. If that assessment is

correct, the Torrisons reliance upon RCW 79.90.105 is misplaced. According to undisputed

facts, the government's land lies between the ordinary high water mark and the Torrisons'

property.

The Torrisons seek to avoid that conclusion by seizing upon the word "related" as used in the

phrase "related beds of navigable waters." According to the Torrisons, the presence of the

word "related" must signify an area associated with the bed of the river. They seem to be

arguing that the phrase "related beds of navigable waters" includes that area from the line of

navigability up to the ordinary high water mark. In other words, the phrase "related beds of

navigable waters" means roughly the same thing as shorelands. Even if the Torrisons are

correct in that regard, their interpretation of the statute will not save their dock. As even they

appear to concede, the government's land lies between the shorelands and their property.

Thus, the Torrisons are reduced to arguing that their dock should be allowed to remain as a

matter of public policy. Id. at 5. That will not do. The Torrisons' public policy arguments fall

well short of the standard necessary to justify judicial interference in the Executive Branch's

performance of legislatively conferred responsibilities.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

1. The Torrisons' motion for summary judgment (Ct. Rec. 23) is DENIED.

2. The motion for summary judgment brought by the United States (Ct. Rec. 27) is

GRANTED.

3. The Torrisons' claims against the United States are dismissed with prejudice.

4. The United States is entitled to the security posted by the Torrisons.

IT IS SO ORDERED. The District Court Executive is hereby directed to enter this order and

furnish copies to counsel.

DATED this 27th day of September, 2000.

Fred Van Sickle

Chief United States District Judge

1The Torrisons have withdrawn a request to add a quiet title claim. 28 U.S.C. §§ 2409a and

1346(f). Consequently, they will not be heard to suggest that Ivah Esther Jump Olsen

conveyed less than her entire interest in the property.

2The act also said that the jurisdiction so ceded to the government would cease if "the United

States shall for five consecutive years fail to use any such land for the purposes of the grant

or acquisition, . . ." Washington Session Laws, ch. 126, § 2 (1939) . That limitation is of no

significance in this case. For one thing, the government continuously has maintained Grand

Coulee Dam and Lake Roosevelt. For another, the government does not need the State's

consent to regulate federal property in the State. See State of Nevada v. Watkins, 914 F.2d

1545, 1554 (9th Cir.1990), cert. denied, 499 U.S. 906, 111 S.Ct. 1105, 113 L.Ed.2d 215
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Appendix F)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhiaf.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:30 PM]

(1991).

3The 1946 agreement may not have been the first agreement. Although the record is not

entirely clear, there is some indication that, as early as 1942, the Bureau of Reclamation and

the National Park Service reached an understanding concerning Lake Roosevelt.

4The two preceding determinations — i.e., that the Park Service is authorized by if s Organic

Act to demand the removal of the Torrisons' dock, and that the Park Service is not estopped

from issuing such a demand -- make it unnecessary to consider the Torrisons' remaining

arguments. However, in the interest of completeness, the Court will do so.

5A "riparian right" is "[t]he right of a landowner whose property borders on a body of water

or watercourse. Black's Law Dictionary 1328 (7th ed.1999).

6When the State adopted its constitution in 1889, "the State claimed ownership over all

submerged lands in navigable waters up to and including the line of ordinary high water.

Const. art. 17, § 1. The declaration of State ownership divested upland owners of all riparian

rights, including the right of access to deep water." Davidson v. State, 116 Wn.2d 13, 25, 802

P.2d 1374 (1991) (citing Eisenbach v. Hatfield, 2 Wash. 236, 26 P. 539 (1891)). Thus, even if

the Torrisons' land abutted the ordinary high water mark of the Columbia, which it does not,

the Torrisons would not be. entitled to access to the river as a matter of right.

7In California v. United States, 438 U.S. 645, 674—75, 98 S.Ct. 2985, 3000—3001, 57

L.Ed.2d 1018 (1978), the Supreme Court disavowed certain dicta in Ivanhoe. In doing so, it

said, The legislative history of the Reclamation Act of 1902 makes it abundantly clear that

Congress intended to defer to the substance, as well as the form, of state water law." 438

U.S. at 675, 98 S.Ct. at 3001.

8RCW Chapter 79.90 begins with a number of definitions. The Washington Supreme Court

has relied upon those definitions in explaining RCW 79.90.105. Caminiti, 107 Wn.2d at 665

n.4.

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

laro/adhi/adhiaf.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Appendix G)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhiag.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:32 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

APPENDIX G:

Visitor Statistics

Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area

year published recreational visits boat launches

1947 ca. 36,500

1948

1949

1950 ca. 72,200

1951

1952

1953

1954

1955 218,800

1956 252,600

1957 266,900*

1958 362,500

1959 449,000

1960 647,400

1961 740,700

1962 689,900

1963 664,500

1964 637,100

1965 680,200

1966 778,300

1967 758,400

1968 542,700

1969 875,100

1970 652,900

1971 421,200

1972 447,660

1973 428,000

1974 575,100

1975 496,400

1976 635,400

1977 676,800 16,000

1978 712,545 17,000
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Appendix G)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhiag.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:32 PM]

1979 794,710

1980 833,400

1981 873,754 33,451

1982 819,328 31,127

1983 666,641 26,309

1984 622,908 22,768

1985 517,471 19,055

1986 790,311 22,900

1987 1,067,001 31,245

1988 1,366,305 51,371

1989 1,097,136 52,036

1990 1,542,515 60,188

1991 1,771,420 64,008

1992 1,121,973** 74,981

1993 1,198,605 75,102

1994 1,515,674 108,404

1995 1,341,016 95,564

1996 1,045,455 71,541

1997 1,431,960 71,680

1998 1,545,150 72,372

1999 1,403,793 57,114

* In May 1957, the multiplier was changed from 3.5 persons-per-vehicle to 4.0.

** Change in counting procedures, including reducing persons-per-vehicle multiplier from

3.5 to 2.45

Note: New statistical methods were employed in the early 1970s.

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

laro/adhi/adhiag.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Annotated Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhib.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:33 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Books

Ackermann, William C., et al., eds. Man-Made Lakes: Their Problems and Environmental

Effects. Washington, D.C.: American Geophysical Union, 1973.

Contains a number of essays that put Lake Roosevelt in a larger context, such as

one on "outdoor recreational use of man-made lakes."

Blonk, Hu. Behind the By-line Hu: A Feisty Newsman's Memoirs. Wenatchee, Wash.: 1992.

Contains his reminiscences (and reprints of his articles) about the clearing of the

reservoir and the construction of Grand Coulee Dam.

Bohm, Fred C., and Craig C. Holstine. The People's History of Stevens County. Colville:

Stevens County Historical Society, 1983.

A useful overview of the region's history, written for the general public. Contains

information from a number of oral interviews.

Carr, Ethan. Wilderness by Design: Landscape Architecture and the National Park Service.

Lincoln, Neb.: University of Nebraska Press, 1998.

Includes a chapter on the National Park Service and national recreational

planning, with a detailed bibliography.

Chance, David. People of the Falls. Colville, Wash.: Don's Printery, for Kettle Falls

Historical Center, Inc., 1986.

Good history of the Kettle Falls area and its archaeology, with descriptions of

the major archaeological periods.

Clark, Robert. River of the West: Stories from the Columbia. New York: HarperCollins West,

1995.

Includes a very readable chapter on David Thompson's travels in the Columbia

River drainage, with good information on Thompson himself.

Clawson, Marion. Land and Water for Recreation: Opportunities, Problems, and Policies.

Chicago: Rand, McNally, 1963.

Analysis of outdoor recreation, mostly focused on conditions in the United States

in the 1960s.

Cody, Robin. Voyage of a Summer Sun: Canoeing the Columbia River. Seattle: Sasquatch
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Annotated Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhib.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:33 PM]

Books, 1995.

Includes some anecdotes about controversial issues on Lake Roosevelt and about

an encounter the author had with a park ranger.

Cohen, Fay G. Treaties on Trial: The Continuing Controversy over Northwest Indian Fishing

Rights. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1986.

Good overview of the issue of Indian fishing rights throughout the region.

Collier, Donald, et al. Archaeology of the Upper Columbia Region. Seattle: University of

Washington Press, 1942.

The first archaeological report on the Lake Roosevelt area, from the Columbia

Basin Archaeological Survey of 1939-1940. Some of its conclusions have since

been disproved.

Cone, Joseph and Sandy Ridlington. The Northwest Salmon Crisis: A Documentary History.

Corvallis, Ore.: Oregon State University Press, 1996.

A series of essays that provides a good explanation of the background of the

decline in salmon populations, with emphasis on factors within human control.

Conservation Foundation. National Parks for a New Generation: Visions, Realities,

Prospects. Washington, D.C.: Conservation Foundation, 1985.

Examines a wide variety of management issues of the National Park System and

makes recommendations.

Davis, Mary B., ed. Native America in the Twentieth Century. New York: Garland

Publishing, Inc., 1994.

Excellent source of information on a wide variety of issues relating to Native

Americans, from allotment to Indian Reorganization Act to water rights. Subjects

are arranged alphabetically.

Deloria, Vine, Jr. Behind the Trail of Broken Treaties: An Indian Declaration of

Independence. New York: Dell Publishing Co., Inc., 1974.

A good account of actions nationwide during the time of the Red Power

movement in the 1970s, with useful background information.

______. Custer Died for Your Sins: An Indian Manifesto. Macmillan Co., 1969.

Contains information on the effort to terminate the Colville Confederated Tribes.

Downs, L. Vaughn. The Mightiest of Them All: Memories of Grand Coulee Dam. Fairfield,

Wash.: Ye Galleon Press, 1986.

Concentrates on the construction of Grand Coulee Dam, based on the author's

personal recollections.

Ellis, Richard N., ed. The Western American Indian: Case Studies in Tribal History. Lincoln:

University of Nebraska Press, 1972.

Includes essays on the Indian Reorganization Act, the Bureau of Indian Affairs
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Annotated Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhib.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:33 PM]

since 1933, the Indian Claims Commission, and termination.

Everhart, William C. The National Park Service. New York: Praeger Publishers, 1972.

One of the standard, still useful histories of the National Park Service. Author

not only provides history of the agency but also discusses its many aspects and

functions.Contains chapters on various administrative aspects of the National

Park Service.

Ficken, Robert E. Rufus Woods, The Columbia River, and the Building of Modern

Washington. Pullman: Washington State University Press, 1995.

Describes Rufus Woods' efforts to have the Grand Coulee Dam built.

Fixico, Donald L. Termination and Relocation: Federal Indian Policy, 1945-1960.

Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1986.

Excellent source on the movement to terminate Indian tribes.

Foresta, Ronald A. America's National Parks and Their Keepers. Wash., D.C.: Resources for

the Future, 1984.

A study of the National Park Service, the bureaucracy that has shaped its growth,

and the stresses it faces. Valuable source.

Glover, Richard, ed. David Thompson's Narrative. Toronto: The Champlain Society, 1962.

One of the standard versions of Thompson's journals of his travels, including the

Inland Northwest. Useful footnotes.

Grand Coulee Dam Bicentennial Association. From Pioneers to Power: Historical Sketches

of the Grand Coulee Dam Area. Nespelem, Wash.: Rima Printing and Graphics, 1976.

Contains contributions from many area residents, written in 1958 and 1976,

concerning the history of the area, with a few mentions of Lake Roosevelt and its

impact on people in the area.

Harvey, Mark W.T. Symbol of Wilderness: Echo Park and the American Conservation

Movement. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1994.

Analyzes the controversy over the construction of the Echo Park Dam on the

Green River in the 1950s and discusses the broader history of the American

conservation movement and its response to a perceived pattern of threats to the

National Park System.

Holstine, Craig E. Forgotten Corner: A History of the Colville National Forest, Washington.

Colville: Colville Statesman-Examiner, 1987.

Contains a good introductory section on the history of northeastern Washington,

including information on mining along the Columbia River. Includes a section on

area recreation.

Hosmer, Charles B., Jr. Preservation Comes of Age: From Williamsburg to the National

Trust, 1926-1949. Vol. 2. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 1981.

Detailed history of the early years of the historic preservation movement in the
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Annotated Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhib.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:33 PM]

United States.

Ise, John. Our National Park Policy: A Critical History. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins

University Press, 1961.

Ise provides a chronological critique of the National Park Service, with

discussion of topics such as national recreation areas, Mission 66, and financing

the parks. Invaluable resource.

Kaufman, Polly Welts. National Parks and the Woman's Voice: A History. Albuquerque:

University of New Mexico Press, 1996.

A history of women's roles in the National Park Service.

Keller, Robert H., and Michael F. Turek. American Indians and National Parks. Tucson:

University of Arizona Press, 1998.

The book focuses on several case studies, such as Grand Canyon and Glacier

National Park. Does contain a couple of chapters on the history of tribal/National

Park Service relations in general.

Knapp, Richard F., and Charles E. Hartsoe. Play for America: The National Recreation

Association, 1906-1965. Arlington, Virg.: National Recreation and Park Association, 1979.

History of the organization that was a major institutional influence on the

development of public recreation in the United States. Some information on the

National Park Service and federal recreation management.

Lowry, William R. The Capacity for Wonder: Preserving National Parks. Washington, D.C.:

Brookings Institute, 1994.

A study of the changes in the park services of the United States and Canada

between the late 190s and the early 1990s.

McClelland, Linda Flint. Building the National Parks: Historic Landscape Design and

Construction. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1998.

Detailed history through the CCC era. Includes a section on the Park, Parkway,

and Recreational Area Study of 1936 and a chapter on National Park Service

design since 1940.

Miles, John C. Guardians of the Parks: A History of the National Parks and Conservation

Association. Washington, D.C.: Taylor & Francis and the National Parks and Conservation

Association, 1995.

Discusses the National Parks and Conservation Association's development and

activities in relation to National Park Service programs.

Mueller, Marge and Ted. Fire, Faults & Floods: A Road & Trail Guide Exploring the

Origins of the Columbia River Basin. Moscow, Idaho: University of Idaho Press, 1997.

Well-illustrated guide to geological features of the Columbia River Basin, with

much information on the Ice Age Floods. Non-technical.

National Parks and Conservation Association. Interpretation: Key to the Park Experience.

Washington, D.C.: Feb. 1988.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Annotated Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhib.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:33 PM]

Includes chapters on environmental education, volunteers, cooperating

associations, and concessions.

National Parks and Conservation Association. Investing in Park Futures: The National Park

System Plan: A Blueprint for Tomorrow. Washington, D.C.: National Parks and Conservation

Association, 1988.

The NPCA, an independent oversight organization, provides an analysis of the

current National Park System and recommendations for the future, based on

interviews with agency employees, independent advocates, and researchers. It

covers a wide variety of topics, from interpretation to establishment of new

parks.

______. Washington, D.C. Parks and People: A Natural Relationship: Visitor Use of the

National Parks. Washington, D.C.: National Parks and Conservation Association, 1988.

Looks at visitor use of the parks, examining appropriate activities and facilities

that both encourage use and preserve resources. Includes a useful section on

concessions, providing a brief historical background but emphasizing many

aspects of recent concessions management.

______. Washington, D.C. Planning and Public Involvement: Constituency Building for the

Parks. Washington, D.C.: National Parks and Conservation Association, 1988.

A useful guide to the complex National Park Service planning process, with

historical background on early master plans, information on current planning

documents, and a critique of the often cumbersome process that has led to

inappropriate development in some units.

______. To Preserve Unimpaired: The Challenge of Protecting Park Resources. Washington,

D.C.: National Parks and Conservation Association, 1988.

This publication provides a critical look at 1980s National Park Service policies,

with suggestions for improvement. One section discusses Resource Management

Plans and their implementation, including law enforcement aspects of resource

protection.

Nisbet, Jack. Sources of the River. Seattle: Sasquatch Books, 1994.

A popular account of David Thompson's travels in western North America, with

present-day observations by the author.

Nullet, Lewis, and Joan Nullet, comps. A Brief History of Kettle Falls: The First 50 Years.

n.p.: 1992.

Book contains copy of article detailing preparations for the last salmon run in

1938. In addition, it describes the merging of Kettle Falls and Meyers Falls and

the moving of buildings from Kettle Falls to the new site.

Pitzer, Paul. Grand Coulee: Harnessing a Dream. Pullman: Washington State University

Press, 1994.

Standard reference work on the construction of Grand Coulee Dam and the

Columbia Basin Irrigation Project. Quite detailed. The book also explores the
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Annotated Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhib.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:33 PM]

project's significance to Pacific Northwest history.

Raufer, Maria Ilma. Black Robes and Indians on the Last Frontier: A Story of Heroism.

Milwaukee: Bruce Publishing Co., 1966.

Good source on regional American Indian history, particularly in connection with

the Catholic Church. Contains many excerpts from a wide variety of hard-tofind documents.

Richardson, Elmo R. Dams, Parks and Politics: Resource Development and Preservation in

the Truman-Eisenhower Era. Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 1973.

Uses mostly primary sources to analyze the political maneuverings of the

Secretary of Interior, National Park Service, and other interests during the

Truman-Eisenhower years. Contains some discussion of Park Service resistance

to managing reservoir-based recreation areas in the 1940s and some mention of

the Mission 66 program.

Robinson, Michael C. Water for the West: The Bureau of Reclamation, 1902-1977. Chicago:

Public Works Historical Society, 1979.

Provides good information on the establishment of the Reclamation Service and

its shift to multiple-purpose water management.

Ruby, Robert H., and John A. Brown. A Guide to the Indian Tribes of the Pacific Northwest.

Norman, Okla.: University of Oklahoma Press, 1986.

The authors provide relatively brief but useful histories of the tribes in the

Pacific Northwest, including the Confederated Colville Tribes and the Spokane

Tribe.

Sellars, Richard West. Preserving Nature in the National Parks: A History. New Haven,

Conn.: Yale University Press, 1997.

An important history of National Park Service management of natural resources,

including a discussion of the agency's role in recreational tourism.

Simpson, Sir George. Narrative of a Journey Round the World, During the Years 1841 and

1842. Vol. 1. London: Henry Colburn, 1847.

First-hand account of travels of the North American Governor of Hudson's Bay

Company, with an account of Fort Colvile.

Steele, Richard F. An Illustrated History of Stevens, Ferry, Okanogan and Chelan Counties,

State of Washington. Spokane: Western Historical Publishing Co., 1904.

A subscription history of the northeastern Washington region, with much useful

information on the early history.

Walker, Deward E., Jr., editor. "Plateau." In Handbook of North American Indians, ed. by

William C. Sturtevant. Vol. 12. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution, 1998.

Numerous authors contributed articles on a variety of aspects of Plateau culture;

separate chapters on individual tribes.

Washburn, Wilcomb E. Red Man's Land/White Man's Law: A Study of the Past and Present
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Annotated Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhib.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:33 PM]

Status of the American Indian. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1971.

Contains essays on the termination movement, hunting, fishing, and water rights,

and the Indian Claims Commission.

White, Richard. The Organic Machine: The Remaking of the Columbia River. N.Y.: Hill &

Wang, 1995.

Explores the relationship between the natural history of the Columbia River and

the human history of the Pacific Northwest. The book includes sections on the

construction of Grand Coulee Dam and its impact on the regional salmon

fishery.

Wirth, Conrad L. Parks, Politics, and the People. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press,

1980.

Former National Park Service Director Wirth compiled a history of the

administration of the national park system. The sections on the Parks, Parkway

and Recreation Study Act of 1936 and on Mission 66 are particularly helpful.

Wright, R. Gerald. Wildlife Research and Management in the National Parks. Urbana, Ill.:

University of Illinois Press, 1992.

Good overview of Park Service wildlife management that includes chapters on

the history of wildlife research and management policies.

Wynecoop, David C. Children of the Sun: A History of the Spokane Indians. Wellpinit,

Wash.: 1969.

Information on the tribe up to 1969. Contains the text of the Acquisition of

Indian Lands for Grand Coulee Dam and Reservoir.

Articles

Bearss, Edwin C. "The National Park Service and Its History Program: 1864-1986 - An

Overview." Public Historian 9 (spring 1987): 10-18.

Provides an interesting review of the National Park Service history program that

started under Horace Albright, a history buff, in the 1930s. With the expansion

of the Park Service during that period to include historical areas, the agency

acquired already-established history programs that dated back to the Civil War.

Beaty, Laura. "How Well Is the National Park Service Managing Its Cultural Resources: The

NPCA Point of View." Public Historian 9 (spring 1987): 125-134.

Article includes discussion of a 1980 report on National Park Service facilities

and the resulting program to address some of the identified problems.

Bloch, Ivan. "The Columbia River Salmon Industry." Reclamation Era 28 (February 1938):

26-30.

Outlines several threats to the Columbia River salmon including overfishing,

diversion of water for irrigation, siltation of spawning beds, pollution, and dams.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Annotated Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhib.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:33 PM]

Blodgett, Peter J. "Striking a Balance: Managing Concessions in the National Parks, 1916-

33." Forest and Conservation History 34 (April 1990): 60-68.

Discusses the need for regulations regarding park concessions and how these

were developed and implemented under Stephen Mather and Horace Albright.

"Boating on the Grand Coulee Dam Reservoir." Reclamation Era 30 (December 1940): 349.

Good history of the Grand Coulee Dam Yacht Club and its activities on the

newly forming lake.

"Boulder and Grand Coulee Dams Attract Tourists." Reclamation Era 29 (November 1939):

294.

Brief discussion of motels and tourist camps available for visitors to the dam,

and of recreational facilities.

Bretz, J Harlen. "The Lake Missoula Floods and the Channeled Scabland." Journal of

Geology 77 (1969): 505-43.

Account of the great Ice Age events that shaped the landscape of eastern

Washington, written by the geologist who postulated the floods and was

eventually proved right.

Campbell, Frederick L., John C. Hendee, and Roger Clark. "Law and Order in Public Parks."

Parks & Recreation 3 (December 1968): 28-31ff.

Authors studied behavior problems in three public campgrounds in Washington,

noting types of violations and vandalism. After speculating on the underlying

causes, they offer potential solutions.

Casseday, Graeme. "A Big Dam's Big Lake." Trailer Boats 24 (Dec. 1980): 24-26.

Short article written for people planning to visit Lake Roosevelt.

"Clearing the Grand Coulee Reservoir." Public Works 73 (April 1942): 28-30.

Discussion of the clearing project, repeating much of what had been written

before.

Conrad, Wafford. "Probing the Depth of Lake Roosevelt." Reclamation Era 34 (March

1948): 57-58.

Short article on the preparation of nautical charts for Lake Roosevelt by the Coast

and Geodetic Survey.

Corson, James W. "Volunteers in the Parks." National Parks & Conservation Magazine 48

(April 1974): 23-24.

Describes the VIP program, which began in 1970.

Dellwo, Robert D. "Indian Water Rights - The Winters Doctrine Updated." Gonzaga Law

Review 6: 215 (spring 1971): 215-240. Available in file A44 Triparty Agreement,

LARO.HQ.ADM.

Dellwo, lawyer for the Spokane Tribe, provides excellent background on the
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Annotated Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhib.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:33 PM]

Winters Doctrine (tribes have dominant right to all waters touching or within

reservation boundaries) and its present and future use in the Pacific Northwest.

______. "The Spokane ‘Reservations' — 1872 to 1881." Rawhide Press (Jan. 1981): 27.

Useful historical account of the establishment of the Spokane Indian Reservation.

Dick, Wesley Arden. "When Dans [sic] Weren't Damned: The Public Power Crusade and

Visions of the Good Life in the Pacific Northwest in the 1930s." Environmental Review 13

(Fall-Winter 1989): 113-153.

Looks at the promise of large dams and hydroelectric projects of the 1930s and

1940s, before they became symbols of ecological disaster.

Fish, Byron. "Grand Coulee's Undiscovered Lake." Ford Times 46 (Nov. 1954): 38-43.

Early article about the attractions of Lake Roosevelt, with photographs

Gibby, Lon, and Donald Ball. "Echoes of Yesterday — Moving 1388 Indian Graves." Pacific

Northwestern 41 (1997 no. 4): n.p.

Account of the grave relocation project of 1939 that moved Indian and white

graves just prior to filling the reservoir behind Grand Coulee Dam.

"Highway Relocation at Grand Coulee." Better Roads 11 (November 1941): 13-15.

Article details the relocation of roads and railroads in the reservoir area, from the

planning to the actual work on the ground.

Johnson, Ralph W. "The Canada-United States Controversy over the Columbia River."

University of Washington Law Review 41 (August 1966): 676-763.

Analysis of the negotiations and events that culminated in the Columbia River

Treaty of 1961 and its potential impact on future Canada-United States relations.

"Joint Investigations, Columbia Basin Project." Reclamation Era 30(August 1940): 219-220.

Article outlines extensive planning underway for the Columbia Basin Irrigation

Project. Investigations were divided into 28 separate problems and included the

issue of recreation on the lake behind Grand Coulee Dam.

"Lake Roosevelt-Paradise Found." Reclamation Era 32 (September 1946): 605-606.

Reports that new lake is haven for boating and seaplane enthusiasts, with public

campsites to be developed soon.

Martin, Emilie. "Student Volunteers in the National Parks and Forests." National Parks &

Conservation Magazine 47 (Feb. 1973): 24-27.

Short article describing the work done by Student Conservation Association

volunteers.

McBride, Dennis. "Grand Canyon-Boulder Dam Tours, Inc.: Southern Nevada's First Venture

into Commercial Tourism." Nevada Historical Society Quarterly 27 (Summer 1984): 92-108.

Article covers a tour business that focused on Hoover Dam and Lake Mead,
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Annotated Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhib.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:33 PM]

starting in 1935.

Neuberger, Richard L. "The Great Salmon Mystery." Saturday Evening Post 214 (13

September 1941): 20-21, 39-45.

Account of the efforts to transport salmon from below Grand Coulee Dam to fish

hatcheries for artificial propagation.

Peterson, Otis. "Grand Destiny for Coulee Dam." Reclamation Era 55 (Nov. 1969): 104.

Discusses Kenneth Brooks' plan to improve the environment of the dam and

surrounding area. Proposed visitor facilities are discussed.

"Pioneer Tugboating on Lake Roosevelt." Marine Digest (Dec. 14, 1946): 9-10.

Article on early tugboats on Lake Roosevelt.

Ross, John Alan. "Political Conflict on the Colville Reservation." Northwest Anthropological

Research Notes 2 (1968): 29-91.

Investigates conflict and factionalism among the ethnic groups of the Colville

Indian Reservation. Discusses how pressure by whites for Indian land intensified

the factionalism.

"Sails and Motors to Dot Dam Lake." Columbian 5 (23 Feb. 1939): 11.

Brief article describing the initial meeting of the group that became the Grand

Coulee Dam Yacht Club. It mentions a proposed log boom and floating wharf

near Rattlesnake Canyon.

Schuster, R. L. "Reservoir Induced Landslides." Bulletin of the International Association of

Engineering Geology 20 (1979): 8-15.

Includes a case study, with excellent photographs, of landslides along the shores

of Lake Roosevelt.

Simonds, William Joe. "The Bureau of Reclamation and its Archeology: A Brief History."

CRM 23 (2000 no. 1): 5-8.

Author provides useful background history on Reclamation's program of

archaeology in connection with its projects.

Sperlin, O. B., ed. "Our First Horticulturalist." Washington Historical Quarterly 22 (Jan.

1931): 48.

This portion of the edited journal of the Wilkes Expedition covers the

exploration of present-day eastern Washington in 1841. The account describes

native plants of the region and foods gathered by American Indians in the area.

In addition, it mentions Euroamerican settlements and offers a good description

of the Hudson's Bay Company farm at Fort Colvile.

Sprague, Roderick. "American Indians and American Archaeology." American Antiquity 39

(January 1974): 1-2 (reprint).

Writer offers several suggestions to reduce or remove the Indian-archaeologist

conflict that intensified during the height of the Red Power movement.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Annotated Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhib.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:33 PM]

Swain, Donald C. "The National Park Service and the New Deal, 1933-1940." Pacific

Historical Review 41 (August 1972): 312-32.

Discusses several aspects of the National Park Service during the 1930s,

including the agency's historic preservation program and recreational planning

and development.

"Vista Points on Columbia Basin Project." Reclamation Era 26 (December 1936): 286-287.

Short article on the Bureau of Reclamation vista houses adjacent to Grand

Coulee Dam.

Webb, Melody. "Cultural Landscapes in the National Park Service." Public Historian 9

(Spring 1987): 81-89.

Traces the evolution of the idea of cultural landscapes and how interest within

the Park Service has broadened from the initial inclusion of event-related

landscapes to cover a wide variety of complex landscapes.

"Widening Columbia River Channel by Contract." Reclamation Era 31 (Jan. 1941): 7.

Discusses the widening of the channel near the Canadian border to prevent

flooding of Canadian lands above Lake Roosevelt.

Reports and Government Documents

Ackerman, Lillian A. Ethnographic Overview and Assessment of Federal and Tribal Lands in

the Lake Roosevelt Area Concerning the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Indian

Reservation. Project Report Number 30. Pullman: Center for Northwest Anthropology,

Washington State University, 1996.

Report provides a useful ethnographic overview and history of the native people

in the Lake Roosevelt area.

Allen, R., et al. "Investigative Reports of Columbia River Fisheries Project." Vancouver,

Wash.: Pacific Northwest Regional Comm., 1976.

Includes a report by Lloyd A. Phinney of the Washington Department of

Fisheries concerning the implementation of programs for Columbia and Snake

rivers salmon and steelhead runs.

Arnold, Edwin L. "Project Report on the Recreation Aspects of the Columbia Basin Project,

Washington." San Francisco: National Park Service, 1967. Available at LARO research

library.

Makes recommendations on recreation planning for the Columbia Basin area,

including Banks Lake.

Beckman, Lance G. et al. "Assessment of the Fisheries and Limnology in Lake F. D.

Roosevelt, 1980-83. Final Report 1985." Seattle: U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, 1985.

Available at Eastern Washington University Library.

The authors obtained baseline data 1979-83 and formulated recommendations for
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Annotated Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhib.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:33 PM]

enhancing the Lake Roosevelt fishery by controlling water levels. They

recommended caution in trying to establish kokanee salmon or rainbow trout by

using hatcheries. They concluded that Lake Roosevelt could support a viable

fishery.

Behrens, Greg W., and Phillip J. Hansen. "Geology and Related Construction Problems of the

Grand Coulee Dam Project," pp. 357-69 in Joseph, N.L. et al., eds., Geologic Guidebook for

Washington and Adjacent Areas, Washington Division of Geology and Earth Resources,

Information Circular No. 86, 1989. Available in "Grand Coulee Dam" section of Dams box,

LARO research library.

Technical report on the geology of the Grand Coulee Dam area as it relates to

construction and operation of the dam, with a suggested road trip to view major

project features.

Bennett, David H., and Robert G. White. "A Survey of Existing Literature on Franklin D.

Roosevelt Lake." University of Idaho, Forest, Wildlife and Range Experiment Station,

Contribution No. 61, January 1977. Available at LARO research library.

Useful summaries of many different scientific studies of Lake Roosevelt.

Biery, Ken D., Jr. "National Park Service Security & Fire Protection Survey: Coulee Dam

National Recreation Area, Fort Spokane District, Park Headquarters." n.d. Available in file

Coulee Dam NRA, Kent Bush, Columbia Cascades Support Office.

Detailed report on Fort Spokane's physical security systems, with

recommendations.

Bloodworth, Jessie. "Human Resources Survey of the Colville Confederated Tribes: a Field

Report of the Bureau of Indian Affairs." Portland: Colville Agency, 1959.

Good tribal history along with sociological information from the late 1950s.

Bouchard, Randy, and Dorothy I. D. Kennedy. Indian Land Use and Occupancy in the

Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake Area of Washington State. Unpublished report prepared for the

Colville Confederated Tribes and the United States Bureau of Reclamation, June 1984.

Comprehensive report contains excellent history of the Colville tribes. Emphasis

of document is on area place names.

Brooks, Kenneth W. Grand Coulee Dam Environmental Plan. Prepared for U.S. Bureau of

Reclamation, 1968. Available at Coulee Dam Town Hall.

This environmental plan was set into motion by the construction of the third

powerhouse. Provides recommendations on tourist and recreational facilities in

the area, including along the shores of Lake Roosevelt. Proposes a Columbia

River Parkway.

Brown, Daniel R. "Coulee Dam National Recreation Area: Statement for Interpretation,

FY93." 1993. Available in K1817 Interpretive Plan, LARO.HQ.CIO.

Overview of interpretation program themes, objectives, costs, and patterns.

Bruesewitz, Sally L., et al. "Hooking Mortality of Walleye Caught from Deep Water."

Olympia: Washington Dept. of Fish & Wildlife, 1996.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Annotated Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhib.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:33 PM]

This study of Lake Roosevelt walleye concluded that walleye caught from deep

water could be protected through length limits and catch-and-release fisheries.

Bucy, Lisa K., and William H. Funk. Lake Roosevelt Management Plan. Prepared for the

Lake Roosevelt Water Quality Council. Pullman, Wash.: WRC Report No. 93, State of

Washington Water Research Center, 1996.

Review and summary of existing water quality conditions and a management

plan for Lake Roosevelt.

Chance, David H. Fort Colvile: The Structure of a Hudson's Bay Company Post, 1825 to

1871 and After. Moscow, Idaho: Department of Sociology/Anthropology, 1972.

Detailed report by the chief archaeologist of the Fort Colvile site that includes

excellent descriptions of the fort buildings and outlying sites based on extensive

archival research.

______. "Kettle Falls: 1976. Salvage Archaeology in Lake Roosevelt." University of Idaho

Anthropological Research Manuscript Series, No. 39. Moscow: Laboratory of Anthropology,

University of Idaho, 1977.

Lengthy report describing the archaeological field work during the 1976 season

at sites in the Kettle Falls area. The analysis pulls together several years of work

at these sites and offers descriptions of at least three phases of cultural activity

there over the past two thousand years.

Collier, Donald, Alfred E. Hudson, and Arlo Ford. "Archeology of the Upper Columbia

Region." University of Washington Publications in Anthropology 9. Seattle: University of

Washington Press, 1942.

Report covers the salvage archaeology operations of the Columbia Basin

Archaeological Survey in the area that was later flooded by Lake Roosevelt.

Although later archaeologists have criticized the authors both for their field work

and their conclusions, this report remains important since it covers the first

excavations done in this region.

Colville Confederated Tribes. "The Year of the Coyote: Centennial Celebration, July 2,

1972." Nespelem, Wash.: Colville Confederated Tribes, 1972.

Provides a detailed overview of the land history of the Colville Confederated

Tribes.

Colville Confederated Tribes, National Park Service, Spokane Tribe of Indians, Bureau of

Reclamation, and Bureau of Indian Affairs. "Lake Roosevelt Concession Management Plan."

Jan. 1991. Available in Special Park Use, etc. notebook, LARO.HQ.CIO.

This document provides guidelines and recommendations for managing

concessions along all of Lake Roosevelt, with emphasis on specific development

areas.

Colville Confederated Tribes, and Spokane Tribe of Indians. "Proposal for Fishery and

Wildlife Evaluation and Development of Management Alternatives for Franklin D. Roosevelt

Reservoir and Its Tributary Streams." ca. 1975. Available in file N1423 Fish (Annual

Report), LARO.HQ.ADM.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Annotated Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhib.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:33 PM]

Reports on an effort to develop a comprehensive research program to evaluate

the existing fishery and wildlife resources of Lake Roosevelt and to initiate

management programs.

Combes, John D. "A Preliminary Investigation at Old Military Fort Spokane, Washington."

Report of Investigations No. 30. Pullman: Laboratory of Anthropology, Washington State

University, 1965.

Brief report includes a useful history of Fort Spokane.

Elvidge, Janice A. "The Interpretive Desires of Overnight Visitors at Four Campgrounds in

Coulee Dam National Recreation Area." n.d. [short and long versions] Available in file

K1817 Visitor Survey, LARO.HQ.CIO.

This 1990s survey analyzed the characteristics of those who attended interpretive

programs at LARO and those who did not.

Fish, Frederic F., and Mitchell G. Hanavan. "A Report Upon the Grand Coulee FishMaintenance Project, 1939-1947." Special Scientific Report No. 55, U.S. Fish & Wildlife

Service, ca. 1948.

Discusses the natural and artificial propagation of relocated fish, concluding that

it is questionable whether the early-running Columbia River salmon races can

surmount the increasing development of the river and its tributaries.

Frizzell, Kent, U.S. Department of the Interior Solicitor, to Secretary of the Interior. "Opinion

on the boundaries of and status of title to certain lands within the Colville and Spokane

Indian Reservations." 3 June 1974. Available in file A44 Tri-party Agreement,

LARO.HQ.ADM.

This opinion discusses the boundaries and status of title to lands within the

reservations. It overturned much of the 1945 opinion written by Warner Gardner.

Galm, Jerry R., ed. A Design for Management of Cultural Resources in the Lake Roosevelt

Basin of Northeastern Washington. Eastern Washington University Reports in Archaeology

and History 100-83. Cheney: Archaeological and Historical Services, Eastern Washington

University, 1994.

Report contains an excellent summary of previous archaeological work in the

Lake Roosevelt reservoir, as well as a fine history of northeastern Washington.

Gangmark, Harold A., and Leonard A. Fulton. "Preliminary Surveys of Roosevelt Lake in

Relation to Game Fishes." Washington, D.C.: U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Special

Scientific Report: Fisheries No. 5, 1949.

Survey completed as a first step towards improving the sport fishing in Lake

Roosevelt.

Gardner, Warner W., U.S. Department of the Interior Solicitor. Opinion (Memorandum to

Assistant Secretary Chapman). 29 Dec. 1945. Available in file 2, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat.

#3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

This key opinion defined Indian rights at Lake Roosevelt until 1974, when much

of the findings were overturned by a subsequent opinion. It provided the basis for

the first thirty years of Park Service management of the NRA.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Annotated Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhib.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:33 PM]

Gilbert, Cathy A., and Renata Niedzwiecka. "The Historic Landscape of Fort Spokane: A

Design Proposal." Seattle: National Park Service, 1985.

Contains management plans and a brief history of Fort Spokane.

Gilbert, Cathy A., Renata Niedzwiecka, James Thomson, and Laurin Huffman II.

"Comprehensive Design Plan for Fort Spokane." Seattle: Cultural Resources Division, Pacific

Northwest Region, National Park Service, 1991.

Comprehensive report details design problems and alternative solutions for Fort

Spokane.

Hall, Bert A. Final Construction Report on Lake Roosevelt Reservoir. Coulee Dam, Wash.:

Bureau of Reclamation, 1952. Available at Grand Coulee Project Office, Bureau of

Reclamation.

Detailed report on the relocation of highways, bridges, and railways and the

clearing work necessary for the clearing of the area now known as Lake

Roosevelt.

Howerton, Jack, Jennifer Creveling, and Brent Renfrow. "Wildlife Protection, Mitigation and

Enhancement Planning for Grand Coulee Dam, Final Report." Portland: U.S. Bonneville

Power Administration, 1986.

Contains summary of effects on wildlife and habitat caused by the creation of

Lake Roosevelt, plus recommendations for mitigation.

Hussey, John A. "Fort Spokane, Washington: A History of the United States Army Post and

of the Fort Spokane Military Reservation." San Francisco: U.S. Department of the Interior,

National Park Service, Region Four, April 1958.

Brief but useful history of Fort Spokane, including its use by the Bureau of

Indian Affairs.

Jones, Fred O. "Report on Geologic Conditions at the Gifford-Inchelium Ferry Landings,

Stevens and Ferry Counties, Washington." Spokane: U.S. Geological Survey, 1949.

Study conducted to determine potential landslide conditions at the two ferry

landings.

Jones, Fred O., Daniel R. Embody, and Warren L. Peterson. "Landslides along the Columbia

River Valley, Northeastern Washington." Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office,

U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 367, 1961. Available at Mid-Columbia Regional

Library, Kennewick, Washington.

Detailed study of more than 300 landslides in the Pleistocene terrace deposits of

Lake Roosevelt and downstream of Grand Coulee Dam. The authors developed

techniques for judging the stability of natural slopes and estimating the extent of

impending landslide actions.

Larrabee, Edward McM., and Susan Kardas. "Archaeological Survey of Grand Coulee Dam

National Recreation Area. Part 1: Lincoln County above Normal Pool." Pullman: Laboratory

of Anthropology, Washington State University, Report of Investigations No. 38, 1966.

Report includes list of informants, some interviewed in the 1960s, as well as a
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Annotated Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhib.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:33 PM]

copy of information from Billy Curlew on Indian campsites.

Lewis, Ralph H. Museum Curatorship in the National Park Service, 1904-1982. Washington,

D.C.: National Park Service, 1993.

Detailed, comprehensive history of the National Park Service museum program.

Mackintosh, Barry. Interpretation in the National Park Service: A Historical Perspective.

National Park Service, 1989.

Provides a context in which to place interpretation at Lake Roosevelt NRA.

______. The National Parks: Shaping the System. Washington, D.C.: National Park Service,

1985.

Author provides a concise history of the National Park Service and shows how it

has evolved since its creation. Includes a section on the creation of reservoir

areas.

______. Visitor Fees in the National Park System: A Legislative and Administrative History.

Wash., D.C.: National Park Service, 1983.

Detailed history of National Park Service administration of visitor fees, up to

1980.

McCrary, Paul F. "Interpretive Prospectus for Coulee Dam National Recreation Area." Sept.

25, 1964. Available in file K1817 Interpretive Prospectus: Coulee Dam NRA 1964,

LARO.HQ.CIO.

Provides guidelines for interpretation of LARO to visitors.

McDonough, Maureen H., and Donald R. Field. "Coulee Dam National Recreation Area:

Visitor Use Patterns and Preferences." Seattle: National Park Service, College of Forest

Resources, University of Washington, 1979. Available in LARO research library.

Study of visitors to Coulee Dam NRA.

McDowell, Amy C., and Janelle R. Griffith. "Retrospective Analysis: Fisheries: Summary

and Recommendations." Wellpinit, Wash.: prepared by Spokane Tribe of Indians for the Lake

Roosevelt Water Quality Council, 1993.

Includes a useful summary of trends in the Lake Roosevelt fishery by decade

since the 1940s.

Nielsen, J. R. "Investigation of the Walleye Fishery in Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake." pp. 28-

50 in, "A Survey and Evaluation of Sport Fisheries in the North Management Area, Region

One, with Special Emphasis on the Walleye Fishery." Washington Department of Game.

Project No. F-64-R, Job No. 2, 1974. Available in Fisheries section, Fisheries box, LARO

research library.

Reports on a study to determine the angler utilization and catch rate and some of

the age and growth characteristics of the walleye population in the lake. Includes

management recommendations.

Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission. Outdoor Recreation for America: A

Report to the President and to the Congress by the Outdoor Recreation Resources Review
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Annotated Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhib.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:33 PM]

Commission. Wash., D.C.: 1962.

Important recommendations for federal outdoor recreation management,

including the creation of a Bureau of Outdoor Recreation.

Peone, Tim L., et al. "Lake Roosevelt Fisheries Monitoring Program: Annual Report, August

1988-December 1989." Volume 1. Portland: Bonneville Power Administration, 1989.

This report gives historical data on fisheries management on Lake Roosevelt.

Powell, J. W. Eighteenth Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology to the

Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, 1896-97. Part 2. Wash., D.C.: Government Printing

Office, 1899.

Includes information on legislation setting aside land for both the Colville and

Spokane reservations.

Ray, Verne F. "Ethnic Impact of the Events Incident to the Federal Power Development on

the Colville and Spokane Indian Reservations." Prepared for the Confederated Tribes of the

Colville Reservation and the Spokane Tribe of Indians. Port Townsend, Washington: 1977.

Available at Eastern Washington State Historical Society, Spokane.

Ray describes not only traditional aspects of tribal culture but also the drastic

impact on this culture brought on by the flooding caused by Grand Coulee Dam.

He provides excellent information on many aspects of this cultural change,

including a discussion of the acceptance of modern tribal government formed

under the Indian Reorganization Act.

______. "Salmon Fishing by the Colville Tribes," in The Confederated Tribes of the Colville

Reservation, et al. v. The United States of America, Indian Claims Commission, Docket No.

181-C, n.d. Available at Eastern Washington State Historical Society Archives (RE SC 395).

Excellent information on the importance of salmon to the Colville Confederated

Tribes, presented as part of the Tribes' case before the Indian Claims

Commission. Ray also provides his own estimates of the historic native

population of the area, disputing accounts of various explorers.

______. "The Sanpoil and the Nespelem: Salish Peoples of Northeastern Washington."

Seattle: University of Washington Publications in Anthropology, vol. 5, 1933.

Lengthy anthropological description of the traditional way of life of the Sanpoil

and Nespelem people, based on field research done 1928-1930.

Riedel, Jon L. "Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area, Washington, Water Resources

Scoping Report." National Park Service, March 1997.

Riedel addresses a variety of water quality and other water resource issues,

including the role of the National Park Service in management of water

resources. The report concludes with a recommendation that the Park Service

fund a full-time water resource management position at LARO.

Roberts, Edward G. "A Report on the Coulee Dam National Recreation Area." Sept. 1969.

Available in file Archives, Drawer 2, LARO.FS.1107.

Report prepared for the National Park Service that makes recommendations to
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Annotated Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhib.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:33 PM]

improve public relations and recreation facilities in the National Recreation

Area.

Scholz, A. T., et al. "Feasibility Report on Restoration of Lake Roosevelt Fisheries." Cheney,

Wash.: Eastern Washington University, ca. 1986. Available in file Marmot Control Program,

drawer 2, LARO.HQ.RMO.

This report provides an excellent overview of Lake Roosevelt fisheries and

discusses a proposed program to mitigate for fish losses resulting from Grand

Coulee Dam by restoring and enhancing the sport fishery of Lake Roosevelt and

its tributaries The recommendations include size regulations and bag limits for

walleye and other regulations, constructing two kokanee hatcheries, improving

habitat in selected tributaries, and conducting a monitoring program.

Shipman, George A. "Final Report and Recommendations Regarding the Town of Coulee

Dam." Ephrata, Wash.: Bureau of Reclamation, 1954.

Synthesizes local attitudes and makes recommendations concerning the

government-owned and -administered town of Coulee Dam.

_______. "The Grand Coulee Dam Area: A Preliminary Report." Ephrata, Wash.: Bureau of

Reclamation, 1953.

Survey of the question of the status of Coulee Dam as a government town.

Discusses the economy of the area, including tourism.

Turek, Michael F. "American Indian Tribes and the U.S. National Park Service." n.p., [ca.

early 1990s]. Available at LARO research library.

Author discusses National Park Service policies concerning Native Americans

and cites the LARO Multi-Party Agreement as "the progressive approach."

Underwood, Keith, and John Shields. "Lake Roosevelt Fisheries Monitoring Program, 1993

Annual Report." Wellpinit, Wash.: Spokane Tribe of Indians, prepared for Bonneville Power

Administration, 1996. Available at BPA library, Portland, Oregon.

Reports on efforts to collect data on the Lake Roosevelt fishery before and after

the Spokane Tribal Hatchery and the Sherman Creek Hatchery began stocking in

1991 and 1992.

U.S. Department of Energy. Bonneville Power Administration. "Environmental Assessment,

Colville Resident Trout Hatchery." 1986. Available at BPA Library, Portland, Oregon.

Describes the impact of Chief Joseph and Grand Coulee dams on the Colville

and Spokane tribes, and the plans for a hatchery as mitigation.

U.S. Department of the Interior. Bureau of Reclamation. Annual Project Histories, Columbia

Basin Project. [beginning in 1970, these were published by the Grand Coulee Dam

Operations Office.] Available at Grand Coulee Project Office, Grand Coulee, Washington.

Excellent resource on the clearing of the reservoir for Lake Roosevelt and on

subsequent management activities. Compiled for the years 1933-1985. Useful for

the early years when Reclamation paid for Park Service operations at the

reservoir.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Annotated Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhib.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:33 PM]

______. Bureau of Reclamation. Recreational Development of Roosevelt Lake: Columbia

Basin Joint Investigations, Problem 26. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office,

1945.

Invaluable discussion of the management issues at LARO as seen in its very

early years.

______. Bureau of Reclamation. Rural Recreational Areas: Columbia Basin Joint

Investigations: Problem 25. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1945.

Has a chapter summarizing the need for recreation facilities in eastern

Washington, with recommendations.

______. Columbia Cascades Support Office. "Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area

Museum Management Plan." National Park Service, 1997. Available in LARO.HQ.CIO.

This detailed plan outlines current conditions. Recommendations are made on

interpretation at Fort Spokane, Kettle Falls, and Dry Falls, and suggestions are

made concerning museum collection management and staffing.

______. Coulee Dam National Recreation Area. "General Management Plan: Coulee Dam

National Recreation Area." 1980. Available in notebook GMP, Envir. Assessment,

LARO.HQ.CIO.

Delineates park-wide policies and programs.

______. "Interpretive Prospectus: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, Washington." 1975.

Available in K1817 Interpretive Prospectus Coulee Dam Dec. 1975, LARO.HQ.CIO.

This interpretive plan covers personal and non-personal services and includes a

plan for wayside exhibits.

______. "Master Plan of Coulee Dam National Recreation Area." 1964. Available in D18

Master Planning 1965-67, LARO.HQ.ADM

Provides guidance for managing the national recreation area.

______. "Resource Management Plan and Environmental Assessment: Coulee Dam National

Recreation Area." 1988. Available in file Coulee Dam NRA, Nat. Resource Mgmt. Plan

1988, LARO.HQ.CIO.

Management plan for the following resources: air, water, plant, geological,

wildlife, and hazardous wastes, with discussion of specific projects.

______. "Resources Management Plan and Environmental Assessment: Coulee Dam National

Recreation Area." 1982. Available in file D18 General Management Plan, box 1 of 3,

LARO.HQ.PAO.

This is LARO's first management plan for natural and cultural resources.

______. Special Park Use Management Plan: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area. 30

Aug. 1990.

This plan provided the guidelines for LARO to implement NPS-53 on a local

level. It deals with all special uses of federal lands at the NRA.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Annotated Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhib.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:33 PM]

U.S. Department of the Interior. Coulee Dam National Recreation Area (and Lake Roosevelt

National Recreation Area). "Superintendent's Annual Reports." Available in various files,

LARO.HQ.ADM.

The annual reports written by the LARO superintendent are an excellent

resource. They often provide detailed information and justification for particular

management decisions.

U.S. Department of the Interior. Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area. Draft General

Management Plan/Environmental Impact Statement: Lake Roosevelt National Recreation

Area. September 1998.

This recent GMP provides guidelines for managing LARO. It offers community

access points as a way to resolve the problem of limited docking facilities at

Lake Roosevelt.

______. "Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area: 5 Year Strategic Plan, 1998-2002." 1997.

Available in Cultural Resource Mgmt. box, LARO.HQ.SUP.

Discusses existing conditions and management goals for LARO for the period

1998 to 2002.

______. "Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area: Resources Management Plan, Natural

Resources Program." Jan. 1997.

Detailed management plan for natural resources in LARO.

U.S. Department of the Interior. National Park Service. "Coulee Dam National Recreation

Area: Environmental Assessment for the General Management Plan." August 1979. Available

in GMP, Envir. Assessment, etc., notebook, LARO.HQ.CIO.

Detailed evaluation of four alternatives for the management of LARO.

______. "Draft Long-Range Interpretive Plan, Lake Roosevelt National Recreational Area."

1999. Available in LARO.HQ.CIO.

This draft document provides guidance for LARO's interpretive program and

also discusses visitor characteristics and trends.

______. Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area: Museum Management Plan. 1997.

Available in LARO.HQ.CIO.

Detailed plan for museum management at LARO.

______. "Museum Prospectus: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area." 1958. Available in

file H20 Collection Management, LARO.HQ.CIO.

This is essentially an interpretive plan for LARO. It discusses visitor services,

self-guided trails, personal services, waysides, and other aspects of

interpretation.

______. National Parks for the 21st Century: The Vail Agenda: Report and

Recommendations to the Director of the National Park Service from the Steering Committee

of the 75th Anniversary Symposium. Washington, D.C.: 1992.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Annotated Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhib.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:33 PM]

Detailed critique of the National Park Service.

______. A Study of the Park and Recreation Problem of the United States. Washington, D.C.:

Government Printing Office, 1941.

This volume reports on a study undertaken by the National Park Service to

establish a basis for coordinated recreation land planning among all agencies

having responsibility for park and recreational developments. Includes

information on recreation trends of the period, planning, and various agencies

that dealt with recreation issues.

Walker, Deward E., Jr., and Sylvester L. Lahren. Anthropological Guide for the Coulee Dam

National Recreation Area. University of Idaho Anthropological Research Manuscript Series,

No. 33. Moscow: Laboratory of Anthropology, University of Idaho, 1977.

Authors provide a very useful overview of the native cultures in the Lake

Roosevelt area. Appendices include names and locations of camps.

Washington Historical Records Survey. Inventory of the County Archives of Washington. No.

33. Stevens County (Colville). Seattle: Washington Historical Records Survey, 1942.

Contains a good general history of Stevens County.

Washington State Planning Council. A Study of Parks, Parkways and Recreational Areas,

State of Washington. Olympia, Wash., 1941.

Comprehensive study includes the organization and operations of state parks,

recreation areas around the state, and recreational travel. While Fort Colvile is

mentioned as an area of potential interest, no mention is made of the soon-to-be

Lake Roosevelt.

Williams, Gary D., and Alan S. Newell. Historic Resource Study: Coulee Dam National

Recreation Area, Washington. Prepared by Historical Research Associates for the National

Park Service, 1980.

Provides an overview of the history of the Lake Roosevelt area from the time

prior to Euroamericans arriving in the area to the inundation of Lake Roosevelt.

Emphasis is on Fort Colvile and Fort Spokane. Also identifies and briefly

describes significant historic sites, a number of them now flooded by the

reservoir.

Archival Material

Attorney-General, Fish & Game Working Files. Washington State Archives, Olympia.

These files contain correspondence related to tribal fishing rights and tribal

jurisdiction questions on Lake Roosevelt. The papers as a whole cover the years

1969-1993.

Clipping file. Northwest Room, Spokane Public Library.

The library maintains extensive newspaper clipping files, most post-1920, on a

wide variety of subjects that pertain to Lake Roosevelt and the surrounding area.

In addition, all Spokesman-Review newspapers through 1920 are indexed, with
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Annotated Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhib.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:33 PM]

these available in the same research room.

Columbia Basin Commission. Papers. Washington State Archives, Olympia.

These papers cover the years 1933-1964 and contain some valuable information

on the administration of Lake Roosevelt, particularly in the "Recreation" folder

of box 34.

Foley, Thomas. Papers. Manuscripts, Archives, and Special Collections, Washington State

University.

Rich source of materials concerning recreation and property rights on Lake

Roosevelt and tribal issues in the 1970s and 1980s. Selected highlights include:

Box 1 contains discussion of the proposed termination of the Colville Indian

Reservation.

Box 80, "Wilderness - Lake Roosevelt Management Plan" folder, contains

correspondence related to the concessions management plan of the late 1980s,

aquaculture on Lake Roosevelt, and the tribes' role in concessions.

Box 159 contains correspondence and newspaper articles concerning the 1974

Solicitor's Opinion and the Colvilles' management of recreation within the Indian

Zone.

Box 238 contains correspondence relating to drawdowns on Lake Roosevelt and

the increase in special use permit fees.

Box 269 contains correspondence from the Colville Confederated Tribes and

from constituents on a variety of issues.

Box 276 contains correspondence related to the Five-Party Agreement.

Box 288 contains constituent correspondence related to the Special Park Use

Management Plan and the Kettle Falls Marina.

Grant County, Washington. County Commissioners' Records. Office of the County Clerk,

Ephrata, Washington.

This collection consists of one folder of material related to the Lake Roosevelt

Forum, including newsletters and correspondence.

Horan, Walt. Papers. Washington State University.

Valuable correspondence and other material relating to Lake Roosevelt,

particularly responses from the public and agencies to the proposed National

Park Service regulations for Lake Roosevelt. Covers the years 1943-1964.

Highlights include:

Box 216 contains much correspondence on a variety of topics related to LARO.

Box 353 includes 1947 correspondence about issues of concern to the Colville

Confederated Tribes.

Box 361 contains a discussion of Indian fishing rights.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Annotated Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhib.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:33 PM]

Jackson, Henry M., Papers. University of Washington Libraries, Manuscripts and University

Archives Division.

Accession 3560-3, Box 32, Folder 12 contains a four-page synopsis of the

Mission 66 plans for Coulee Dam NRA, along with 1956-1957 correspondence

from area residents complaining about lack of funds for developing the NRA.

Letters from Harold Maysent suggest private citizens use their own equipment to

develop the national recreation area.

Accession 3560-5, Box 159, Folder 14 contains letters concerning plans to

purchase Canadian water to maintain level in Lake Roosevelt.

LaBret, Frances. Untitled manuscript. n.d. Available in "History" section of Fort Spokane

box, LARO research library.

The writer, a former student at the Indian boarding school at Fort Spokane,

provides an excellent first-hand account of life at the school. She tells about the

reality of the school, from daily routines to humorous incidents typical of

children to accounts of students running away from the school.

Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area. Central files and files held by individual

employees. Coulee Dam, Fort Spokane, and Kettle Falls, Washington.

Files maintained by park staff over the decades are the backbone of this report.

All decades except the 1960s and 1970s are well documented.

Langlie, Gov. Arthur B. Papers. Washington State Archives, Olympia.

Box 10 contains correspondence about the 1951 regulations of Lake Roosevelt.

Magnuson, Warren G. Papers. University of Washington Libraries, Manuscripts and

University Archives Division.

Large collection contains materials about Coulee Dam National Recreation Area.

Of particular interest are the following:

Accession 3181-3, Box 85, Folder 21: Includes the 1951 Rules and Regulations

along with considerable correspondence protesting these rules and earlier

attempts to control development around the lake.

Accession 3181-3, Box 85, Folder 22: Considerable correspondence from 1949-

1950 concerning early attempts to regulate industry and development around

Lake Roosevelt.

Accession 3181-4, Box 208, Folder 5: Letter of 17 June 1949 outlining proposed

developments in the new recreation area.

May, Catherine. Papers. Manuscripts, Archives, and Special Collections, Washington State

University.

May's papers are a good source of information on National Park Service

management of Lake Roosevelt for the years 1959-1970. Of particular interest

are the following:

Box 67, "Banks Lake" folder contains correspondence relating to recreation and
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Annotated Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhib.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:33 PM]

lake levels on Lake Roosevelt and Banks Lake.

Box 160, "Bills - H.R. 10228" and "Bills - H.R. 7652" folders contain more

discussion of Banks Lake and recreation.

Box 252, "Interior Dept. - National Park Serve" folder contains several 1960s

press releases about Coulee Dam NRA.

McDonald, Angus. "A Few Items of the West." Typed manuscript, n.d. Angus McDonald

Papers, SC 427, file 3/3, Montana Historical Society Archives, Helena, Montana.

Manuscript contains description of Fort Colvile, as well as discussion of

discovery of gold near the fort in 1854. Much of the document covers

McDonald's life elsewhere in the Northwest.

Morrison, Sid. Papers. Manuscripts, Archives, and Special Collections, Washington State

University.

Morrison's papers contain some correspondence related to the administration of

Lake Roosevelt in recent years.

National Archives and Records Administration, Pacific Alaska Region. Seattle, Washington.

This repository contains two groups of records that have information pertinent to

this project. They are:

Record Group 75, Records of the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Box 185, folder

Colville Project 1934-35: Contains correspondence about a project to resettle

Indians on lands purchased within reservation boundaries. Some of the letters

contain useful information about the status of the tribes at that time.

Record Group 187, Records of the National Resources Planning Board. Box 49,

folder Recreation - Regional, Recreation Comm. 1936: Includes correspondence

from staff members looking for other examples of recreation developments on

other reservoirs, especially along the Mississippi River.

Box 88, folder Columbia Basin Area I, 1939: Includes correspondence

concerning problems to be discussed in relation to the development of the

Columbia Basin Irrigation Project. It also contains letters about the potential for

recreation development on the reservoir behind Grand Coulee Dam.

Box 107, folder Columbia Basin Area I, 1940: Contains various digests of

minutes for the Problem No. 26 Committee, as well as correspondence

concerning Problem No. 26.

Box 125, folder: Columbia Basin Area — General I, 1941: Includes a monthly

progress report for August 1941 that concerns the drafting of the first interbureau

agreement.

Box 126, folder Columbia Basin Area — Problem No. 26 1941: Most of the

folder's contents deal with various interpretations of the Act of June 29, 1940,

that set aside approximately one-quarter of the reservoir area for the paramount

use of Indians from the Spokane and Colville reservations. Materials include

resolutions from both tribes, minutes of tribal council meetings, and reports from

the Problem No. 26 Committee.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Annotated Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhib.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:33 PM]

National Archives and Records Administration, Pacific Sierra Region. San Bruno, California.

The LARO records held at this branch of the National Archives contain

voluminous correspondence between National Park Service Regional Office and

LARO staff and others concerning a wide variety of topics, primarily dating

from the 1940s and 1950s. These boxes of records are mostly to be found in RG

079-89-001 and RG 079-89-004. Monthly and annual superintendent's reports

dating from the 1950s and 1960s are located in RG 079-95-05 and RG 079-95-

06.

Pitzer, Paul. Collection. Washington State Archives, Central Regional Branch, Ellensburg.

This collection contains the source materials for Pitzer's book, Grand Coulee:

Harnessing a Dream.

U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation. Regional Office, Boise, Idaho.

Folder 715, Columbia Basin Project, Administration of Recreational Areas,

Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake: This folder contains many important documents

pertaining to early LARO history, most from the period of 1941-ca. 1951. They

include:

--memos and correspondence concerning the establishment of the recreation area

--first interbureau agreement between the Park Service and Reclamation, 22 July

1942

--correspondence about special use permits, a special use permit form, and lists

of early special use permits

--correspondence about the log dump controversy at San Poil Bay

--list of FY1943 expenditures

--correspondence concerning interpretations of the Act of June 29, 1940

--Solicitor's Opinion of December 29, 1945

--correspondence about negotiations for the 1946 Tri-Party Agreement

--correspondence about the concrete plant controversy at South Marina

--correspondence illustrating mounting tensions between the Park Service and

Reclamation

--correspondence about the Grand Coulee Dam Yacht Club interests

--correspondence and meeting minutes about the proposed regulations

Folder 715, Columbia Basin Project, Administration of Recreational Areas,

National Park Service: This folder contains correspondence from the late 1980s

defining the responsibilities of the Park Service and Reclamation.

U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation. Technical library, Coulee Dam,

Washington.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Annotated Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhib.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:33 PM]

The technical library contains the complete run of annual project histories for the

Columbia Basin Irrigation Project, 1933-1985. The photograph department

contains some 72,000 negatives of photographs related to the construction of

Grand Coulee Dam and operation of the Columbia Basin Irrigation Project.

______. National Park Service. Photograph Archives. Harper's Ferry Center, West Virginia.

Collection for LARO includes several dozen photographs, most dating from the

1950s and 1960s. Some documents related to interpretation at the NRA are also

included.

Washington State Department of Conservation. Papers. Washington State Archives, Olympia.

Box 6 contains valuable information on Lake Roosevelt, including

correspondence related to the 1951 proposed National Park Service regulations

of the reservoir.

Works Progress Administration. Papers. Vertical File 343, Manuscripts, Archives, and

Special Collections, Washington State University, Pullman, Washington.

Includes a lengthy 1940 press release on the clearing of the Grand Coulee

reservoir.

Theses and Dissertations

Iverson, Thomas M. "Lake Roosevelt Burials: A Computer Analysis." Master's thesis,

University of Idaho, 1984.

Analysis of 283 burials from 33 sites around Lake Roosevelt. Includes a useful

history of burial removal from the 1930s through 1978.

Olson, Gordon Cooper. "A History of Natural Resources Management Within the National

Park Service." M. A. thesis, Slippery Rock University, 1986. Available at LARO research

library.

Detailed history of this aspect of National Park Service resource management.

Smith, Elizabeth R. "Effects of User Characteristics, Visitor Characteristics and Concerns on

Management Preference: Lake Roosevelt, Washington." M.S. thesis, Washington State

University, 1997.

Smith surveyed LARO visitors in 1996 on topics such as education vs. regulation

on various issues. She found that the interest in interpretive evening programs

was low.

Ulrich, Roberta. "Justice Delayed: A Sixty Year Battle for Indian Fishing Sites." M. A.

thesis, Portland State University, 1996.

Author provides a well-researched, readable account of the battle over Indian

fishing rights on the Columbia River, concentrating on the lower portion of the

river.

Interviews
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Annotated Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhib.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:33 PM]

Baker, Vaughn (LARO Superintendent). Interview with Nancy F. Renk, 9 Dec. 1999. Notes

on file, LARO.HQ.

Brougher, Lynne (LARO Education Specialist). Phone interview with Kathryn L. McKay, 1

March 2000. Notes on file, LARO.HQ.

Brown, Dan (former CODA Chief of Interpretation). Phone interview with Kathryn L.

McKay, 3 March 2000. Notes on file, LARO.HQ.

Dashiell, Ray (LARO maintenance worker). Phone interview with Kathryn L. McKay, 2

March 2000. Notes on file, LARO.HQ.

DePuydt, Ray (LARO archaeologist). Phone interview with Kathryn L. McKay, 1 March

2000. Notes on file, LARO.HQ.

DePuydt, Ray (LARO archaeologist). Phone interview with Nancy F. Renk, 7 July 2000.

Notes on file, LARO.HQ.

Everts, Don (retired LARA maintenance worker). Phone interview with Kathryn L. McKay, 3

March 2000. Notes on file, LARO.HQ.

Everts, Don (retired LARO maintenance worker) and Connie Everts. Interview with Nancy F.

Renk, 7 Dec. 1999. Notes on file, LARO.HQ.

Hebner, Scott (LARO Natural Resources Specialist). Phone interview with Kathryn L.

McKay, 3 March 2000. Notes on file, LARO.HQ.

Huseman, Marty (LARO Concessions Manager). Phone interview with Kathryn L. McKay,

29 Feb. 2000. Notes on file, LARO.HQ.

Kuiper, Gary (former LARA superintendent). Interview with Nancy F. Renk, 10 Dec. 1999.

Notes on file, LARO.HQ.

MacDonald, Lynne (USBR Regional Archaeologist). Interview with Nancy F. Renk, 13 Jan.

1999. Notes on file, LARO.HQ.

Mason, Dan (LARO Chief Ranger). Phone interview with Kathryn L. McKay, 2 March 2000.

Notes on file, LARO.HQ.

McCue, Sam (lived in Coulee Dam since 1935, early member of Grand Coulee Dam Yacht

Club). Phone interview with Kathryn L. McKay, 11 March 2000. Notes on file, LARO.HQ.

Miller, Roberta (LARO Program Assistant). Phone interview with Kathryn L. McKay, 29

Feb. 2000. Notes on file, LARO.HQ.

Robinson, Mrs. Homer (Sis) (widow of former LARO Superintendent) and Don Everts

(retired LARO maintenance worker). Interview with Nancy F. Renk, 6 Dec. 1999. Tape and

index on file, LARO.HQ.

Schieber, Bill (retired LARO maintenance worker) and Doris. Interview with Nancy F. Renk,

7 Dec. 1999. Notes on file, LARO.HQ.

Schmidt, Merv (Grand Coulee Dam Yacht Club member). Phone interview with Kathryn L.

McKay, 3 March 2000. Notes on file, LARO.HQ.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Annotated Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhib.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:33 PM]

Sprankle, Craig (Bureau of Reclamation Public Information Officer, Coulee Dam). Phone

interview with Kathryn L. McKay, 8 March 2000. Notes on file, LARO.HQ.

Taylor-Goodrich, Karen (former LARO Chief of Resource Management). Phone interview

with Kathryn L. McKay, 3 August 2000. Notes on file, LARO.HQ.

Tays, Gerald W. (former LARO Superintendent). Interview with Nancy F. Renk, 20 July

2000. Tape and index on file, LARO.HQ.

Teaford, Tom (former Supv. Ranger, Fort Spokane). Phone interview with Kathryn L.

McKay, 3 August 2000. Notes on file, LARO.HQ.

Legislation

76th Congress. Public Law No. 690. An act for the acquisition of Indian lands for the Grand

Coulee Dam and Reservoir, and for other purposes. 29 June 1940.

Act set aside "approximately one-quarter of the entire reservoir area for the

paramount use of the Indians of the Spokane and Colville Reservations for

hunting, fishing, and boating purposes . . . ."

Videos

Young, Ray, and Robert E. Pace. "The Price We Paid." 20 mins. Produced by Media

Services, Yakima Indian Nation for the Confederated Colville Tribes Business Council, 1977.

Available for viewing at Colville Tribal Museum, Coulee Dam, Washington.

Video interviews several tribal elders and others, including anthropologist Verne

Ray, about the impacts of the creation of Lake Roosevelt on the lives of the tribal

people in the area.

Newspapers (selected issues)

[Colville] Statesman-Examiner

Davenport Times

Electrical West

Omak-Okanogan County Chronicle

Oregonian

Republic News-Mine

Seattle Post-Intelligencer

Spokane Chronicle

Spokesman-Review

[Grand Coulee] Star

Tribal Tribune [Colville]

Wenatchee World

Wilbur Register

<<< Previous <<< Contents >>>
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Annotated Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhib.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:33 PM]

laro/adhi/adhib.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/images/fig0-1.jpg[2/26/2014 3:34:35 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/images/fig0-1.jpg[2/26/2014 3:34:35 PM]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 1 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi1n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:36 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 1:

Endnotes

1 Statement of Colville and Okanogan chiefs to President Calvin Coolidge in November

1925, in Maria Ilma Raufer, Black Robes and Indians on the Last Frontier: A Story of

Heroism (Milwaukee: Bruce Publishing Co., 1966), 428.

2 David H. Chance, People of the Falls (Colville: Don's Printery for Kettle Falls Historical

Center, Inc., 1986), 10-32. This book provides excellent summaries of the significance of the

various periods, written by the archaeologist who did most of the work at Kettle Falls.

3 Lillian A. Ackerman, Ethnographic Overview and Assessment of Federal and Tribal Lands

in the Lake Roosevelt Area Concerning the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Indian

Reservation, Project Report No. 30 (Pullman: Center for Northwest Anthropology, WSU,

1996), 111; Jerry R. Galm, ed., A Design for Management of Cultural Resources in the Lake

Roosevelt Basin of Northeastern Washington, EWU Reports in Archaeology and History 100-

83 (Cheney: Archaeological and Historical Services, 1994), 6.2; Verne F. Ray, "Salmon

Fishing by the Colville Tribes," in The Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation, et al.

v. The United States of America, Indian Claims Commission, Docket No. 181-C, n.d., 11.

4 Jack Nisbet, Sources of the River (Seattle: Sasquatch Books, 1994), 144-145, 149-151, 159.

5 Richard Glover, ed., David Thompson's Narrative (Toronto: The Champlain Society, 1962),

335, 385.

6 Chance, People of the Falls, 35-42.

7 Craig E. Holstine, Forgotten Corner: A History of the Colville National Forest, Washington

(Colville, Wash.: Colville Statesman-Examiner, Inc., 1987), 6; Washington Historical

Records Survey, Inventory of the County Archives of Washington. No. 33. Stevens County

(Colville) (Seattle: Washington Historical Records Survey, 1942), 7-8.

8 David H. Chance, Fort Colvile: The Structure of a Hudson's Bay Company Post, 1825 to

1871 and After (Moscow, Idaho: Department of Sociology/Anthropology, UI, 1972), 4; R.

Bouchard and D. Kennedy, Indian Land Use and Occupancy in the Franklin D. Roosevelt

Lake Area of Washington, unpublished report prepared for CCT and USBR, June 1984, 58;

William S. Lewis, "Information Concerning the Establishment of Fort Colville," Washington

Historical Quarterly 16 (April 1925): 103, as quoted in Galm, Design for Management, 6.7.

9 Sir George Simpson, Narrative of a Journey Round the World, During the Years 1841 and

1842, vol. 1 (London: Henry Colburn, 1847), 150. The Hudson's Bay Co. post was named for

Andrew Wedderburn Colvile, who later became governor of the HBC. The spelling is

frequently confused with the later U.S. Army post, Fort Colville.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 1 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi1n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:36 PM]

10 Chance, Fort Colvile, 8; O. B. Sperlin, ed., "Our First Horticulturalist," Washington

Historical Quarterly 22 (January 1931): 48.

11 Charles Dryden, Up the Columbia for Furs (Caldwell, Idaho: Caxton Press, 1949), 43,

quoted in Deward E. Walker, Jr., with Sylvester L. Lahren, Anthropological Guide for the

Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, UI Anthropological Research Manuscript Series, No.

33 (Moscow: Laboratory of Anthropology, UI, 1977), 44.

12 Walker, Anthropological Guide, 46; Bouchard and Kennedy, Indian Land Use, 60-64.

13 Walker, Anthropological Guide, 47-48.

14 Galm, Design for Management, 6.15; David C. Wynecoop, Children of the Sun: A History

of the Spokane Indians (Wellpinit, Wash.: privately printed, 1969), 21.

15 Galm, Design for Management, 6.15; Wynecoop, Children of the Sun, 22-24.

16 Walker, Anthropological Guide, 49; Ackerman, Ethnographic Overview, 114.

17 Robert Clark, River of the West: Stories from the Columbia (New York: Harper Collins

West, 1995), 145-149; Bouchard and Kennedy, Indian Land Use, 75-76. Although the

Yakama Tribe's name was spelled "Yakima" for many years, the treaty spelling was Yakama;

the tribe officially returned to this earlier spelling in 1992.

18 [Angus McDonald], "A Few Items of the West," typed manuscript, n.d.: 11-12, Angus

McDonald Papers, SC 427, file 3/3, Montana Historical Society Archives, Helena; Fred C.

Bohm and Craig E. Holstine, The People's History of Stevens County (Colville, Wash.:

Stevens County Historical Society, 1983), 12-13; Walker, Anthropological Guide, 51;

Wynecoop, Children of the Sun, 25-27.

19 Bohm and Holstine, People's History, 12-13; Walker, Anthropological Guide, 51;

Wynecoop, Children of the Sun, 25-27.

20 Bohm and Holstine, People's History, 13-17; Richard F. Steele, An Illustrated History of

Stevens, Ferry, Okanogan and Chelan Counties, State of Washington (Spokane: Western

Historical Publishing Co., 1904), 71-72; Washington Historical Records Survey, Inventory of

County Archives, 40.

21 Notes from interview with Henry Covington, in Ruth S. Strock, LARO Administrative

Assistant, to Henry Covington, 28 Aug. 1960, file H14 Fort Spokane Research, Rehab.,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Galm, Design for Management, 5.3, 8.2, 8.8.

22 Galm, Design for Management, 5.3; Bouchard and Kennedy, Indian Land Use, 81-84;

Raufer, Black Robes and Indians, 128 [quote].

23 Galm, Design for Management, 6.27-6.28; Bouchard and Kennedy, Indian Land Use, 82.

24 Bouchard and Kennedy, Indian Land Use, 82, 84; Robert D. Dellwo, "The Spokane

‘Reservations' — 1872 to 1881," Rawhide Press (Jan. 1981), 27.

25 Raufer, Black Robes and Indians, 138; J. W. Powell, Eighteenth Annual Report of the

Bureau of American Ethnology to the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, 1896-97, Part
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 1 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi1n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:36 PM]

2, (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1899), 858.

26 Raufer, Black Robes and Indians, 138-139.

27 Ibid., 140-141; John Alan Ross, "Political Conflict on the Colville Reservation," Northwest

Anthropological Association Research Notes 2 (1968): 61.

28 Deward E. Walker, Jr., "Plateau," in Handbook of North American Indians, v. 12, ed. by

William C. Sturtevant (Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution, 1998), 492-493; Ross,

"Political Conflict," 61-62.

29 Dellwo, "Spokane ‘Reservations'," 27; Powell, Eighteenth Annual Report, 857; Wynecoop,

Children of the Sun, 31-33.

30 John D. Combes, "A Preliminary Investigation at Old Military Fort Spokane, Washington,"

Report of Investigations No. 30, (Pullman: Laboratory of Anthropology, WSU, 1965), 2-3;

Cathy A. Gilbert and Renata Niedzwiecka, "The Historic Landscape of Fort Spokane: A

Design Proposal" (Seattle: NPS, 1985), 5, 9-11; John A. Hussey, "Fort Spokane,

Washington: A History of the United States Army Post and of the Fort Spokane Military

Reservation" (San Francisco: NPS, Region Four, [1958]), 2-3.

31 G. D. Meiklejohn, Acting Secretary of War, 28 Aug. 1899, file W30 Jurisdiction,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Mary B. Davis, ed., Native America in the Twentieth Century: An

Encyclopedia (New York: Garland Publishing, Inc., 1994), 84-85.

32 Gilbert and Niedzwiecka, "Historic Landscape of Fort Spokane," 17-22; Frances LaBret,

[untitled ms.], n.d., History — Fort Spokane box, LARO.HQ.LIB.

33 Raufer, Black Robes and Indians, 147-148; Galm, Design for Management, 5.8, 5.11, 6.30;

Davis, Native America, 27; "Making Ready to Open South Half of Colville Reserve,"

unidentified newspaper, 20 Nov. 1914, clipping file, Northwest Room, Spokane Public

Library; Wynecoop, Children of the Sun, 35-36; Robert H. Ruby and John A. Brown, A

Guide to the Indian Tribes of the Pacific Northwest (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press,

1986), 42.

34 Galm, Design for Management, 5.4-5.5, 7.8, 7.17.

35 USBR, Project History 1933, 13-73.

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

laro/adhi/adhi1n.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 1)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi1a.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:39 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 1:

When Rivers Ran Free (continued)

When missionaries came to the Upper Columbia region, determined to change Indian lives,

native people were somewhat prepared for their arrival. Many tribes had contact with French

Canadian and Iroquois trappers whose Roman Catholic practices exposed Indians to a new

set of beliefs. HBC Governor Simpson sent the sons of two influential chiefs to the Anglican

missionary school on the Red River (now Winnipeg) in 1825; they returned four years later

and began to teach about Christianity. One of these young men, Spokan Garry, taught hymns,

prayers, and the practice of saying grace before meals, all of which appealed to Indians who

had traditionally practiced a variety of rituals. [13]

The first missionaries came in direct response to a delegation of Flathead and Nez Perce

Indians who traveled to St. Louis in 1831. Their request for religious instruction for their

people resonated with Americans, fueled by a religious revival and interest in proselytizing.

The first missionaries went to the Willamette Valley in Oregon Territory in 1834, and two

years later others settled among the Cayuse near Walla Walla and the Nez Perce at Lapwai.

Samuel Parker, an itinerant Protestant missionary, came to Fort Colvile in 1836 and is

credited with giving the first church service there. When Elkanah Walker and Cushing Eells

and their wives arrived at the fort in 1838, HBC trader Archibald McDonald suggested the

site of Tshimakain (Chamokane), now Walker's Prairie, for their church. These missionaries

soon had a congregation of two hundred Spokane Indians, but the numbers did not hold up.

During their ten years there, Walker and Eells had little success in changing the nomadic

lifestyle of the Spokane people or in converting many to Christianity. They closed the

mission in June 1848, a few months after disillusioned Cayuse Indians had turned against

their missionaries and murdered them at Waiilatpu. [14]

Catholics joined Protestant missionaries within a short time. Two Jesuit priests stopped

briefly at Fort Colvile during the winter of 1838-1839 to minister to HBC employees and

their families. One of them returned the following summer for a longer stay, resulting in

many Indian baptisms and confessions. More importantly, the goodwill he generated laid the

groundwork for a Catholic mission there. The indefatigable Father Pierre Jean DeSmet spent

ten days at Fort Colvile in May 1841, continuing the pattern of short visits to baptize and

preach. Father Anthony Ravalli built the first chapel for the Indians at Kettle Falls in 1845.

This was followed two years later with the construction of the more permanent St. Paul's

Mission on the hill above the falls. Catholic missionaries visited the Spokane people during

this same period, coming from a mission among the Coeur d'Alenes. After Chief Baptiste

Peone requested a permanent missionary for the Upper Spokane, Father Joseph Cataldo took

up residence there in December 1866 and built St. Michael's Mission. Other Catholic

churches in the region included the Church of the Immaculate Conception, near the U.S.

Army post, and St. Francis Regis. [15]

Like the fur traders, missionaries had considerable impact on the culture of native peoples

since they worked to totally change the traditional religious and social systems. They

preached against the practice of polygamy, despite its important place in the native cultural,
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 1)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi1a.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:39 PM]

political, and economic systems. They urged men to take up farming and failed to understand

their reluctance to assume what was considered women's work. They hoped to end the

nomadic lifestyle of Indians and to have them settle in small cabins; such dwellings,

however, were not suitable for the traditional extended family. Those Indians who did

become Christians faced many problems: non-Indians still saw them as inferior while Indians

often despised them for giving up the ways of their forefathers. [16]

Interior Salish Indians in camp, ca. 1935. Photo courtesy of National

Park Service, Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area (LARO

2506).

Tensions between Indians and non-Indians increased dramatically during the 1850s.

Following the creation of Washington Territory in 1853, Isaac Stevens was appointed both

governor and ex officio Superintendent of Indian Affairs; it was in the latter position that he

was mandated to take a census of the tribes and negotiate treaties for the United States. These

treaties were key to the eventual construction of the transcontinental railroad since all Indian

claims to land along the route had to be extinguished. Stevens called for a council in Walla

Walla in 1855. Prior to meeting with the governor, leaders of several tribes, including

Yakama, Walla Walla, and Nez Perce, met in the Grand Ronde Valley in Oregon to devise a

strategy for outwitting Stevens. If each chief demanded his tribe's entire territory for a

reservation, they reasoned, then non-Indians would be left without any land. Stevens had a

spy among the Indians, however, Hollolsotetote (Lawyer) of the Nez Perce, who revealed the

plan to Stevens. Lawyer's announcement at the council that he would sign the treaty upset the

other chiefs, who were further were alarmed by Indian Agent Joel Palmer's explanation that

non-Indian settlement could not be stopped. By the end of the council, the tribes had ceded

sixty thousand square miles and reserved substantially less acreage for three reservations, an

annual payment of $500 to the chiefs, and promises of agricultural equipment and provisions

worth close to $650,000. [17]

Tribal resentment exploded that summer, fueled by clashes with miners trespassing on land

reserved for Indians. In the fall of 1854, an HBC employee discovered gold on the sandbars

of the upper Columbia River, in the vicinity of Fort Colvile. When the news leaked out a few
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 1)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi1a.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:39 PM]

months later, a predictable rush of miners flooded the region just as Stevens was concluding

the treaty process. Colville chief Peter John closed his lands to non-Indians in August 1855,

and the following month a number of miners and an Indian agent were killed by Yakamas. A

state of war erupted, and both sides remained on high alert during the next three years.

Stevens met with leaders of the Spokane, Coeur d'Alene, and Colville tribes late in 1855 in

an effort to contain the war. They reached no agreements at that time, however, and a

meeting planned for the following spring never occurred. [18]

While the Colvilles and their neighbors remained relatively aloof from the fray, the Spokanes

allied themselves with the Coeur d'Alenes, Yakamas, Kalispels, and Palouse to protect their

lands from further encroachment from non-Indians. A frightened group of settlers met at Fort

Colvile in November 1857 and petitioned the government for a company of soldiers to

protect them. Discovery of gold on the Fraser River in British Columbia in 1858 intensified

the problem. Col. Edward J. Steptoe and his two hundred troops felt the full force of Indian

wrath when they ventured out from Fort Walla Walla in May, only to be soundly defeated by

a coalition force of between six hundred and sixteen hundred Indians. The victory, while

sweet, was short-lived. Col. George Wright and his Army troops won two decisive battles

later that summer and ended the war. In an effort to permanently cripple the Indians and

ensure that they could never fight again, Wright ordered the killing of eight hundred horses, a

devastating blow to a people whose welfare and wealth depended upon these herds. Troops

also destroyed grain crops and stores of food in Spokane territory and then hung fifteen

Indians for alleged murders. The war was over, but the memory lived on. [19]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 1)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi1a.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:39 PM]

Portion of map of upper Columbia River area showing position and

strength of Indian tribes, 1871. Note gold mines, HBC Post, Fort

Colville, and Old Presbyterian Mission. (Frame 658, RG 049, WSAERB, Cheney.)

(click on image for an enlargement in a new window)

Following the defeat of the interior tribes, the U.S. Army responded to the request for a post

in the vicinity of HBC's Fort Colvile to monitor the border and help prevent future trouble

between settlers and Indians. Two companies of the 9th U.S. Infantry, under the command of

Pinkney Lugenbeel, arrived in the spring of 1859 to begin construction of Fort Colville,

located about three miles east of the present town of Colville. Within four years, it

encompassed forty-five buildings. Pinkney City, an occasionally wild settlement, grew up

near the army post and came into prominence during the 1860s as a supply point for mines in

the region. Supplies arrived from Walla Walla via pack trains, and later freight wagons, on a

major trail through the Colville Valley. [20]

<<< Previous <<< Contents >>> Next >>>
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 1)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi1a.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:39 PM]

laro/adhi/adhi1a.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 2 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi2n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:40 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 2:

Endnotes

1 Paul Pitzer, Grand Coulee: Harnessing a Dream (Pullman, Wash.: Washington State

University Press, 1994), 10, 15-16, 18; Michael C. Robinson, Water for the West: The

Bureau of Reclamation, 1902-1977 (Chicago: Public Works Historical Society, 1979), 1.

Pitzer provides a detailed analysis of the controversy of the 1890s through the 1930s

concerning the best method for bringing water to the Columbia plateau. U.S. Department of

the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, Annual Project History, Columbia Basin Project, 1933

also discusses in some detail the various surveys and reports that resulted in the

recommendation of the pumping plan. Billy Clapp, a lawyer from Ephrata who is credited

with the idea of a dam at the Grand Coulee, traced his idea to his understanding that glaciers

had once dammed the Grand Coulee. Dam proponents of the 1930s, including engineers,

often saw dams as imitating nature rather than subduing it (Richard White, The Organic

Machine: The Remaking of the Columbia River, (N.Y.: Hill & Wang, 1995), 57.

2 Pitzer, Grand Coulee, 58-59; Earl Clark, "Rufus Woods: Grand Coulee Promoter,"

Montana The Magazine of Western History 29 (1979): 45, 47. In 1921, Washington Water

Power applied for a permit to build a dam at Kettle Falls; such a dam, supported by private

power interests, would have substantially reduced the maximum height of Grand Coulee Dam

(Robert E. Ficken, Rufus Woods, The Columbia River, and the Building of Modern

Washington, Pullman, Wash.: Washington State University Press, 1995), 100.

3 Pitzer, Grand Coulee; 69, 75, 77-80; Robinson, Water for the West, 51.

4 Michael C. Blumm and F. Lorraine Bodi, "Commentary," in Joseph Cone and Sandy

Ridlington, The Northwest Salmon Crisis: A Documentary History (Corvallis, Ore.: Oregon

State University Press, 1996), 99; Pitzer, Grand Coulee, 233-37, 241, 245; Craig Sprankle,

USBR, Coulee Dam, personal communication to Kathryn L. McKay, 13 Sept. 2000. The

Tennessee Valley Authority managed reclamation, land use, power generation and sale,

fisheries, industrial development, urban growth, and agriculture. The last serious effort to

create a Columbia Valley Authority was in 1950.

5 Pitzer, Grand Coulee, 84, 89, 112, 150, 181, 191, 213.

6 Pitzer, Grand Coulee, 120, 126, 163.

7 WPA, "Coulee Clearing Project," press release, 1940: 5, Vertical File 343, WPA Coll.,

WSU.

8 Verne F. Ray, "Ethnic Impacts of the Events Incident to the Federal Power Development on

the Colville and Spokane Indian Reservations" (Port Townsend, Wash.: prepared for the

Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation and the Spokane Tribe of Indians, 1977), 48;

George A. Shipman, "The Grand Coulee Dam Area: A Preliminary Report" (Ephrata: USBR,
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 2 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi2n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:40 PM]

1953), 6; Grand Coulee Dam Bicentennial Association, From Pioneers to Power: Historical

Sketches of the Grand Coulee Dam Area (Nespelem, Wash.: Rima Printing and Graphics,

1976), 261-62; Fred C. Bohm and Craig C. Holstine, The People's History of Stevens County

(Colville: Stevens County Historical Society, 1983), 108-09; WPA, "Coulee Clearing

Project," press release, 1940: 5, Vertical File 343, WPA Coll., WSU.

9 Ed Frostad, quoted in Michael Schmeltzer, "Coulee's Casualties Gone, Not Forgotten,"

Spokesman-Review, 7 July 1985, E-1.

10 USBR, Project History 1938, 66; Pitzer, Grand Coulee, 215-16; Bert A. Hall, Final

Construction Report on Lake Roosevelt Reservoir (Coulee Dam, Wash.: U.S. Bureau of

Reclamation, 1952), 24. Because it was often easier to purchase whole tracts of land, the

federal land does not conform neatly to the 1,310-foot taking line; it is more of a patchwork.

The 1,310-foot contour line was employed fairly closely in purchasing reservation lands. The

taking line for off-reservation lands, however, was a series of tangents, not the 1,310-foot

contour line. For detailed information on the land acquisition, clearing, relocation of roads,

etc., see Hall's 1952 report.

11 Russell A. Bankson, "The 1310' Level," Spokesman-Review, 25 Dec. 1938, Magazine Sec.;

B. E. Stoutemyer, USBR District Counsel, to H. V. Clotts, Assistant Director, Indian

Irrigation Service, 19 August 1935, file 1.3 Colville Correspondence 1931-44, box 714, RG

75, NARA-PAR; Hall, Final Construction Report, 15; "Meeting with Mr. Emmet E. Willard,

Secretary's Field Representative, Portland Concerning Coulee Dam, & Chief Joseph Dam,"

minutes, 1972: 22-23, file A94 BIA, LARO.HQ.ADM; Pitzer, Grand Coulee, 218; Bohm and

Holstine, People's History of Stevens County, 115.

12 USBR, Project History 1942, 64; O. A. Dolven and Curtis O. Ness, "Bureau of

Reclamation Reservoirs and the Environment," pp. 596-600, in William C. Ackermann et al,

eds., Man-Made Lakes: Their Problems and Environmental Effects (Washington, D.C.:

American Geophysical Union, 1973), 597; Michael Schmeltzer, "Coulee's Casualties Gone,

Not Forgotten," Spokesman-Review, 7 July 1985, E-1; Russell A. Bankson, "The 1310

Level," Spokesman-Review, 25 Dec. 1938, Magazine Sec.

13 HRA, Historic Resource Study, 146-147.

14 Bohm and Holstine, People's History of Stevens County, 1983, 115; Gary D. Williams and

Alan S. Newell, Historic Resource Study: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area,

Washington (prepared by Historical Research Associates for the NPS, 1980), 149; Lewis

Nullet and Joan Nullet, comps., A Brief History of Kettle Falls: The First 50 Years (n.p.,

1992), 104; WPA, "Coulee Clearing Project," press release, 1940: 5, Vertical File 343, WPA

Coll., WSU.

15 Jim DeSautel, in Ray Young and Robert E. Pace, "The Price We Paid" (video produced by

Media Services, Yakima Indian Nation for the Confederated Colville Tribes Business

Council, 1977).

16 WPA, "Coulee Clearing Project," press release, 1940: 5-6, Vertical File 343, WPA Coll.,

WSU; Williams and Newell, Historic Resource Study, 251; Russell A. Bankson, "What Is

Next?", Spokesman-Review, 1 Jan. 1939, Magazine Sec.; Ray, "Ethnic Impacts," 49-51, 53;

CCT, "Critique and Review of ‘Draft EIS - Columbia Basin Project,'" 1975: 12-13, file 15,

box 3 of 3, LARO #95 Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

17 Verne F. Ray, "Salmon Fishing by the Colville Tribes," in CCT et al. v. The USA, Indian
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 2 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi2n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:40 PM]

Claims Commission Docket No. 181-C, n.d.: 1-2, 4, 6; Jerry R. Galm, ed., A Design for

Management of Cultural Resources in the Lake Roosevelt Basin of Northeastern Washington

(Cheney, Wash.: Eastern Washington University Reports in Archaeology and History 100-83,

1994), 5.8, 5.11, 10.2.

18 Craig Sprankle, USBR, Coulee Dam, email to Kathryn L. McKay, 13 Sept. 2000.

19 Warner W. Gardner, DOI Solicitor, Opinion (Memorandum for Assistant Sec. Chapman),

29 Dec. 1945, file 2, box 3 of 3, LARO #95 Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Louis Balsam,

Colville Indian Agency, to Commissioners of USBR and OIA, 1 Aug. 1939, file Coulee Dam

- Proposed Flood Water Area, box 1211, RG 75, NARA-PAR.

20 USBR, "Final Environmental Statement: Columbia Basin Project," vol. II, 1975:

Appendices 72, 85, LARO.HQ.LIB; Louis Balsam, Colville Indian Agency, to

Commissioners of USBR and OIA, 1 Aug. 1939, file Coulee Dam - Proposed Flood Water

Area, box 1211, RG 75, NARA-PAR; Wilkinson, Cragun & Barker, Counsel for Spokane

Tribe, "Memo re: Spokane Indian Hunting, Fishing and Boating Rights in the Lake Roosevelt

Indian Zone," 20 May 1959, file A44 Triparty Agreement, LARO.HQ.ADM; T. J. Mutch,

"Memo to the Files," 25 March 1969, file L54 Water Matters, LARO.HQ.ADM; Warner W.

Gardner, Solicitor, Opinion (Memorandum for Assistant Sec. Chapman), 29 Dec. 1945, file 2,

box 3 of 3, LARO #95 Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO. The total Indian lands acquired came to

20,103 acres (STI, "Statement of Spokane Tribal Rights and Policies on Roosevelt Lake,"

prepared for presentation to Secretary's Task Force on Roosevelt Lake, 1972: 7, file 8, box 3

of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Craig Sprankle, USBR, Coulee Dam, email to

Kathryn L. McKay, 13 Sept. 2000. In 1934, the board of appraisers assigned prices ranging

from $100 per acre for good irrigated land to $1.25 per acre for poor pasture land, with

apricot trees $10 and Delicious apple trees $20 per tree. These figures did not include the

value of young timber on the lands (L. M. Holt, Supervising Engineer, Indian Service

Irrigation, to Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 20 April 1934, file 1.3 Colville

Correspondence 1931-44, box 714, RG 75, NARA-PAR). The appraisals were reviewed by

the Office of Indian Affairs and were either approved or changed (T. J. Mutch, USBR, to

Files, 25 March 1969, file L54 Water Matters, LARO.HQ.ADM).

21 W. S. Hanna, Supervising Engineer, USBR, to A. L. Wathen, Director of Irrigation, U.S.

Indian Service, 1 Dec. 1937, file 1.3 Colville Correspondence 1931-44, box 714, RG 74,

NARA-PAR; CCT, "Part 2: Environmental Impact of Grand Coulee Dam and the Third

Powerhouse on the Colville Tribe and Its Members, with Critique and Review of Draft

Environmental Impact Statement Columbia Basin Project," 1975: 3, 8-9, 11, file 14, box 3 of

3, LARO #95 Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Superintendent, Colville Indian Agency, to Tom

Sussman, Staff Director, Practices and Procedures Sub-committee, U.S. Senate, 22 Jan. 1972,

file 8, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

22 Ray, "Ethnic Impacts," 56-57, 91; "Final Report, Colville/Spokane Task Force," 1980: 2-3,

file N14 Animal and Plant Life, LARO.HQ.ADM; Young and Pace, "Price We Paid";

Williams and Newell, Historic Resource Study, 199, 216, 218, 233.

23 Ray, "Ethnic Impacts," 41, 45-46; Verne F. Ray, "The Sanpoil and the Nespelem: Salish

Peoples of Northeastern Washington" (Seattle: University of Washington Publications in

Anthropology, vol. 5, 1933), 15, 17; "Plaintiffs' Brief in Support of Plaintiffs' Motion for

Determination of Issues of Law," Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation, et al., vs.

United States of America, Docket No. 181-C, Before the Indian Claims Commission: 13, file

15, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 2 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi2n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:40 PM]

24 Lucy Covington, in Young and Pace, "Price We Paid."

25 "Thousands Bid Adieu to West's Historic Falls," June 1940, newspaper clipping, file Kettle

Falls - The Falls, Stevens County Historical Society Archives. In 1989, CCT tribal members

organized the first Salmon Days ceremony held since the 1930s ("Indians Gather At Hayes

Island," [Colville] Tribal Tribune, 15 May 1989).

26 "Minutes of Task Force Meeting, Sept. 19, 1972," transcript: 81, file 9, box 3 of 3, LARO

#95 Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO. In 1994, residents of Coulee Dam paid a basic rate of $3.25

per month, while most reservation residents paid $12 per month (Roberta Ulrich, "Making

Good on a Pledge," Oregonian, 30 Aug. 1994). The complicated and continuing story of

compensation provided to the tribes for their losses resulting from the construction of Grand

Coulee Dam is covered in detail in Chapter 4.

27 USBR, Project History 1941, 259, 268; USBR, Project History 1940, 218; Hall, Final

Construction Report, 257; "Clearing the Grand Coulee Reservoir," Public Works 73 (April

1942): 28, 30.

28 USBR, Project History 1939, 275. Remnants of the peach orchards in the vicinity of the

town of Peach are still visible at the LARO picnic area at Hawk Creek. The strip of land

along the Kettle River was cleared to 1,295 feet instead of 1,290 feet (Kearney to Greider, 19

June 1941, file 3, box 3, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR).

29 "Excerpt from Conservation Working Plan Report of Colville Indian Reservation, June 3,

1936," file Coulee Dam - Proposed Flooded Area, box 1211, RG 75, NARA-PAR; USBR,

Project History 1939, 278; Williams and Newell, Historic Resource Study, 148.

30 USBR, Project History 1940, 49-50, 228, 236, 238, 238-39, 249; USBR, Project History

1941, 58-59, 268, 270, 274, "Highway Relocation at Grand Coulee," Better Roads 11 (Nov.

1941): 13, 15; USBR, Project History 1939, 281; Vaughn L. Downs, The Mightiest of Them

All: Memories of Grand Coulee Dam (Fairfield, Wash.: Ye Galleon Press, 1986), 94; Nullet

et al., Kettle Falls, 110.

31 USBR, Project History 1941, 289; "Widening Columbia River Channel by Contract,"

Reclamation Era 31 (Jan. 1941): 7; USBR, Project History 1943, 83; USBR, Project History

1948, 72-73.

32 USBR, Project History 1940, 221, 225-26; Hall, Final Construction Report, 16, 253, 256,

284; USBR, Project History 1941, 259.

33 WPA, "Coulee Clearing Project," press release, 1940: 3, Vertical File 343, WPA Coll.,

WSU.

34 Pitzer, Grand Coulee, 218; Hall, Final Construction Report, 60. Frank Banks and the state

WPA director Carl Smith felled the "last" tree, but crews later cut more than eighty additional

acres.

35 Pitzer, Grand Coulee, 211-12; USBR, Project History 1942, 291.

36 Pitzer, Grand Coulee, 249-51; White, Organic Machine, 1995, 72.

37 Hall, Final Construction Report, 24.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 2 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi2n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:40 PM]

38 Pitzer, Grand Coulee, xi, xii, 274, 278-79, 282-83; USBR, Project History 1950, 3. Within

the past fifteen years, Reclamation prepared an Environmental Impact Study for irrigating the

remaining acres in the project but, in the end, decided not to do so (Gary Kuiper, former

LARO Superintendent, personal communication to Kathryn L. McKay, 1 March 2001).

39 Pitzer, Grand Coulee, 317, 339-41, 345, 350-54; Robinson, Water for the West, 99-100;

Craig Sprankle, USBR, Coulee Dam, emails to Kathryn L. McKay, 13 and 15 Sept., 2000.

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

laro/adhi/adhi2n.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 2)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi2a.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:42 PM]

Most of the 3,000 persons who

were forced to move accepted

their fate philosophically. . . .

Many felt that this forced

evacuation released them from

a bondage that held them in the

great canyon where tradition

and custom bound them

inevitably to a life of drudgery

and poverty.

-- WPA press release, 1940 [7]

Sometimes I just can't help but

wonder if things might have

been better up here if they

hadn't built the dam.

I think about it every spring

when the water is down and I

see that old town [Marcus]

down there. It's not a pretty

sight.

-- Ed Frostad, former resident

of old Marcus, 1985 [9]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 2:

The River Becomes a Lake (continued)

Acquiring Land for the Reservoir Behind Grand Coulee Dam

When construction of Grand Coulee Dam began in

1933, many American Indians lived along the river

bottoms between Whitestone Creek (near Jones Bay)

and Inchelium and also farther upstream. Most were

concentrated on the tongues of land close to the water

or on the low benches along the river. A number of

ferries crossing the river served these people and their

neighbors farther from the riverbanks. Only a handful

of white families lived in the immediate vicinity of the

dam site, but a number of communities and small

farming settlements were located along the river

farther upstream. Fruit orchards, livestock raising,

farming, logging, and mining supported the people

living along the river. When construction of the dam

began, the residents of northeastern Washington, white and Indian alike, were suffering from

the effects of a series of agricultural recessions and mine closures and the nationwide

Depression. [8]

Beginning in 1933, Reclamation engineers prepared to

purchase land and rights-of-way for a reservoir that

would stretch some 151 miles from the dam to close to

the Canadian boundary. Surveyors worked for several

years setting permanent monuments along the

approximate 1,310-foot "taking line" to indicate the

land the government needed to acquire. The

"Columbia River Reservoir" eventually flooded

approximately 70,500 acres, and Reclamation took an

additional 11,500 acres of "freeboard" land (the strip of

land between the 1,290 water line and the 1,310-foot

taking line) for the reservoir. Within this area lay two

railroads, three primary state highways, about one

hundred and fifty miles of country roads, fourteen

bridges, eleven towns, four sawmills, four telegraph

and telephone systems, and many power lines and cemeteries. All of these had to be

purchased and/or relocated before the waters came. Some towns were relocated to higher

ground, but a number of small communities were not. In total, some three thousand people

had to leave their homes because of the creation of the reservoir. [10]

As early as 1933, an appraisal board began valuing the twelve hundred parcels of land to be
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 2)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi2a.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:42 PM]

purchased. The appraisers considered the physical value of the land and also its productive

and residential values. When landowners did not accept final government purchase offers,

Reclamation filed condemnation suits. Many property owners felt that they did not receive

fair value for their land. By the close of 1942, all of the lands required for the reservoir had

been acquired by purchase or condemnation or were under contract to purchase. In the end,

over $10.5 million was paid for this land, including town lots and farms, plus the relocation

of railroads, highways, sawmills, and other improvements. [11]

Portion of a 1930s map showing the land ownership at the

confluence of the Columbia and Spokane rivers. The dashed line

represents the water line at 1,300 feet, but the actual water line was

at 1,290 feet and the taking line for Bureau of Reclamation

acquisition of land was at a minimum of 1,310 feet. (Metsker's Atlas

of Stevens County, Washington, [1930s], Stevens County Historical

Society.)

(click on image for an enlargement in a new window)

The federal government paid property owners the market value of their land but did not cover

moving and relocation costs. This was standard policy until 1958, when Congress authorized

payment for moving expenses. Some homeowners sold their property (real property — land

— and improvements) to the government, then bought the house back for salvage at much

lower cost. They then lived in the building until required to evacuate because of rising water

and paid the moving expenses if they wished to relocate the house. These costs could be

high; for example, house movers charged about $125 to move a home from old Marcus up to

the new townsite less than a mile away on the hill. Reclamation did pay, however, for the

moving of some buildings, such as the U.S. Forest Service Kettle Falls Ranger Station and

Great Northern Railway facilities. [12]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 2)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi2a.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:42 PM]

Projected distances below

water:

Keller 85 feet

Peach 235 feet

Lincoln 175 feet

Gerome 110 feet

Gifford 90 feet

Inchelium 130 feet

Daisy 75 feet

Kettle Falls (town) 30 feet

Marcus 45 feet

Boyds 30 feet

Fort Colvile 80 feet

Kettle Falls (falls) 90 feet

-- Historical Research

Associates, Historic Resource

Study, 1980 [13]

Town of Kettle Falls, 1938. Photo courtesy of National Park Service,

Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area (LARO 2784).

The reservoir flooded eleven towns that had post

offices. Daisy, one small town that was relocated, had

three stores, two churches, a blacksmith shop, a

creamery, a saloon, a highway department garage, and

a high school. The school was rebuilt in a new

location, but only the store and the service station

were relocated. The town of Kettle Falls found a novel

solution to its problem. Unable to obtain land adjacent

to St. Paul's mission, their first choice for a new town

site, Kettle Falls residents annexed the nearby higher

town of Meyers Falls and a strip of land along the

state highway connecting the two communities. The

residents of both towns, after some political

maneuvering, then voted to abandon the old town site

and the strip. They gave the old town of Meyers Falls

the new name of Kettle Falls. Many residents of

Meyers Falls resented this forced merging of their

town with their relocated neighbor. Marcus, with a

population close to six hundred in 1940, was the

largest town that had to be relocated. It was moved to

a bench some 145 feet above the former town. [14]

Inchelium was another town that was flooded by the reservoir. The community had about 190

residents in the 1930s, mostly members of the Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT). There

was heated controversy over the location of the new town, and in the end, the school and the

Indian subagency were relocated a few miles away from the new town. Because payment for

the school building was tied up in litigation, the school board had no money to buy or move

the building, so the rising water began to flood the school. Ultimately, Reclamation had to
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 2)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi2a.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:42 PM]

The river was the central and

most powerful element in the

religious, social, economic, and

ceremonial life of my people.

Suddenly, all of this was wiped

out. The river was blocked, the

land was flooded. The river we

had known was destroyed. Our

homesites were gone. The

fordings were made impossible.

The far banks were beyond our

reach. The root-digging prairies

were cut off. The salmon came

no more, and with the

disappearance of the salmon,

our traditional economy was

lost forever.

-- Jim DeSautel, member,

Colville Confederated Tribes,

1977 [15]

Lands acquired within the

reservations for Grand Coulee

Dam and Lake Roosevelt:

Colville Reservation

Allotted 14,844

acres $259,458.83

Tribal 3,359

acres $67,530.21

Spokane Reservation

Allotted 1,855

acres $37,174.64

Tribal 1,045

acres $17,264.46 [18]

lower the reservoir level to allow trucks to move the school at the last possible minute. Longdistance phone service was not provided to the new town for thirty years. Many of

Inchelium's former residents had to move to other areas such as Okanogan, Omak, and

Tonasket that were far from their homes. Many older people, according to anthropologist

Verne Ray, died of grief, and the damage to the traditional culture was "incalculable." [16]

Besides established towns, hundreds of year-round

villages and seasonal campsites of the CCT and

Spokane Tribe of Indians (STI) had been established

along both sides of the Columbia River and its larger

tributaries, all waters that carried the life-sustaining

salmon. In the 1930s, descendants of these people on

the two reservations continued to live along the rivers.

The southern half of the Colville Reservation was

allotted to individual Indians in 1916 but held in trust

by the government for the next twenty-five years.

Members of both tribes chose their allotments adjacent

to the Columbia River or the Spokane River whenever

possible. Many of these people's homes were located

within the future reservoir area. [17]

The right to

purchase tribal

and allotted

lands was

accomplished

by the

Acquisition of

Indian Lands

for Grand Coulee Dam Act of June 29, 1940, which

authorized the Secretary of the Interior to take lands

for reservoir purposes. There were three classes of

land ownership on the two reservations: Indian

allotments assigned to an individual for his personal

use (the Indian owned the property but could not sell

it - title was held in trust by the U.S. government);

tribal lands (communal property of the entire tribe

held in trust by the U.S. government); and alienated

lands (Indian title extinguished, usually through

homesteading or outright purchase). The actual

acquisition of Indian allotted lands began long before the 1940 act was passed, and many

people were forced to relocate before they even had been paid for their land and buildings.

The acquisition of tribal lands was relatively simple, since the Secretary of the Interior was

the trustee for these lands. Alienated lands were treated the same as privately owned lands not

located on the reservations. [19]

The Act of June 29, 1940 required the Secretary of the Interior to determine the amount of

money to be paid to the Indians as compensation for their lands. This was done on the basis

of appraisers' reports and a Reclamation-prepared description of the land proposed to be

acquired. The appraisal done by Reclamation's Board of Appraisers turned out to be more

favorable to the owners of allotted lands than an independent appraisal done by the Office of

Indian Affairs, due to different methodologies. The Reclamation appraisal was adopted, and

funds were transferred to pay the Indian allottees or their heirs. In total, 18,203 acres of

allotted and tribal land was purchased on the Colville Reservation and 2,900 acres (including
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 2)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi2a.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:42 PM]

the Klaxta town site) on the Spokane Reservation. Most of Klaxta, the area where the

Spokane and Columbia rivers join, has since been turned back to the STI. [20]

Reclamation reported that the appraisals of Indian land were made on exactly the same basis

as the appraisals of lands outside the reservations, but many tribal members at the time and in

subsequent decades have disputed this contention. Most Indians received $500-$700 for their

land. One man's timberland was reportedly appraised at the same value as sagebrush land.

Under the Act of 1940, however, the decisions of the Secretary as to the value of allotted

lands were final. Landowners with title in hand could challenge the appraised value and

negotiate the amount of compensation, but the Indians' land was taken by "declaration"

because the federal government had retained title to the allotted and tribal lands. [21]

Aerial view of the confluence of the Columbia and Spokane rivers,

1932. The bridge across the Spokane River was one of several that

had to be relocated. The new bridge is closer to the confluence and

historic Fort Spokane. Photo courtesy of National Park Service,

Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area (LARO 2961).

The CCT and STI suffered far-reaching injuries beyond the loss of their homes and land.

Hundreds of Indian burials were relocated; others were inundated by the rising water. The

construction of Grand Coulee Dam and the flooding of the reservoir destroyed fundamental

aspects of tribal culture and forced Indians into a new, undesired way of life. The arrival of

thousands of non-Indian dam workers and the construction of towns to house them created

cultural conflict.

Both tribes gathered roots and berries on lands south of the Columbia River; this ended

because of the influx of non-Indians to these lands and because crossing the reservoir was so

difficult. Hunting was affected by the flooding of much bottomland forage. School-age

children living in the Keller area of the Colville Reservation had to take a forty-mile (one

way) school bus and ferry ride to school in Wilbur. The reservoir flooded sites with

mythological significance, places to gather pitch wood and driftwood, and rock art. All these

related impacts created great personal hardship and economic dislocation. The benefits to the

tribes, on the other hand, were few. Relatively few tribal members were employed in the

construction of the dam. The irrigation aspect of the project benefited lands south of the

reservations, not agricultural lands owned or farmed by Indians. [22]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 2)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi2a.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:42 PM]

We had a beautiful way of life.

We were rich. The dam made

us poor. The way they treated

us, they tried to make us less

than human. . . . We Indians

trust the day is past when the

nation will approve of what the

government did when they built

the dams, which back in those

days caused one of our people

to say, "The promises made by

the government were written in

sand and then covered with

water, like everything else."

-- Lucy Covington, member,

Colville Confederated Tribes,

1977 [24]

Another tremendous loss for the American Indians of the region was the loss of the fishery at

Kettle Falls, the mouth of the Sanpoil River, Little Falls, and other places along the upper

Columbia River in the area flooded by Lake Roosevelt. At the time of white contact, several

species of salmon taken from the Columbia and tributaries provided perhaps half the total

diet of the Colville and Spokane tribes. The salmon was also important to the tribes' religion,

economy (dried salmon was traded for other goods), and social life. The fish runs on the

Columbia River and in the Kettle Falls area began declining in the late 1800s due to

commercial fishing in the lower Columbia and the Pacific Ocean and the construction of

downstream dams. The sudden and complete loss of the salmon fishery upstream of Grand

Coulee Dam dramatically changed the way of life of Indians living along the upper

Columbia. [23]

In June 1940, American Indians from around the

Pacific Northwest gathered at the site of St. Paul's

mission above Kettle Falls for a final three-day

"Ceremony of Tears" to mourn the loss of the ancestral

fishing grounds. A crowd estimated at eight to ten

thousand people attended the gathering. Chief Peter

Joseph of the Kalispel commented that the government

should reimburse the tribes for the loss of their fishing

grounds, and Senator Clarence C. Dill pledged his

support for a measure to accomplish this. [25]

One specific concern of both tribes in subsequent years

has been the high cost of electricity to tribal members

living on the reservation. The rates are much higher on

the Colville Reservation than in the town of Coulee

Dam, for example, even though the BPA had assured

the tribes that electricity would be extremely cheap as

a result of the dam. The BPA response is that they sell

power at the same rate to electrical utilities; the

difference in users' costs is due to the varying cost of

distribution, so rural residents face higher bills than people living in towns. [26]

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

laro/adhi/adhi2a.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 3 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi3n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:43 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 3:

Endnotes

1 USBR, "Plan of Joint Investigations, Columbia Basin Irrigation Project," Memorandum No.

2, 1 Nov. 1939: 4-19, file Columbia Basin Area I, 1939, box 88, RG 187, NARA-PAR.

2 Paul C. Pitzer, Grand Coulee: Harnessing A Dream (Pullman: WSU Press, 1994), 271-272;

"Joint Investigations, Columbia Basin Project," Reclamation Era 30 (Aug. 1940): 219.

3 USBR, "Plan of Joint Investigations, Columbia Basin Irrigation Project," Memorandum No.

2, 1 Nov. 1939: 17-18, file Columbia Basin Area I, 1939, box 88, RG 187, NARA-PAR

4 USBR, Recreational Development of Roosevelt Lake: Columbia Basin Joint Investigations,

Problem 26 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1945), iv.

5 Conrad L. Wirth, NPS Supervisor of Recreation and Land Planning, to NPS Acting

Regional Director, 26 Oct. 1939, file 3, box 1, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

6 USBR, Problem 26, iv.

7 NPS Regional Director to [Claude E.] Greider, NPS State Supervisor, 4 Nov. 1939, file 3,

box 1, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

8 Barry Mackintosh, The National Parks: Shaping the System (Washington, D.C.: NPS,

1985), 52-53; NPS, A Study of the Park and Recreation Problem of the United States

(Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1941), vi-vii.

9 NPS, Park and Recreation Problem, vi-vii, 53-54; Elmo R. Richardson, Dams, Parks and

Politics: Resource Development and Preservation in the Truman-Eisenhower Era

(Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 1973), 14, 52-53; Mackintosh, Shaping the

System, 52, 56; H. W. Bashore, USBR Commissioner, to NPS Director, 10 May 1945,

LARO.94.3249.2, LARO.HQ.ADM.

10 John E. White, NPS Regional Director, to Earle S. Draper, Director of Department of

Regional Planning Studies, Tennessee Valley Authority, 22 Oct. 1940, file 2, box 1, RG 079-

89-001, NARA-PSR.

11 Marshall N. Dana, District Chairman, by R. F. Bessey, Consultant, to Harland

Bartholomew, Consultant, 1 May 1936, file Recreation — Regional, Recreation Comm. 1936,

box 49, RG 187, NARA-PAR.

12 C. E. Greider, NPS Recreation Planner, to Edward W. Torbert, USBR Field Coordinator,

30 Jan. 1940, file 3, box 1, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Greider to Major A. E. McKennett,
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 3 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi3n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:43 PM]

Corps of Engineers, 9 April 1940, file 3, box 1, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Greider to

Torbert, 4 Oct. 1940, file 2, box 1, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; "Status of Study for

Problem No. 26," draft, 29 Oct. 1940: 1-2, file 2, box 1, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; "A

Committee Progress Report, Problem No. 26, Joint Investigations Columbia Basin Irrigation

Project," 15 Nov. 1940: 1-2, file Columbia Basin Area I, 1940, box 107, RG 187, NARAPAR; Torbert to Greider, 26 Oct. 1940, file 2, box 1, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

13 C. E. Greider, NPS Recreation Planner, to NPS Regional Director, 29 Oct. 1940, file 2,

box 1, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

14 NPS Regional Director to NPS Director, 31 Oct. 1940, file 2, box 1, RG 079-89-001,

NARA-PSR; "Digest of Minutes of Committee Meeting on Problem No. 26, Joint

Investigation Columbia Basin Irrigation Project," 15 Nov. 1940: 8-9, file Columbia Basin

Area I, box 107, RG 187, NARA-PAR; A. E. Demaray, NPS Associate Director, telegram to

NPS Regional Director, 26 Nov. 1940, file 2, box 1, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; [Claude

E.] Greider, NPS Recreation Planner, to Col. White, NPS Regional Director, 16 Dec. 1940,

file 2, box 1, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

15 Spokesman-Review, 8 Jan. 1939, letters column; A. E. Demaray, NPS Associate Director,

to NPS Acting Regional Director, 26 Feb. 1940, file 3, box 1, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR;

Harold L. Ickes, Secretary of the Interior, to Mrs. Franklin D. Roosevelt, 18 April 1945, file

9, box 8, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

16 C. E. Greider, NPS Recreation Planner, to NPS Regional Director, 28 Nov. 1940, file 2,

box 1, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Greider to F. A. Banks, USBR Supervising Engineer, 2

Dec. 1940, file 2, box 1, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

17 John R. White, NPS Regional Director, telegram to Phillip [sic] Kearney, NPS Associate

Landscape Architect, 7 March 1941, file 5, box 1, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Conrad L.

Wirth, NPS Supervisor of Recreation and Land Planning, to NPS Regional Director, 12

March 1941, file 5, box 1, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Herbert Maier, NPS Acting

Regional Director, telegram to NPS Director, 14 March 1941, file 5, box 1, RG 079-89-001,

NARA-PSR; Kearney to Claude E. Greider, NPS State Supervisor, 17 April 1941, file 3, box

3, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

18 Herbert Maier, NPS Acting Regional Director, telegram to Philip Kearny [sic], NPS

Associate Landscape Architect, 10 April 1941, file 5, box 1, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

19 Phil Kearney, NPS Associate Landscape Architect, to Claude E. Greider, NPS State

Supervisor, 17 April 1941, file 3, box 3, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

20 Phil Kearney, NPS Associate Landscape Architect, to [Claude E.] Greider, NPS State

Supervisor, 24 May 1941, file 3, box 3, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; NPS Acting Regional

Director to Kearney, 1 Aug. 1941, file 5, box 1, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Raymond E.

Hoyt, NPS Chief of Recreation Planning Division, to Kearney, 26 Aug. 1941, file 5, box 1,

RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Kearney to NPS Regional Director, 29 Aug. 1941, file 5, box

1, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

21 Phil [Kearney], NPS Associate Landscape Architect, to Claude [Greider], NPS State

Supervisor, 8 Sept. 1941, file 3, box 3, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

22 Phil [Kearney], NPS Associate Landscape Architect, to Claude [Greider], NPS State

Supervisor, 20 Sept. 1941, file 3, box 3, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 3 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi3n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:43 PM]

23 Phil [Kearney], NPS Associate Landscape Architect, to Claude [Greider], NPS State

Supervisor, 12 July 1941, file 3, box 3, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

24 Philip W. Kearney, "Progress Report on Land Use Study — Columbia River Reservoir —

for the period June 22 to 28, 1941," file 5, box 1, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

25 "Digest of Minutes, Committee Meeting on Problem No. 26, Joint Investigation Columbia

Basin Irrigation Project," Olympia, 22 May 1941: 3-4, 6-8, file Columbia Basin Area —

Problem No. 26 1941, box 126, RG 187, NARA-PAR.

26 Ibid., 5.

27 Philip W. Kearney, NPS Associate Landscape Architect, to Claude E. Greider, NPS State

Supervisor, 25 April 1941, file 5, box 1, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

28 "Digest of Minutes, Committee Meeting on Problem No. 26," 22 May 1941: 5, 9-11, file

Columbia Basin Area — Problem No. 26 1941, box 126, RG 187, NARA-PAR.

29 Ibid., 12-13, 16.

30 F. A. Banks, USBR Supervising Engineer, to USBR Commissioner, 9 July 1941, file 715

Columbia Basin Project, Administration of Recreational Areas, Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake,

USBR Boise.

31 Philip W. Kearney, "Progress Report on Land Use Study, Columbia River Reservoir — for

the period June 30 to July 5, 1941," file 5, box 1, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Phil

[Kearney], NPS Associate Landscape Architect, to Claude [Greider], NPS State Supervisor,

18 July 1941, file 3, box 3, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; NPS Associate Landscape

Architect, "Progress Report on Land Use Study — Columbia River Reservoir for the period

Oct. 13, to Oct. 18, 1941," file 3, box 3, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Raymond E. Hoyt,

NPS Chief of Recreation Planning Division, and Greider to NPS Regional Director, 31 Dec.

1941, file 1, box 2, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; H. Maier, NPS Acting Regional Director,

to NPS Director, 31 Dec. 1941, file 1, box 2, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Kelly Cash,

former LARO Assistant Superintendent, personal communication to Nancy F. Renk, 1 March

2001.

32 F. A. Banks, USBR Supervising Engineer, to USBR Commissioner, 30 Sept. 1941, file

Copy — CODA Historical Files #2, LARO.HQ.SUP; Guy D. Edwards, Superintendent,

Boulder Dam NRA, to NPS Regional Director, 29 Sept. 1941, file 1, box 2, RG 079-89-001,

NARA-PSR; Stephen R. Tripp, NPS Administrative Assistant, to NPS Director, 16 Feb.

1942, file 1, box 2, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; "Agreement Between the Bureau of

Reclamation and the National Park Service Relating to the Development and Use of the

Grand Coulee Reservoir Area," 22 July 1942, file 715 Columbia Basin Project,

Administration of Recreational Areas, Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake, USBR Boise.

33 Conrad L. Wirth, NPS Acting Director, to NPS Regional Director, 20 Oct. 1941, file 1,

box 2, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

34 C. E. Greider, NPS State Supervisor, to NPS Regional Director, 26 Nov. 1940, file 2, box

1, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; [Ernest A.] Davidson, NPS Regional Chief of Planning, to

Chairman, Committee on Joint Investigations, Problem No. 26, 18 Nov. 1941, file 1, box 2,
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 3 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi3n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:43 PM]

RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

35 Raymond E. Hoyt, NPS Chief of Recreation Planning Division, to NPS Regional Director,

26 Nov. 1941, file 1, box 2, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

36 Ernest A. Davidson, NPS Regional Landscape Architect, to NPS Regional Director, 13

Nov. 1940, file 2, box 1, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Claude E. Greider, NPS Recreation

Planner, and Philip W. Kearney, NPS Associate Landscape Architect, to NPS Regional

Director, 30 July 1943, file D18 Planning Program, closed 6/3/53, LARO.HQ.ADM.

37 Stephen R. Tripp, NPS Administrative Assistant, to NPS Director, 16 Feb. 1942, file 1, box

2, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

38 NBD [Newton B. Drury], NPS Director, to [Conrad] Wirth, NPS Assistant Director, 9

March 1942, file 1, box 2, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR (time of 11:15 p.m. was written on

the note).

39 Phil [Kearney], NPS Associate Landscape Architect, to Claude [Greider], NPS Recreation

Planner, 28 June 1941, file 3, box 3, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; USBR, Problem 26, 17,

19-20; Charles B. Hosmer, Jr., Preservation Comes of Age: From Williamsburg to the

National Trust, 1926-1949, v. 1 (Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 1981), 718-

720.

40 Phil [Kearney], NPS Associate Landscape Architect, to Claude [Greider], NPS Recreation

Planner, 4 July 1942, file 3, box 3 RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

41 C. E. Greider, NPS Recreation Planner, to Edward N. Torbert, USBR Field Coordinator, 9

July 1942, file 1, box 5, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

42 Philip W. Kearney, "Progress Report on Land Use Study, Columbia River Reservoir, for

the Period March 15 to 31, 1942," file 1, box 2, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR ; Kearney, NPS

Associate Landscape Architect, to NPS Regional Director, 19 March 1942, file 1, box 2, RG

079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

43 Philip W. Kearney, NPS Associate Landscape Architect, to NPS Regional Director, 6 Feb.

1942, file 1, box 2, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

44 R. D. Waterhouse, NPS Regional Engineer, to NPS Regional Director, 30 March 1942, file

1, box 2, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

45 Phil [Kearney], NPS Associate Landscape Architect, to Claude [Greider], NPS Recreation

Planner, 27 April 1942, file 3, box 3, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

46 Phil [Kearney], NPS Associate Landscape Architect, to Claude [Greider], NPS Recreation

Planner, 16 April 1942, file 3, box 3, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

47 Phil [Kearney], NPS Associate Landscape Architect, to Claude [Greider],NPS Recreation

Planner, 27 April 1942, file 3, box 3, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Kearney, "Progress

Report — Master Plans — Columbia River Reservoir Area for the period April 12 to April

25, 1942," file 1, box 2, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

48 Phil [Kearney], NPS Associate Landscape Architect, to Claude [Greider], NPS Recreation
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 3 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi3n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:43 PM]

Planner, 19 June 1942, file 3, box 3, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

49 Phil [Kearney], NPS Associate Landscape Architect, to Claude [Greider], NPS Recreation

Planner, 4 July 1942, file 3, box 3, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

50 Philip W. Kearney, "Progress Report on Land Use Study, Columbia River Reservoir, for

the Period March 15 to 31, 1942," file 1, box 2, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; "Agreement

Between the Bureau of Reclamation and the National Park Service Relating to the

Development and Use of the Grand Coulee Reservoir Area," 22 July 1942, file 715 Columbia

Basin Project, Administration of Recreational Areas, Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake, USBR

Boise; [Claude E. Greider], "A Very Brief History of National Park Service Activities in the

Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake Area," ca. 1 Feb. 1946, file H14 Project Histories (USBR),

LARO.HQ.ADM; Claude G[reider], NPS Recreation Planner, handwritten report to Major

[Owen A.] Tomlinson and H. Maier, NPS Regional Office, 29 Dec. [1942], file 3, box 3, RG

079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

51 F. A. Gross, Colville Indian Agency Superintendent, to C. E. Greider, NPS Recreation

Planner, 15 July 1943, file 715 Columbia Basin Project, Administration of Recreational

Areas, Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake, USBR Boise; Greider to NPS Regional Director, 7 Sept.

1943: 3, file Copy — CODA Historical Files #2, LARO.HQ.SUP.

52 Claude E. Greider, NPS Recreation Planner, to NPS Regional Director, 7 Sept. 1943, file

Copy — CODA Historical Files #2, LARO.HQ.SUP; F. A. Gross, Colville Indian Agency

Superintendent, to Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 4 Oct. 1943: 2-3, file 715 Columbia

Basin Project, Administration of Recreational Areas, Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake, Boise

USBR.

53 C. E. Greider, NPS Recreation Planner, to Lincoln Lumber Company, 7 Sept. 1943, file

715 Columbia Basin Project, Administration of Recreational Areas, Franklin D. Roosevelt

Lake, USBR Boise; "Memorandum of Agreement Among the Bureau of Reclamation,

National Park Service, and Office of Indian Affairs Relating to the Planning, Development,

and Administration of the Coulee Dam Recreational Area," 18 Dec. 1946, part I.5, part III.8,

part IV.2, file 2, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO. The Indian Zones

included lands that had been acquired by Reclamation for the Columbia Basin Irrigation

Project. They lay above the high water mark, adjacent to the reservations. Since the signing

of the Lake Roosevelt Cooperative Management Agreement in 1990, these lands and adjacent

waters are referred to as the Reservation Zone.

54 Claude E. Greider, NPS Recreation Planner, and Philip W. Kearney, NPS Associate

Landscape Architect, to NPS Regional Director, 30 July 1943, file D18 Planning Program,

closed 6/3/53, LARO.HQ.ADM; Greider to NPS Regional Director, 12 Oct. 1943, file D18

Planning Program, closed 6/3/53, LARO.HQ.ADM.

55 Claude E. Greider, NPS Recreation Planner, to NPS Regional Director, 12 Oct. 1943, file

D18 Planning Program, closed 6/3/53, LARO.HQ.ADM.

56 Claude E. Greider, NPS Recreation Planner, and Philip W. Kearney, NPS Associate

Landscape Architect, to NPS Regional Director, 30 July 1943, file D18 Planning Program,

closed 6/3/53, LARO.HQ.ADM; Herbert Maier, NPS Acting Regional Director, to Greider, 2

Oct. 1943, file D18 Planning Program, closed 6/3/53, LARO.HQ.ADM; Maier to Greider, 16

Oct. 1943, file D18 Planning Program, closed 6/3/53, LARO.HQ.ADM.

57 NPS, "Columbia River Reservoir Area, Washington, General Report and Development
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 3 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi3n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:43 PM]

Outline," June 1944: 7, file USA.3.1, LARO.HQ.100.

58 Newton B. Drury, NPS Director, to NPS Regional Director, 11 Sept. 1944, file 3, box 3,

RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; F. A. Banks, USBR Supervising Engineer, to USBR

Commissioner, 3 Nov. 1944, file D18 Planning Program, closed 6/3/53, LARO.HQ.ADM;

Drury to NPS Regional Director, 16 Oct. 1944, file 3, box 3, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

59 Claude E. Greider, NPS Recreation Planner, to F. A. Banks, USBR Regional Director, 14

Oct. 1943, file 715 Columbia Basin Project, Administration of Recreational Areas, Franklin

D. Roosevelt Lake, USBR Boise.

60 F. A. Banks, USBR Supervising Engineer, to USBR Acting Commissioner, 21 July 1943,

file 715 Columbia Basin Project, Administration of Recreational Areas, Franklin D.

Roosevelt Lake, USBR Boise; Claude E. Greider, NPS Recreation Planner, to NPS Director,

29 Oct. 1945, box 4, History — Coulee Dam NRA, LARO.HQ.LIB; USBR, Project History,

1944, 45; Claude G[reider], NPS Recreation Planner, handwritten report to Major [Owen A.]

Tomlinson and H. Maier, NPS Regional Office, 29 Dec. [1942], file 3, box 3, RG 079-89-

001, NARA-PSR.

61 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," FY1947: 1, file 3, box 3, RG 079-89-001,

NARA-PSR.

62 "Memorandum of Agreement," 18 Dec. 1946: Recitals.7, file 2, box 3 of 3, LARO #95,

Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ,PAO; Act of August 7, 1946, Statutes at Large, 60, ch. 788, 885

(1946).

63 Mackintosh, Shaping the System, 51-52; "Memorandum of Agreement," 18 Dec. 1946: part

I.7, file 2, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

64 C. Richard Neely for the DOI Regional Solicitor, to NPS Regional Director, 29 March

1985, CODA Historical Files #1, LARO.HQ.SUP; LARO, "National Park Service

Administration of Coulee Dam National Recreation Area (CODA)," n.d., file A44 MultiParty Agrmt., LARO.HQ.ADM; General Authorities Act of 1970, as quoted in LARO, Draft

General Management Plan/Environmental Impact Statement: Lake Roosevelt National

Recreation Area (September 1998):170.

65 Torrison v. Baker et al., No. CS-97-285-FVS, United States District Court, Eastern District

of Washington, 27 Sept. 2000: 6. For full text of the opinion, see Appendix B.

66 Claude E. Greider, NPS Recreation Planner, to F. A. Banks, USBR Supervising Engineer,

31 May 1946, file 715 Columbia Basin Project, Administration of Recreational Areas,

Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake, Boise USBR; Banks to USBR Commissioner, 6 June 1946, file

715 Columbia Basin Project, Administration of Recreational Areas, Franklin D. Roosevelt

Lake, Boise USBR; "Memorandum of Agreement," 18 Dec. 1946: Part I.8, file 2, box 3 of 3,

LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; USBR, Project History, 1948, 55;

"Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," FY1947: 3, file 3, box 3, RG 079-89-001, NARAPSR; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," FY1948: 1-2, file 3, box 3, RG 079-89-001,

NARA-PSR.

67 Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Director, 11 Aug. 1947, file 16, box

136, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," FY1947: 3,

file 3, box 3, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 3 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi3n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:43 PM]

68 List of Bureau of Reclamation Property in use on loan basis in Coulee Dam Recreational

Area, Office, Warehouse, and Field, as of Oct. 1, 1947, file 17, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat.

#3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

69 Herbert Maier, NPS Acting Regional Director, to NPS Regional Director, 10 April 1946,

file 3, box 3, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

70 Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to Kirby Billingsley, Columbia Basin

Commission Secretary, 8 March 1948, file 1, box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

71 Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to S.F. (?) Hutton, USBR Engineer, 21 March

1949: 2, file H14 Project Histories (USBR), LARO.HQ.ADM; Greider to Kirby Billingsley,

Columbia Basin Commission Secretary, 8 March 1948, file 1, box 6, RG 079-89-001,

NARA-PSR.

72 A. E. Demaray, NPS Director, to Walt Horan, U.S. House of Representatives, 21 May

1951, file Coulee Rec. Area 1948-52, box 216, Horan Coll., WSU.

73 Walt Horan, U.S. House of Representatives, to W. C. Howe, Spokane County Republican

Central Committee, 18 April 1950, file Coulee Rec. Area 1948-52, box 216, Horan Coll.,

WSU; Columbia Basin Interagency Committee Minutes, "Minutes of the 21st Meeting of the

CBIAC," Seattle, 17 Sept. 1948: 4, Special Collections, UI; Edwin C. Bearss, "The National

Park Service and Its History Program: 1864-1986 — An Overview," Public Historian 9

(Spring 1987): 14.

74 Claude E. Greider, LARO Supervisor, to Kirby Billingsley, Columbia Basin Commission

Secretary, 30 Jan. 1948, file 1, box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

75 Walt Horan, U.S. House of Representatives, to W. G. Oves, Publicity-Tourist Bureau,

Spokane Chamber of Commerce, 21 Jan. 1949, file Coulee Rec. Area 1948-52, box 216,

Horan Coll., WSU.

76 Walt Horan, U.S. House of Representatives, to W. C. Howe, Spokane County Republican

Central Committee, 18 April 1950, file Coulee Rec. Area 1948-52, box 216, Horan Coll.,

WSU.

77 Claude E. Greider, LARO Supervisor, to William S. Royce, [secretary to Walt Horan, U.S.

House of Representatives], 19 Sept. 1947, file Coulee Rec. Area 1948-52, box 216, Horan

Coll., WSU.

78 William S. Royce, secretary to Walt Horan, U.S. House of Representatives, to Claude E.

Greider, LARO Supervisor, 22 Oct. 1947, file Coulee Rec. Area 1948-52, box 216, Horan

Coll., WSU; Walt Horan, U.S. House of Representatives, to R. T. Paine, President of Colville

Chamber of Commerce, 7 Nov. 1947, file Coulee Rec. Area 1948-52, box 216, Horan Coll.,

WSU.

79 Claude E. Greider, LARO Supervisor, to NPS Director, 31 Dec. 1947, file 16, box 136, RG

079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

80 F. S. Ludolph, Chairman, Grant County Board of County Commissioners, to Warren G.

Magnuson, U.S. Senate, 7 May 1949, file 22, box 85, accession 3181-3, Magnuson Coll.,

UW.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 3 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi3n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:43 PM]

81 Conrad L. Wirth, NPS Acting Assistant Director, to Warren G. Magnuson, U.S. Senate, 3

June 1949, file 22, box 85, accession 3181-3, Magnuson Coll., UW; Claude E. Greider,

LARO Superintendent, to Kirby Billingsley, Columbia Basin Commission Secretary, 17 June

1949, file 5, box 208, accession 3181-4, Magnuson Coll., UW. Greider's title was Supervisor

from November 1946 to mid-February 1948, when it changed to Superintendent; Hillary [sic]

A. Tolson, compiler, Historical Listing of National Park Service Officials ([Washington,

D.C.]: U.S. Department of the Interior/National Park Service, 1986), 70.

82 C. Grover Wilson, Chairman, Publicity-Tourist Bureau, Spokane Chamber of Commerce,

to Warren G. Magnuson, U.S. Senate, 1 Feb. 1950, file 22, box 85, accession 3181-3,

Magnuson Coll., UW.

83 C. S. Hutsell, Grand Coulee Navigation Co. manager, to Walt Horan, U.S. House of

Representatives, 27 April 1951, file 21, box 85, accession 3181-3, Magnuson Coll., UW.

84 NPS, "Columbia River Reservoir Area, Washington: General Report and Development

Outline," June 1944: 4, USA 3.1, LARO.HQ.100; "Report for Calendar Year 1944, Leases,

Licenses, and Special Use Permits, Columbia River Reservoir," 1-4, file LARO.94.3249.25,

LARO.HQ.ADM (figures vary somewhat from those in first document); "Memorandum of

Agreement," 18 Dec. 1946, Part III.4, file 2, Box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250,

LARO.HQ.PAO; F. A. Banks, USBR Regional Director, to USBR Commissioner, 22 April

1944, file 715 Columbia Basin Project, Administration of Recreational Areas, Franklin D.

Roosevelt Lake, Boise USBR; Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to Banks, 9 Dec.

1948, file LARO.94.3249.25, LARO.HQ.ADM; Greider to Walt Horan, U.S. House of

Representatives, 28 Oct. 1948: 2, 4, file Coulee Rec. Area 1948-52, box 216, Horan Coll.,

WSU.

85 W. O. Kurth, Secretary, Grand Coulee Chamber of Commerce, to Warren G. Magnuson,

U.S. Senate, 16 July 1949, file 21, box 85, accession 3181-3, Magnuson Coll., UW.

86 Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to Kirby Billingsley, Columbia Basin

Commission Secretary, 17 June 1949, file 5, box 208, accession 3181-4, Magnuson Coll.,

UW; LARO, "Master Plan," v. III, section F, March 1963: 4, file D18 Master Plan 1962, box

3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

87 Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 13 Dec. 1948: 1, 3,

6, file 715 Columbia Basin Project, Administration of Recreational Areas, Franklin D.

Roosevelt Lake, Boise USBR; F. A. Banks, USBR District Manager, to Greider, 15 Dec.

1948, file 715 Columbia Basin Project, Administration of Recreational Areas, Franklin D.

Roosevelt Lake, Boise USBR.

88 O. A. Tomlinson, NPS Regional Director, to Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, 25

Jan. 1949, file 1, box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

89 O. A. Tomlinson, NPS Regional Director, to R. J. Newell, USBR Regional Director, 4 Jan.

1949, file 715 Columbia Basin Project, Administration of Recreational Areas, Franklin D.

Roosevelt Lake, Boise USBR; Newton B. Drury, NPS Director, to USBR Commissioner, 2

March 1949, file 1, box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Michael W. Straus, USBR

Commissioner, to NPS Director, n.d., file 1, box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

90 F. A. Banks, USBR District Manager, to Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, 8

March 1949, file 1, box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Greider to Banks, 10 March 1949,
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 3 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi3n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:43 PM]

file 1, box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Banks to Greider, 18 March 1949, file 1, box 6,

RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; O. A. Tomlinson, NPS Regional Director, to Greider, 14

March 1949, file 1, box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

91 "Memorandum of Agreement," 18 Dec. 1946, Part III. 9, file 2, Box 3 of 3, LARO #95,

Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to F. A. Banks,

USBR District Manager, 23 Sept. 1948, file 1, box 4, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

92 "Rules and Regulations, Rough Draft 9-22-48": 4-8, 10-12, 21, file History of NPS,

CODA, drawer 5, LARO.HQ.RMO; [Paul Lemargie], USBR Chief of Legal Division, to

USBR District Manager, 14 Oct. 1948, file History of NPS, CODA, drawer 5,

LARO.HQ.RMO; Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 21

Oct. 1948, file History of NPS, CODA, drawer 5, LARO.HQ.RMO; Greider to NPS Regional

Director, 5 Nov. 1948, file History of NPS, CODA, drawer 5, LARO.HQ.RMO.

93 Confidential memo from NPS Director to NPS Regional Director, 2 May 1949, file History

of NPS, CODA, drawer 5, LARO.HQ.RMO.

94 Confidential memo from NPS Director to NPS Regional Director, 2 May 1949, file History

of NPS, CODA, drawer 5, LARO.HQ.RMO; confidential memo from O. A. Tomlinson, NPS

Regional Director, to NPS Director, 10 May 1949, file History of NPS, CODA, drawer 5,

LARO.HQ.RMO; confidential memo from Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS

Director, 13 May 1949, file History of NPS, CODA, drawer 5, LARO.HQ.RMO; confidential

memo from Greider to NPS Director, 13 May 1949, file History of NPS, CODA, drawer 5,

LARO.HQ.RMO.

95 Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 8 Aug. 1949, file

History of NPS, CODA, drawer 5, LARO.HQ.RMO.

96 "Title 36 — Parks, Forests, and Memorials, Chapter I — National Park Service,

Department of the Interior, Part 2 — General Rules and Regulations Governing Recreational

Areas, Draft 9-22-49," file History of NPS, CODA, drawer 5, LARO.HQ.RMO; Claude E.

Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Director, 22 Sept. 1949, file History of NPS, CODA,

drawer 5, LARO.HQ.RMO; Herbert Maier, Acting NPS Regional Director, to NPS Director,

20 Oct. 1949, file History of NPS, CODA, drawer 5, LARO.HQ.RMO; Greider to NPS

Regional Director, 25 Oct. 1949, file History of NPS, CODA, drawer 5, LARO.HQ.RMO;

Newton B. Drury, NPS Director, to NPS Regional Directors, 5 Dec. 1949, file 1, box 4, RG

079-89-001, NARA-PSR; F. A. Banks, USBR District Manager, to USBR Regional Director,

14 Dec. 1949, file 715 Columbia Basin Project, Administration of Recreational Areas,

Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake, Boise USBR.

97 Boyd Hanna, Grand Coulee Dam Yacht Club commodore, to Walt Horan, U.S. House of

Representatives, 21 Feb. 1950, file 21, box 85, accession 3181-3, Magnuson Coll., UW,

Mactin (?) G. White, Acting Assistant Secretary of the Interior, to Warren G. Magnuson, US

Senate, 21 March 1950, file 21, box 85, accession 3181-3, Magnuson Coll., UW; Claude E.

Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 23 March 1950, file History of

NPS, CODA, drawer 5, LARO.HQ.RMO. It is unclear whether or not the regulations were

actually published in the Federal Register at this time.

98 Walt Horan, U.S. House of Representatives, to Oscar Chapman, Secretary of the Interior,

12 April 1950, file 22, box 85, accession 3181-3, Magnuson Coll., UW; Boyd Hanna, Grand

Coulee Dam Yacht Club commodore, to Oscar L. Chapman, Secretary of the Interior, 23

March 1950, file 21, box 85, accession 3181-3, Magnuson Coll., UW.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 3 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi3n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:43 PM]

99 "Sails and Motors to Dot Dam Lake," Columbian 5 (23 Feb. 1939): 11, file 12, box 2,

accession 87-4-454, WSA-CRB; Boyd Hanna, Grand Coulee Dam Yacht Club commodore,

to Warren G. Magnuson, U.S. Senate, 4 June 1950, file 21, box 85, accession 3181-3,

Magnuson Coll., UW; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," FY1949: 2-3, file 3, box 3,

RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

100 Transcript of meeting at Grand Coulee Dam Yacht Club, 1 June 1951: 1-2, 5-6, 21, file

715 Columbia Basin Project, Administration of Recreational Areas, Franklin D. Roosevelt

Lake, Boise USBR.

101 Ibid., 24.

102 R. F. Mirick, Secretary of Ancient and Honorable Association of Bass Fishermen and

Duck Hunters, to Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, 5 June 1951, file Proposed

Regulations CODA, drawer 5, LARO.HQ.RMO; "Memorandum Concerning the Proposed

Issuance of General Rules and Regulations Governing the National Recreational Areas," [ca.

July 1951]: 5, 6, 8, file Proposed Regulations CODA, drawer 5, LARO.HQ.RMO;

"Resolution of Grand Coulee Dam Yacht Club," 15 Oct. 1951, file Proposed Regulations

CODA, drawer 5, LARO.HQ.RMO; C. D. McGregor, President [Grand Coulee Gun Club], to

Columbia Basin Commission, 5 Nov. 1951, file Proposed Regulations CODA, drawer 5,

LARO.HQ.RMO; Carl Scott, President [Grand Coulee Dam Sportsmans Association], to

Columbia Basin Commission, 6 Nov. 1951, file Proposed Regulations CODA, drawer 5,

LARO.HQ.RMO; Hubert H. Walter, Administrative Assistant, Columbia Basin Commission,

to Oscar Chapman, Secretary of the Interior, 27 Sept. 1951, file Proposed Regulations

CODA, drawer 5, LARO.HQ.RMO; Chapman to Walter, 24 Oct. 1951, file Proposed

Regulations CODA, drawer 5, LARO.HQ.RMO; "Resolution of the Columbia Basin

Commission," 6 Nov. 1951, file Proposed Regulations CODA, drawer 5, LARO.HQ.RMO.

103 Lawrence C. Merriam, NPS Regional Director, to NPS Director, 25 Jan. 1952, file

History of NPS, CODA, drawer 5, LARO.HQ.RMO; Conrad L. Wirth, NPS Director, to

Secretary of Interior, 16 May 1952, file Proposed Regulations CODA, drawer 5,

LARO.HQ.RMO; Oscar L. Chapman, Secretary of Interior, to Mr. Walter, Columbia Basin

Commission, 27 June 1952, file 36-A-1-b Roosevelt Lake Rec. Area, 1951, box 6, Dept. of

Conservation, Director's Papers, WSA; W. Butler, Grand Coulee Dam Yacht Club

commodore, to Walt Horan, U.S. House of Representatives, 15 Jan. 1953, file 2, box 9, RG

079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

104 Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 10 July 1951, file 2,

box 9, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

105 Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 20 July 1951, file 2,

box 9, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

106 Clifford R. Koester to Columbia Basin Commission, 6 Nov. 1951, file Proposed

Regulations CODA, drawer 5, LARO.HQ.RMO; F. A. Banks, "Statement of F. A. Banks to

The Columbia Basin Commission," Spokane, Washington, 6 Nov. 1951, file Proposed

Regulations CODA, drawer 5, LARO.HQ.RMO.

107 Completed form, "Proposed National Parks & Monuments," Grand Coulee, ca. 1935: 4,

file H14 Historical Records — Grand Coulee, LARO.HQ.ADM; Frank A. Kittredge, NPS

Regional Director, to NPS Director, 14 Feb. 1938, file 3, box 1, RG 079-89-001, NARAPSR; Washington State Planning Council, A Study of Parks, Parkways and Recreational
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 3 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi3n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:43 PM]

Areas, State of Washington, Works Progress Administration, July 1939: 55; Earl A. Trager,

NPS Chief of Naturalist Division, "Grand Coulee, General Considerations," Aug. 1938: 2, 6,

file H14 Historical Records — Grand Coulee, LARO.HQ.ADM.

108 Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 6 Dec. 1949, file 2,

box 9, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

109 Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Director, 14 April 1950, file 19, box

136, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Oscar L. Chapman, Secretary of Interior, to Mr. Walter,

Columbia Basin Commission, 17 Oct. 1951, file Proposed Regulations CODA, drawer 5,

LARO.HQ.RMO; USBR, Project History 1950, 51; "Superintendent's Annual Report,

CODA," FY1950: 2, file 3, box 3, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

110 Hubert H. Walter, Administrative Assistant, Columbia Basin Commission, to Oscar

Chapman, Secretary of Interior, 10 Sept. 1951, file Proposed Regulations CODA, drawer 5,

LARO.HQ.RMO; "Resolution of the Columbia Basin Commission," 6 Nov. 1951, file

Proposed Regulations CODA, drawer 5, LARO.HQ.RMO; Lawrence C. Merriam, NPS

Regional Director, to NPS Director, 3 March 1952, file History of NPS, CODA, drawer 5,

LARO.HQ.RMO.

111 John A. Biggs, Director of Washington Department of Game, to H. A. Parker, USBR

Supervising Engineer, 28 Feb. 1952, file 1 of 3 Recreation, box 34, Columbia Basin

Commission, WSA; John R. Vanderzicht, Director of Washington State Parks and Recreation

Commission, to Parker, 22 April 1952, file 1 of 3 Recreation, box 34, Columbia Basin

Commission, WSA; Hubert H. Walter, Administrative Assistant, to W. A. Galbraith, Director

of Washington Department of Conservation and Development, 23 April 1952, file 1 of 3

Recreation, box 34, Columbia Basin Commission, WSA.

112 Conrad L. Wirth, NPS Director, to Hubert H. Walter, Administrative Assistant, Columbia

Basin Commission, 4 Dec. 1952, file 1 of 3 Recreation, box 34, Columbia Basin Commission,

WSA; Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to USBR District Manager, 24 Sept. 1951,

file 18, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Greider to Eril C. Wert, 9 Oct.

1952, box 4, History — Coulee Dam NRA, LARO.HQ.LIB; Greider to NPS Regional

Director, 13 June 1952: 3, file D18 Planning Program, closed 6/3/53, LARO.HQ.ADM; John

A. Biggs, Director of Washington Department of Game, to Walt Horan, U.S. House of

Representatives, 2 Dec. 1952, file 1 of 3 Recreation, box 34, Columbia Basin Commission,

WSA; John A. Biggs, Director of Washington Department of Game, to Greider, 23 Dec.

1952, file 1 of 3 Recreation, box 34, Columbia Basin Commission, WSA.

113 Hubert H. Walter, Administrative Assistant, Columbia Basin Commission, to W. A.

Galbreath [sic], Director of Washington Department of Conservation and Development, 5

Dec. 1952, file 36-A-1-b Roosevelt Lake Rec. Area, 1951, box 6, Dept. of Conservation,

Director's Papers, WSA; Douglas McKay, Secretary of the Interior, to Galbraith, 19 Feb.

1953, file 1 of 3 Recreation, box 34, Columbia Basin Commission, WSA. Available

documentation did not indicate how the final decision was reached concerning administration

of the Equalizing Reservoir.

114 Lawrence C. Merriam, NPS Regional Director, to NPS Director, 27 Oct. 1958, file A44

Tri-Party Agrmt. — Sites in Coulee Dam, LARO.HQ.ADM.

115 Catherine May to Wey Simpson, News Director of KULE radio station, wire, 10 April

1959, file Interior — National Park Services, box 6, May Coll., WSU; "Superintendent's

Annual Report, CODA," CY1959:1, file 2621 Annual Reports Field Areas 1-1-60 to 12-31-
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 3 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi3n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:43 PM]

60, box 4, RG 79-95-05, NARA-PSR.

116 Don and Connie Everts, interview with Nancy F. Renk, 7 Dec. 1999, Tape 1-A, tape and

index on file LARO.HQ.

117 Mrs. Homer (Sis) Robinson and Don Everts, interview with Nancy F. Renk, 6 Dec. 1999,

Tape 1-A, tape and index on file LARO.HQ.

118 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," FY1953, file A2621 Annual Reports Field

Areas 5-1-53 to 12-1-53, box 3, RG 79-95-05, NARA-PSR; Lawrence C. Merriam, NPS

Regional Director, to P. R. Nalder, USBR District Manager, 7 Aug. 1953, file 18, box 3 of 3,

LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

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

laro/adhi/adhi3n.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi3a.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:45 PM]

Early in 1939, a Spokane

newspaper was flooded with

suggestions for naming the lake

that was beginning to form

behind Grand Coulee Dam.

Possibilities included Lake

Beautiful, Lake President ("in

honor of the highest office of

our nation and government"),

and Lake Reclamation ("That

carries a world of

possibilities"). Not all were

flattering, however. One man

had a number of suggestions

including Devil's Lake or

Bankruptcy Lake ("Either

name would be appropriate").

For the "weak-minded idol

worshipers," he proposed

naming features such as

"Roosevelt bay, Ickes isle and

Eleanor point . . . . Let us name

the dam [sic] lake right while

we are about it."

In 1940, the Park Service

followed Reclamation's less

imaginative lead by referring to

the lake as the Columbia River

Reservoir. Reclamation

suggested the change to

Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake in

April 1945, following the

president's death. Secretary of

the Interior Harold L. Ickes

told Mrs. Roosevelt of the

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 3:

A Long Road Lies Ahead: Establishing Lake

Roosevelt National Recreation Area (continued)

The National Park Service Arrives at the Columbia River Reservoir

Greider immediately began to prepare for the

upcoming planning work at the reservoir area. He

wanted two experienced planners, one with field

experience in eastern Washington. They would need

office space in either Ephrata or Coulee Dam, along

with drafting materials, car and boat transportation,

and the periodic use of a small survey crew. He

estimated that these men, who probably could not start

work until the weather warmed up in March, would

need ten to twelve weeks in the field, followed by

another six to eight weeks to prepare Master Plans.

Greider appealed to Reclamation for help in meeting

these needs. [16]

Help came not from Reclamation but from the CCC,

which supplied Philip W. Kearney, Associate

Landscape Architect, to the Park Service for the

reservoir planning project. Kearney's appointment was

approved on March 7, 1941, and he began work on site

shortly thereafter. Despite urgent requests for

additional help during the critical early period of work,

apparently none was forthcoming from Washington,

D.C., so Greider himself worked with Kearney for

nearly two weeks in March. By mid-April, Kearney

reported that he managed to have someone, probably

from Reclamation, with him nearly half the time to

assist him on site. [17]

The rigors of field work were the least of Kearney's

concerns during his first six months on the job. Within

a few weeks of coming to Coulee Dam, he was offered

another position with Defense Housing in the Public

Building Administration. Herbert Maier wired Kearney

from the regional office, telling him that while it was

Park Service policy not to object when a defense

agency requested the services of an employee, that

person did not have to accept the transfer. "We feel
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi3a.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:45 PM]

change. "The designation of this

monument to the President's

name has been done with a

feeling of pride and yet with a

deep sense of humility," he

wrote, "recognizing that his

greatest monument is in the

hearts of the people." [15]

you are doing an excellent job on land use study and

would very much regret [to] see this work interrupted

or delayed," he wired. "Grand Coulee Land Use Study

is a major undertaking which should bring

considerable professional prestige to the one making

it." [18] Kearney found that the proffered work would

require an eventual transfer to Washington, D.C., and

he decided to stay with the Park Service. "I hope that

you will be successful in gaining me some stability in

your department — at the desired grade," Kearney wrote to Greider. [19] He missed his

family, who evidently lived in Seattle, and upon completion of the field work, he received

permission to work on the final plans and drawings in Seattle. The regional office reminded

him, however, that his official headquarters remained in Grand Coulee and thus he would

receive no travel or per diem for this move. Within a few weeks of his return to Seattle,

Kearney lost his job when the regional office terminated all CCC personnel. Kearney took

the news "with a feeling of disappointment" that he was unable to have the satisfaction of

finishing the job, and he forwarded his work to the San Francisco office for completion. [20]

Bust of President Franklin D. Roosevelt at the U.S. Bureau of

Reclamation Visitor Arrival Center at Grand Coulee Dam,

September 1957. The lake was named after the president following

his death in 1945. Photo courtesy of Grant County Historical Society

and Museum, BOR Collection (P 222 17 39522).

The Park Service hired Kearney back in less than two weeks, but he approached the

appointment with justifiable caution. Although he wanted to finish the project, he placed the

welfare of his family first and noted that "the spring and summer was a distinct hardship for

all of us." He refused to return to Coulee Dam, since that meant separation from his family,

but he said that if the Park Service would let him complete the drawings in Seattle, he would

be "willing to take the chance on the future but otherwise it is no dice." He had found the

assignment interesting and appreciated the good treatment he received from Reclamation, but
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi3a.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:45 PM]

Crops are bumper and streams

still high. So is living. 

--Phil [Kearney] to Claude

[Greider], 12 July 1941. [23]

"the NPS has certainly kicked me around with very little consideration," Kearney wrote to

Greider. [21] He was about to sign on with the Army Corps of Engineers when he received a

wire from the Park Service confirming his appointment. "Now I will continue to hope that the

NPS will need my services so that the career that I have chosen will continue uninterrupted."

[22]

During the spring and summer months of 1941,

Kearney immersed himself in field work, getting to

know the reservoir area well. His work was hampered

by the difficult conditions he encountered. The water

level was up to only 1,208 feet by late June, nearly

inundating Kettle Falls and flooding the flats above

Gifford and Inchelium. "For the first time the area

assumes the character of a lake rather than a river," Kearney noted in his weekly report.

Despite this rising water, it was still eighty feet below full pool, and Kearney was forced to

examine potential swimming beaches and boat ramps at areas not yet touched by the lake's

waters. [24]

The Committee on Problem No. 26 met in Olympia in May 1941 and listened to Kearney's

report on his preliminary work at the reservoir. He discussed approaches to the reservoir, with

the dam as the primary access point and the confluence of the Spokane and Columbia rivers

as a secondary point. A new state highway ran north along the reservoir from this confluence,

and he suggested that if Spokane interests developed a parkway from Riverside State Park to

the mouth of the Spokane, it would bring tourists and boost recreational development on the

reservoir. Kearney had concentrated his work on the three areas where there was enough

federally owned land suitable for recreation: the dam, confluence of the Spokane and

Columbia, and Kettle Falls. He recommended boat docks for all three areas but suggested

that the most extensive development should occur at the confluence site due to its potential

size and proximity to the Spokane urban population. In addition to the three major sites, he

identified other sites suitable for picnicking, camping, boating, and summer home

development. [25]

The potential for industrial development was considered part of the reservoir development

from the beginning, so in addition to recreation sites, Kearney identified three primary areas

for industrial use. The first extended from Spring Canyon to Plum and included four thousand

acres acquired by the Columbia City Development Company. The second embraced the

mouth of Hawk Creek where Lincoln Lumber Company operated its mill. The third

encompassed the shore at the original Kettle Falls town site where up to two sawmills could

be accommodated. "If proper land use principles are observed, industrial and recreational

development in this district need not conflict," noted Kearney. [26] In an earlier report,

however, he had cautioned that careful planning for industrial use was critical to ensure that

"the industries do not make the area uninhabitable for those who are sensitive to their

environment." [27] In addition to these three sites and the area north of Marcus, Kearney

suggested that many industries would use the reservoir waters for transportation, necessitating

coordination with recreational water use. After hearing Kearney's report, the committee

decided not to make regulations for industrial use, but it stressed the need for standards to

protect both public health and aesthetic values. After discussion, the members voted to

designate fifteen miles of the south shore, starting at the dam, as primarily for industrial

development. [28]

The committee also took up the matter of administration of the reservoir area. Reclamation

reported many inquiries from individuals wanting to set up businesses on the lake, and the

agency pushed for swift resolution of the question of future development and administration

for the area. The committee considered several potential managers, including a private group
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi3a.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:45 PM]

("not desirable"), Washington State Parks (no funding or personnel), Reclamation (also no

funding or personnel to take on recreation in addition to irrigation), and a Columbia River

Authority (not in existence). In the end, they reached the foregone conclusion: "The National

Park Service has authority, has experience, personnel, has or can get funds, and its

qualifications for the job are quite superior." Committee members saw other advantages to

having the Park Service take over administration of the reservoir. Because the three agencies

in charge of the area - the Park Service, Reclamation, and the Office of Indian Affairs (OIA,

predecessor to the Bureau of Indian Affairs) - all were part of the Department of the Interior,

they "could work out an agreement within a matter of a few days if the situation required it."

The committee asked the Park Service to assume responsibility for the recreational

development and administration of the Columbia River Reservoir Area, including developing

Master Plans, constructing public facilities, supervising private development, cooperating

with other governmental agencies, and providing funding for these responsibilities. In

addition, the committee urged the Park Service to form an advisory committee to include

representatives from the Problem No. 26 Committee. [29]

Reclamation was justifiably concerned about administration of the area as it continued to

issue temporary licenses for both private and commercial use of the shore lands. Frank A.

Banks recognized that such unplanned development was undesirable and could interfere with

future public use. More worrisome were potential problems with commercial interests who

spent money on private development and might later feel that they had vested rights in the

land. Banks believed that if the Park Service refused to undertake development and

administration of the reservoir, Reclamation needed to act quickly to find another agency to

do the job. If necessary, he said that Reclamation could ask the Park Service to loan qualified

advisors to the project. [30]

Instead, Reclamation offered limited support for Kearney's mapping and field surveys during

the summer of 1941. The Park Service provided even less assistance. Aside from a brief twoday visit in early July from Thomas Vint, National Park Service Chief of Planning from

Washington, D.C., and Ernest A. Davidson, Regional Chief of Planning, Kearney was

basically on his own as the sole Park Service representative in the reservoir area. He ended

his field work in late July. Following the interruptions in his employment, Kearney evidently

finished the Land Use Study plans during the fall of 1941 in Seattle. The completed study

was ready for review by the end of that year. After the success of the plans for the Columbia

River Reservoir, the Park Service hoped to reassign the team of Kearney and Greider to work

on the Central Valley Project in California, particularly the Shasta and Friant (Millerton) dam

reservoirs. The men were not transferred, however. [31]

The Park Service did not immediately take over administrative responsibilities at the

reservoir. The agency attempted to reach accord with Reclamation and the OIA, with

representatives of all three signing an agreement in September 1941 (Greider signed for the

Park Service). It never went into effect, however, because National Park Service Director

Newton Drury wanted to wait for completed studies and a decision on the national

significance of the reservoir. Reclamation was anxious to have the Park Service take charge

of recreational development, however, so the two agencies signed a memorandum of

agreement in July 1942 to have the Park Service assume general administrative and planning

functions for the Columbia River Reservoir. Reclamation designated up to $10,000 to cover

expenses for the first year, and the two agencies renewed this agreement annually until the

Tri-Party Agreement was signed by Reclamation, Park Service, and OIA in 1946. [32]

While Park Service personnel proceeded with plans for recreational development at the new

reservoir, agency officials continued to question the national significance of the proposed

recreation area. Director Drury was hesitant to commit the Park Service to full involvement

until he had a chance to visit the area and form his own opinion about its significance. If it
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi3a.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:45 PM]

were determined nationally significant, Drury hoped that Congress would recognize it with

legislative authority. On the other hand, if it were determined less significant, the Park

Service would not be the appropriate administrative agency. [33]

Not everyone within the Park Service agreed that the agency should take over the new

reservoir area. In 1940, Regional Landscape Architect Ernest A. Davidson, who had lived in

the Inland Northwest for thirty-one years, urged that the agency approach the new area with

"great caution." Since the region had so many natural lakes, still largely undeveloped, he

believed that campers and boaters would prefer scenic areas, like Lake Chelan, to the hot

artificial lake behind Grand Coulee Dam. Greider refuted these claims, but within a year

Davidson characterized part of the preliminary report on Problem No. 26, which compared

the reservoir with other popular areas, as "propaganda . . . , incomplete or possibly onesided." [34] Other Park Service officials urged civility and perspective. Raymond E. Hoyt,

Chief of the Recreation Planning Division, decried the "unfortunate memorandum to Mr.

Greider . . . which . . . tends to break down Service unity and the respect we should cherish

for fellow workers opinions." After all, Hoyt reminded, "we are preparing a land use study

and not an investigation of a potential national park." [35] Ironically, within a few years

Davidson was sent to Coulee Dam to help with preliminary recreation planning. [36]

The release of Hoyt and Greider's report, "A Study of Land Use for Recreation Development

of the Columbia River Reservoir Area above the Grand Coulee Dam, Washington," spurred

further debate over the issue of national significance. The recreation area was definitely

popular; in 1940, only Yellowstone National Park drew more visitors than Grand Coulee

Dam, which attracted 325,000 tourists (100,000 more than Mount Rainier). Boulder Dam's

225,000 visitors in 1938 mushroomed to 800,000 three years later, the greatest growth for any

recreation area in the west. One Park Service official believed that Grand Coulee Dam would

continue to attract national tourists, but the small strip of federal land around the reservoir

would attract regional residents only. "It is highly improbable that the so-called recreational

resources of the Columbia Reservoir Area are of national significance," he concluded. [37]

Drury, who became National Park Service Director in 1940, remained skeptical as well,

partly because he thought the Park Service would need to acquire more land there in the

future. "We had better try to define 'national significance,'" he cautioned late one night.

"Don't let's fool ourselves about 'attendance' at Boulder Dam National Recreation Area." [38]

Drury took a conservative approach to expansion of the National Park System. He believed

in the concept of parks as the "crown jewels" of the country. "I was not particularly an

advocate of adding areas of lesser caliber to the National Park System," he later recalled. [39]

The Director did not visit the area until July 1942 when he and Regional Director Owen A.

Tomlinson were shown around the reservoir by Frank A. Banks and Phil Kearney. Drury was

impressed with the beauty of the lake but remained concerned about the limited amount of

public land. While the Director assured the group that he was keeping an open mind about

the area, Banks later remarked to Kearney that "if this had been true he would not have been

at such pains to remark on it." [40] Soon after the visit, Park Service officials edited a

Reclamation press release about the Problem No. 26 report to "avoid any inference that the

National Park Service is to be the permanent administrative agency for recreation on the

Area," because Drury had not yet discussed the idea with Reclamation Commissioner Page.

[41]

Kearney continued with his work on Master Plans during 1942. Reclamation assisted by

providing detailed topographical drawings, while Park Service Regional Engineer Robert D.

Waterhouse spent ten days in March helping Kearney with field examinations of potential

recreation sites. The engineer recommended several months of intensive surveying to get data

sufficient to meet Park Service standards. Because of this, Kearney realized that he would not

be able to complete Master Plans that year and proposed doing less time-consuming
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi3a.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:45 PM]

preliminary plans instead. This would allow him time to advise Reclamation on boating

permits, thus relieving pressure on that agency. [42]

The ten areas proposed for development were Rattlesnake Canyon near the dam (Crescent

Bay), Spring Canyon, south approach to Keller Ferry, Hawk Creek, Fort Spokane, Gerome,

Hunters, Kettle Falls, Barstow, and Sheep Creek. Kearney reported that some people from

Spokane hoped that the old fort would be preserved as an historical site. He estimated that

the brick buildings there needed just a small amount of work to "preserve them for all times,"

but he recommended removing some of the frame structures since they were not "of

sufficient interest to warrant the great amount of work necessary for their preservation."

Waterhouse found Kettle Falls a difficult area to design due to nearby houses, a new sawmill,

the railroad, and abandoned roads. He and Kearney finally settled on an area for recreation

"as far away from the commercial areas and the mess as possible." [44]

Prior to July 1942, Reclamation handled all permits for private development around the

reservoir. The agency took a favorable stance toward industry and was fairly lenient in

permitting businesses in the area. "You have to look out," Kearney found, since "private

interests that mean business seem mighty attractive to the Bureau people." [45] For instance,

a man under permit built a house at Fort Spokane where he planned to use some of the old

WPA "shacks" for business operations. Kearney complained that the above-ground gasoline

tanks there were unsightly. He was also concerned about a proposed magnesium smelter at

Spring Canyon, even though Frank A. Banks assured him that they would find a site other

than Hunters for loading ore. Developments at Kettle Falls were even more troubling since a

sawmill had opened in a central location and loggers had cut timber around the bridges and

mission site. When Kearney protested logging of federal lands, it "brought only mild

surprise," but he hoped that the order to cease would be effective. Additional logging was

going on between Hunters and the mouth of the Colville River, apparently on government

lands. [46] Kearney predicted further problems and expressed his regret to Greider. "This is

too bad as everyone here seemed quite willing to cooperate but cannot be expected to hold

out indefinitely." [47]

Park Service operations at the reservoir were threatened by more distant events as well.

Apparently Greider faced a potential call to service in the Air Corps on "short notice."

Kearney worried that his colleague might be losing interest in the reservoir recreation project

"with weightier things" on his mind, and he reassured him that the war might be over sooner

than expected. [48] Later he mused about the war:

It still seems like fiddling — working on this job while things are in such a

turmoil the world over but there is no place that I can see myself to better

advantage wither [sic] for my personal welfare or for the good of the country.

The situation seems to grow more and more confounding. I hope that the powers

that be have a Master Plan. There is little evidence of the formulation of one in

looking over the past events. [49]

Despite the turmoil of World War II, Park Service work at the reservoir area achieved a

modicum of stability in 1942. Kearney moved with his family to Mason City in March.

Funding became more predictable after the July 1942 interbureau agreement was signed

providing the Park Service with $10,000 in Reclamation project funds to handle development

and administration of the recreation area. After three years of working on preliminary plans

for the reservoir, Claude Greider finally moved to the area at the end of the year, starting

work as the Recreation Planner on December 26, 1942. Within a few months, the initial

office staff was completed with the addition of Frances Fleischauer as clerk-typist. Greider

reported to the regional office that Reclamation expected the Park Service "to assume rather

broad authority" for planning and administration of the reservoir area, without depending on
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi3a.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:45 PM]

Reclamation staff. It believed that the area would be an important national recreation area

(NRA), and Greider predicted, "Undoubtedly the best efforts of the Service will be put to the

test over the next few years on this project." [50]

View of Fort Spokane and the new bridge, 1942. The frame buildings

near the bridge were removed before the Park Service gained

administrative control of the property in 1960. The guardhouse, at

right, remains. Photo courtesy of National Park Service, Lake

Roosevelt National Recreation Area (LARO 3058).

One test occurred in 1943 when Park Service and OIA officials disagreed over an issue at

Sanpoil Bay. The Park Service identified the area near the old Keller town site as having

good potential for recreational development. When Lincoln Lumber Company began using

the site as a log dump in 1943, the Park Service, backed by the Colville Indian Agency,

ordered the company to move its operations a short distance to the mouth of Manila Creek.

Within a short time, however, the Colville Agency reneged, saying that the Keller site had

greater value as a log dump than a campground. The Park Service, backed by Reclamation,

stood firm, and the OIA joined the fray. Greider reiterated the Park Service policy of favoring

industrial uses such as logging in areas where these interests were paramount. But, he

continued, "It would not be considered in the best public interest to use valuable potential

recreational sites for logging purposes when other sites of lesser recreational importance are

available." The Park Service worried "that the loggers as a group have amply demonstrated

that they have little if any regard for aesthetic or recreational values of the reservoir area."

[51]

The disagreement soon escalated from a log dump to Indian rights. The OIA wanted to

resolve the question of paramount use in one-quarter of the reservoir and wanted to take over

management of freeboard lands (between high water and the 1,310 elevation) on the

reservations. Greider suggested that the agency resented being left out of the interagency

agreement between the Park Service and Reclamation. F. A. Gross, Superintendent of the

Colville Agency, was less antagonistic than the OIA representative toward the Park Service
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi3a.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:45 PM]

operations, but he stood firm in what he viewed as best for the Indians. In particular, he did

not want to restrict the potential development of the reservation timber resources, which he

saw as the keystone of the Colville economy. He believed that unless the Indian Service or

the tribes themselves spoke up for their interests, they would

be shoved into the background by more aggressive white interests along the

reservoir shore. . . . When the Park Service officials speak of "the public interest"

we fear that in their mind's eye they see primarily the motoring and boating

public, the picnickers and the swimmers. [52]

Greider also stood firm in defense of the recreation area, and he told Lincoln Lumber

Company that its use of the Sanpoil site would expire with its permit at the end of the year. It

is unclear how the situation was finally resolved, but under the Tri-Party Agreement signed

in 1946, the OIA specifically retained the right to issue and administer permits for log dumps

within the Indian Zones at sites selected in consultation with the Park Service. The agreement

likewise allowed the Park Service, in consultation with the OIA, to designate sites suitable

for recreation in the Indian Zones. [53]

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

laro/adhi/adhi3a.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:46 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 4:

Endnotes

1 Robert H. Keller and Michael F. Turek, American Indians and National Parks (Tucson:

University of Arizona Press, 1998), 233.

2 Ibid.; Richard N. Ellis, ed., The Western American Indian: Case Studies in Tribal History

(Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1972), 144-145.

3 Mary B. Davis, ed., Native America in the Twentieth Century: An Encyclopedia (New

York: Garland Publishing, Inc., 1994), 263. The Office of Indian Affairs became the Bureau

of Indian Affairs ca. 1950.

4 Ibid.; Verne F. Ray, "Ethnic Impact of the Events Incident to the Federal Power

Development on the Colville and Spokane Indian Reservations," (prepared for CCT and STI,

Port Townsend: 1977), 74-75; Sister Maria Ilma Raufer, Black Robes and Indians on the Last

Frontier: A Story of Heroism (Milwaukee: Bruce Publishing Company, 1966), 447-448;

Jessie A. Bloodworth, "Human Resources Survey of the Colville Confederated Tribes" (Field

Report of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Portland Area Office, Colville Agency, 1959), 49-50;

David C. Wynecoop, Children of the Sun: History of the Spokane Indians (Wellpinit:

privately printed, 1969), 46.

5 William Zimmerman, Jr., Assistant Commissioner of Indian Affairs, to Harvey K. Meyer,

Superintendent, Colville Indian Agency, 5 Sept. 1933 (letter approved and signed by T. A.

Walters, First Assistant Secretary, 4 Oct. 1933), file 1.3 Colville Correspondence 1931-44,

box 714, RG 75, NARA-PAR.

6 William Zimmerman, Jr., Assistant Commissioner of Indian Affairs, to Dr. Elwood Mead,

Commissioner of Reclamation, 5 Dec. 1933 (letter approved and signed by Harold L. Ickes,

Secretary of the Interior, 22 Dec. 1933), file 1.3 Colville Correspondence 1931-44, box 714,

RG 75, NARA-PAR.

7 L. M. Holt, USBR Supervising Engineer, to Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 20 April 1934,

file 1.3 Colville Correspondence 1931-44, box 714, RG 75, NARA-PAR; USBR Supervising

Engineer to Director of Irrigation, U.S. Indian Service, 1 Dec. 1937, as quoted in Ray,

"Ethnic Impact," 83; "Excerpts from Minutes of Meeting of Colville Indian Business Council

Held on January 10 and 11, 1941," file Columbia Basin Area — Problem No. 26 1941, box

126, RG 187, NARA-PAR.

8 USBR, Project History 1937, 82; USBR, Project History 1938, 56; "Memorandum of

Understanding," 6 April 1939, in USBR, "Final Environmental Statement, Columbia Basin

Project," v. II, 1975:1-2, LARO.HQ.LIB.

9 Louis Balsam, Field Representative in Charge, Colville Indian Agency, to Commissioner of
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:46 PM]

Reclamation and Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1 Aug. 1939, file Coulee Dam — Proposed

Flood Water, box 1211, RG 75, NARA-PAR.

10 John C. Page, USBR Commissioner, to Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 20 Feb. 1940, file

3, box 1, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

11 76th Congress, Public Law No. 690, An act for the Acquisition of Indian lands for the

Grand Coulee Dam and Reservoir, and for other purposes, 29 June 1940. The 1,310 limitation

does not apply to off-reservation lands.

12 Ibid.

13 P. Hetherton, Executive Officer, Washington State Planning Council, to C. E. Greider, NPS

State Supervisor, 25 Oct. 1940, file 2, box 1, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

14 R. F. Bessey, Counselor, National Resources Planning Board, to Mr. [G. H.] Fernald and

Mr. [P.] Hetherton, 15 Jan. 1941, file Columbia Basin Area — Problem No. 26 1941, box

126, RG 187, NARA-PAR; P. Hetherton, Washington State Planning Council, to R. F.

Bessey, Counselor, National Resources Planning Board, 27 Jan. 1941, file Columbia Basin

Area — Problem No. 26 1941, box 126, RG 187, NARA-PAR; G. H. Fernald to

Subcommittee on Problem No. 26, Columbia Basin Joint Investigations, 22 Jan. 1941, file

Columbia Basin Area — Problem No. 26 1941, box 126, RG 187, NARA-PAR; USBR,

Recreational Development of Lake Roosevelt: Columbia Basin Joint Investigations, Problem

26 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1945), xi.

15 "Excerpts from Minutes of Meeting of Colville Indian Business Council Held on January

10 and 11, 1941," file Columbia Basin Area — Problem No. 26 1941, box 126, RG 187,

NARA-PAR; "Resolution," 11 Jan. 1941, file Columbia Basin Area — Problem No. 26 1941,

box 126, RG 187, NARA-PAR.

16 "Minutes of Spokane Indian Tribal meeting held at the Spokane Subagency," 21 Jan. 1941,

file Columbia Basin Area — Problem No. 26 1941, box 126, RG 187, NARA-PAR.

17 O. A. Tomlinson, NPS Regional Director, Navy radio telegram to NPS Director, 14 Oct.

1941, file 3, box 1, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; "November Monthly Progress Report,"

Joint Investigations, Columbia Basin Irrigation Project, 17 Dec. 1941, file Columbia Basin

Area — General I 1941, box 125, RG 187, NARA-PAR.

18 F. A. Gross, Superintendent, Colville Indian Agency, and Carthon R. Patrie, Acting

Regional Forester, Colville Indian Agency, to Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 10 March

1941, file Columbia Basin Area — Problem No. 26 1941, box 126, RG 187, NARA-PAR.

19 "August Monthly Progress Report," Joint Investigations, Columbia Basin Irrigation

Project, 15 Sept. 1941, file Columbia Basin Area — General I 1941, box 125, RG 187,

NARA-PAR; "Recreation at Grand Coulee to Be Under National Park Service," press release,

Department of the Interior Information Service, USBR, 16 Sept. 1941, file 715 Columbia

Basin Project, Administration of Recreational Areas, Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake, Boise

USBR; Guy D. Edwards, Superintendent, Boulder Dam National Recreation Area, to NPS

Regional Director, 29 Sept. 1941, file 1, box 2, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

20 F. A. Banks, USBR Supervising Engineer, to USBR Commissioner, 30 Sept. 1941, file

Copy — CODA Historical Files #2, LARO.HQ.SUP; Guy D. Edwards, Superintendent,
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:46 PM]

Boulder Dam National Recreation Area, to NPS Regional Director, 29 Sept. 1941, file 1, box

2, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

21 F. A. Banks, USBR Supervising Engineer, to USBR Commissioner, 30 Sept. 1941, file

Copy — CODA Historical Files #2, LARO.HQ.SUP.

22 Stephen R. Tripp, NPS Administrative Assistant, to NPS Director, 16 Feb. 1942, file 1, box

2, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; NPS Regional Director to NPS Director, 30 Sept. 1941, file

1, box 2, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; "Agreement Between the Bureau of Reclamation and

the National Park Service Relating to the Development and Use of the Grand Coulee

Reservoir Area," 22 July 1942, file 715 Columbia Basin Project, Administration of

Recreational Areas, Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake, Boise USBR.

23 P. R. Nalder, USBR Associate Engineer, to USBR Supervising Engineer, 11 Sept. 1941,

file 715 Columbia Basin Project, Administration of Recreational Areas, Franklin D.

Roosevelt Lake, Boise USBR.

24 Walter V. Woehlke, OIA, to Secretary [of the Interior], 30 Dec. 1943, file 715 Columbia

Basin Project, Administration of Recreational Areas, Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake, Boise

USBR.

25 Claude E. Greider, NPS Recreation Planner, to F. A. Banks, USBR Supervising Engineer,

21 Feb. 1944, file 715 Columbia Basin Project, Administration of Recreational Areas,

Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake, Boise USBR.

26 F. A. Banks, USBR Supervising Engineer, to USBR Commissioner, 26 Feb. 1944, file 715

Columbia Basin Project, Administration of Recreational Areas, Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake,

Boise USBR.

27 Warner W. Gardner, DOI Solicitor, Opinion (Memorandum to Assistant Secretary

Chapman), 29 Dec. 1945, file 2, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

28 Newton B. Drury, NPS Director, to NPS Regional Director, 18 Feb. 1946, file 6, box 6,

RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

2929 Raymond E. Hoyt, NPS Chief Recreation Study Division, to NPS Regional Director, 1

March 1946, file 6, box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Paul Lemargie, DOI Field Solicitor,

to Homer Robinson, LARO Superintendent, 29 Sept. 1958, file 3, box 3 of 3, LARO #95,

Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

30 Herbert Maier, NPS Acting Regional Director, to NPS Regional Director, 10 April 1946,

file 3, box 3, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

31 John McGue, OIA Acting Commissioner, to USBR Commissioner, 16 Aug. 1946, file

Copy — CODA Historical Files #2, LARO.HQ.SUP.

32 Ibid.; Colville Business Council Resolutions T-27 and T-28, April 1946, file 1946 1-60,

box 1, sub-group 1941 to 1951 (original copies), archive series Tribal Resolutions, CCT

Archives Center, Nespelem.

33 "Memorandum of Agreement Among the Bureau of Reclamation, National Park Service,

and Office of Indian Affairs Relating to the Planning, Development, and Administration of
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:46 PM]

the Coulee Dam Recreational Area," 18 Dec. 1946: II.1-3, IV.2-6, file 2, box 3 of 3, LARO

#95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

34 Ibid., III.1-2, 4, 8-9, 13.

35 United States Statutes at Large, 1946, v. 60, part 1 (Washington: Government Printing

Office, 1947), 885.

36 Claude E. Greider, LARO Supervisor, to NPS Regional Director, 8 Aug. 1947, file History

— Coulee Dam NRA, box 4, LARO.HQ.LIB; O. A. Tomlinson, NPS Regional Director, to

LARO Superintendent, 13 Aug. 1947, file History — Coulee Dam NRA, box 4,

LARO.HQ.LIB.

37 Donald L. Fixico, Termination and Relocation: Federal Indian Policy, 1945-1960

(Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1986), 33, 63-69, 93-99, 101; Ellis, Western

American Indian, 188-189; Wilcomb E. Washburn, Red Man's Land/White Man's Law: A

Study of the Past and Present Status of the American Indian (New York: Charles Scribner's

Sons, 1971), 85.

38 Fixico, Termination and Relocation, 103-104; Davis, Native America, 222.

39 George Pierre, American Indian Crisis (San Antonio: Naylor Co., 1971), 39, as quoted in

Fixico, Termination and Relocation, 184.

40 Fixico, Termination and Relocation, 134-156; Davis, Native America, 222.

41 Report on Tribes Ready for Termination of Federal Supervision, House Report Number

2680, 83rd Congress, 2nd session, 1954, in Fixico, Termination and Relocation, 207

(Appendix 2); "The Statement from the Spokane Tribe of Indians to Glenn L. Emmons,

Commissioner of Indian Affairs, Concerning ‘Planning and Programming of the Spokane

Tribe,'" Spokane, Washington, 21 Jan. 1955, file 130 Colville, Long Range and Withdrawal,

box 6, RG 75, NARA-PAR; "Separation Asked by Spokane Tribe," Spokane Chronicle, 19

Oct. 1966, p. 3. The Indian Claims Commission settled one land claim in 1967, awarding STI

$6.7 million in additional compensation for lands taken in 1887.

42 Orme Lewis, Assistant Secretary of the Interior, to Hiram Runnels, 13 June 1953, box 356,

Horan Collection, WSU; Bloodworth, "Human Resources Survey," 51-52; Vine Deloria, Jr.,

Custer Died for Your Sins: An Indian Manifesto (n.p.: Macmillan Co., 1969), 72-76; Colville

Confederated Tribes, "The Year of the Coyote: Centennial Celebration, July 2, 1972"

(Nespelem: 1972), 4-5; Raufer, Black Robes and Indians, 452; John Alan Ross, "Political

Conflict on the Colville Reservation," Northwest Anthropological Association Research Notes

2 (1968): 75, 79; Senate bill S 1442, 88th Cong., 2nd Sess., 20 Aug. 1964, file 14, box 203,

Jackson Coll., UW; Senate bill S 1413, 89th Cong., 1st Sess., 8 March 1965, file 11, box 206,

Jackson Coll., UW; Senate bill S 282, 90th Cong., 1st Sess., 12 Jan. 1967, file 19, box 208,

Jackson Coll., UW; Senate bill S 541, 91st Cong., 1st Sess., 22 Jan. 1969, file 7, box 213,

Jackson Coll., UW; Senate bill S 3518, 91st Cong., 2nd Sess., 26 Feb. 1970, file 44, box 214,

Jackson Coll., UW; NPS, "Master Plan of Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," chapter 3,

(29 Jan. 1965), 2, file D18 Master Planning 1965-67, LARO.HQ.ADM.

43 Fixico, Termination and Relocation, 28-31; Ellis, Western American Indian, 174;

Wynecoop, Children of the Sun, 43; Davis, Native America, 611-612; Ray, "Ethnic Impact,"
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:46 PM]

72, 75; Colville Tribes — Grand Coulee Settlement, Hearing before the Subcommittee on

Oversight and Investigations of the Committee on Natural Resources, House of

Representatives, 103d Cong., 2d Sess. on H.R. 4757, 2 Aug. 1994: 6, 26, 56-58, 81. Although

the tribe filed too late on this second claim, the issue is still under discussion, according to

USBR in Coulee Dam.

44 Raufer, Black Robes and Indians, 437-441; Plaintiffs' Brief, Confederated Tribes of the

Colville Reservation, et al., v. United States of America, Docket No. 181-C, before the Indian

Claims Commission, Feb. 1973, file 15, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO;

"Final Report, Colville/Spokane Task Force, September, 1980," unlabeled file,

LARO.HQ.SUP; Jess Walter, "Tribes win settlement over dam," Spokesman-Review, 23

March 1994, A-1; Colville Tribes — Grand Coulee Settlement, Hearing before the

Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations of the Committee on Natural Resources,

House of Representatives, 103d Cong., 2d Sess. on H.R. 4757, 2 Aug. 1994: 6, 26, 56-58, 81.

45 Nathan R. Margold, DOI Solicitor, to Secretary of the Interior, 28 Dec. 1939, file 2, box 3

of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; H. W. Bashore, USBR Assistant

Commissioner, to USBR Supervising Engineer, 12 March 1943, file 715 Columbia Basin

Project, Administration of Recreational Areas, Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake, Boise USBR;

Claude E. Greider, LARO Supervisor, to NPS Regional Director, 28 Feb. 1947, file 715

Columbia Basin Project, Administration of Recreational Areas, Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake,

Boise USBR; Wesley K. Nelson, USBR Commissioner, to USBR Regional Director, 2 Sept.

1947, file 715 Columbia Basin Project, Administration of Recreational Areas, Franklin D.

Roosevelt Lake, Boise USBR; R. J. Newell, USBR Regional Director, to USBR

Commissioner, 29 Sept. 1947, file 715 Columbia Basin Project, Administration of

Recreational Areas, Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake, Boise USBR.

46 Paul R. Franke, NPS Acting Director, to NPS Regional Director, 30 Oct. 1950, file W30

Jurisdiction, LARO.HQ.ADM; Sanford Hill, NPS Assistant Regional Director, to LARO

Superintendent, 11 Dec. 1950, file D18 Planning Program, closed 6/3/53, LARO.HQ.ADM.

47 D. S. Myer, BIA Commissioner, to Walt Horan, U.S. House of Representatives, 15 March

1951, file Coulee Rec. Area 1948-52, box 216, Horan Collection, WSU.

48 "The Statement from the Spokane Tribe of Indians to Glenn L. Emmons, Commissioner of

Indian Affairs, Concerning ‘Planning and Programming of the Spokane Tribe,'" Spokane,

Washington, 21 Jan. 1955, file 130 Colville, Long Range and Withdrawal, box 6, RG 75,

NARA-PAR; Mastin G. White, DOI Solicitor, to Secretary of the Interior, 16 May 1951,

W30 Jurisdiction, LARO.HQ.ADM.

49 Ronald F. Lee, NPS Acting Director, to NPS Regional Director, 17 Aug. 1951, file 1, box

6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Alfred C. Kuehl, NPS Regional Landscape Architect, to

NPS Assistant Regional Director, 25 April 1952, file 1, box 1, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

50 Hugh Peyton, LARO Superintendent, to Floyd H. Phillips, Superintendent, Colville Indian

Agency, 3 April 1957, file H14 Area and Service History, LARO.HQ.ADM.

51 Homer Robinson, LARO Superintendent, to Paul Lemargie, DOI Field Solicitor, 19 Aug.

1958, file 3, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Robinson to LARO Files,

16 Sept. 1958, file A44 Cooperative Agreements, BOR Outside Storage Space,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Lemargie to Robinson, 29 Sept. 1958, file 3, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat.

#3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:46 PM]

52 Wilkinson, Cragun & Barker, Counsel for Spokane Tribe, "Spokane Indian Hunting,

Fishing and Boating Rights in the Lake Roosevelt Indian Zone," 20 May 1959, file A44

Triparty Agreement, LARO.HQ.ADM.

53 Ibid.; Glen A. Wilkinson, Wilkinson, Cragun & Barker, to Secretary of the Interior, 21

March 1960, box 360, Horan Collection, WSU.

54 Homer Robinson, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Director, 30 Sept. 1959, file 3, box 3 of

3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

55 Glen A. Wilkinson, Wilkinson, Cragun & Barker, to Secretary of the Interior, 21 March

1960, box 360, Horan Coll., WSU; Edmund T. Fritz, Deputy Solicitor, DOI Office of the

Solicitor, to Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 27 May 1960, file Copy — CODA Hist. Files

#2, LARO.HQ.SUP.

56 Public Land Order 2087, 9 May 1960, file 2, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250,

LARO.HQ.PAO.

57 Howard Stewart, CCT Tribal Game Protector, to Ellis L. Newbill, 29 April 1963, file 3,

box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Homer Robinson, LARO

Superintendent, to Paul Lemargie, Field Solicitor, 24 May 1963, file 3, box 3 of 3, LARO

#95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Lemargie to Robinson, 4 June 1963, file Copy — CODA

Hist. Files #2, LARO.HQ.SUP.

58 Robert D. Dellwo, Dellwo, Rudolf & Grant, to David Richie, LARO Superintendent, 15

Aug. 1968, file Copy — CODA Hist. Files #2, LARO.HQ.SUP.

59 Robert D. Dellwo, Dellwo, Rudolf & Grant, to LARO Superintendent, 10 Jan. 1968, file

A44 Tri-party Agreement, LARO.HQ.ADM; David Richie, LARO Superintendent, to

Dellwo, 28 Aug. 1968, file Copy — CODA Hist. Files #2, LARO.HQ.SUP.

60 Robert D. Dellwo, Dellwo, Rudolf & Grant, to David Richie, LARO Superintendent, 11

March 1969, file L54 Water Matters, LARO.HQ.ADM.

61 Robert D. Dellwo, Dellwo, Rudolf & Grant, to Wayne R. Howe, LARO Superintendent,

11 Feb. 1971, file A94 Spokane Tribe, LARO.HQ.ADM; Dellwo to James F. Walsh, Seattle

District Corps of Engineers, 4 March 1971, file A94 Spokane Tribe, LARO.HQ.ADM; Walsh

to Dellwo, 17 March 1971, file Copy — CODA Hist. Files #2, LARO.HQ.SUP. It is not

known when the Corps gave up this permitting authority (Roberta Miller, LARO Program

Assistant, personal communication to Nancy F. Renk, 17 October 2000).

62 Robert D. Dellwo, Dellwo, Rudolf & Grant, to W. E. Rawlings, USBR Project Manager,

and David Richie, LARO Superintendent, 15 Jan. 1969, file Copy — CODA Hist. Files #2,

LARO.HQ.SUP.

63 Davis, Native America, 691-692; Robert D. Dellwo, "Indian Water Rights — The Winters

Doctrine Updated," Gonzaga Law Review 6 (Spring 1971): 215, 223.

64 Memo from T. J. Mutch to Files, 25 March 1969, file L54 Water Matters,

LARO.HQ.ADM.

65 W. E. Rawlings, USBR Project Manager, to USBR Regional Director, 27 March 1969, file
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:46 PM]

L54 Water Matters, LARO.HQ.ADM; H. T. Nelson, USBR Regional Director, to DOI

Regional Solicitor, 8 May 1969, file Copy — CODA Hist. Files #2, LARO.HQ.SUP.

66 Paul Lemargie, DOI Field Solicitor, to Associate Solicitor, Reclamation and Power, 6 Jan.

1970, file A94 Spokane Tribe, LARO.HQ.ADM.

67 J. Lane Morthland, Associate Solicitor, Reclamation and Power, to Commissioner of

Reclamation, 5 March 1971, file L54 Water Matters, LARO.HQ.ADM.

68 Ellis L. Armstrong, USBR, Washington, D.C., to Robert D. Dellwo, Dellwo, Rudolf &

Grant, 10 March 1972, file Copy — CODA Hist. Files #2, LARO.HQ.SUP.

69 Fay G. Cohen, Treaties on Trial: The Continuing Controversy over Northwest Indian

Fishing Rights, (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1986), 3-11; Vine Deloria, Jr.,

Behind the Trail of Broken Treaties: An Indian Declaration of Independence, (New York:

Dell Publishing Co., Inc., 1974), 26-27.

70 Deloria, Jr. Behind the Trail of Broken Treaties, 22-25, 33-39, 44-80.

71 John Reid, "Colville Tribe Bans Hunting," Spokesman-Review, 17 Aug. 1971, p. 15.

72 Fenton Roskelley, "Colvilles Lay Claim to Lake Roosevelt," Spokane Daily Chronicle, 23

Nov. 1971.

73 Unsigned, "Notes on Nov. 24, meeting with Colville Tribal Committee," [ca. Nov. 1971],

file Copy — CODA Hist. Files #2, LARO.HQ.SUP.

74 Wayne R. Howe, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 16 Nov. 1971, file

Copy — CODA Hist. Files #2, LARO.HQ.SUP; Fenton Roskelley, "Indians Claiming

Columbia's Water," Spokane Daily Chronicle, 23 Nov. 1971; Howe to NPS Assistant

Director, Park Support Services, 15 Dec. 1971, file W30 Jurisdiction, LARO.HQ.ADM.

75 Notes from meeting at Superintendent's Office, 26 April 1972, with Colville Tribal

Council, file A94 Colville Confederated Tribes, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual

Report, CODA," CY1972: 7, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM;

[name illegible], President, and M. McGrath, Secretary, Wilbur Boat Club, to Senators

[Henry] Jackson and [Warren] Magnusson and Congressman [Thomas] Foley, 4 May 1972,

file Copy — CODA Hist. Files #2, LARO.HQ.SUP; unsigned, "Notes on Nov. 24, meeting

with Colville Tribal Committee," [ca. Nov. 1971], file Copy — CODA Hist. Files #2,

LARO.HQ.SUP.

76 Notes from meeting at Superintendent's Office, 26 April 1972, with Colville Tribal

Council, file A94 Colville Confederated Tribes, LARO.HQ.ADM.

77 Wayne R. Howe, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 29 March 1972, file

Copy — CODA Hist. Files #2, LARO.HQ.SUP; Paul Lemargie, DOI Field Solicitor, to

LARO Superintendent, 28 March 1972, file 8, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250,

LARO.HQ.PAO; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1972: 5, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM.

78 Wayne R. Howe, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 29 March 1972, file

Copy — CODA Hist. Files #2, LARO.HQ.SUP; Howe to NPS Regional Director, 12 May
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:46 PM]

1972, file Copy — CODA Hist. Files #2, LARO.HQ.SUP.

79 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1972: 7, file A2621 Superintendent's

Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM.

80 Tom McPherson, Secretary, Wilbur Chamber of Commerce, to Wayne R. Howe, LARO

Superintendent, 2 May 1972, file Copy — CODA Hist. Files #2, LARO.HQ.SUP.

81 "Meeting with Mr. Emmet E. Willard, - Secretary's Field Representative, Portland,

concerning Coulee Dam, & Chief Joseph Dam," 7 Feb. 1972, file A94 BIA,

LARO.HQ.ADM.

82 Ibid.

83 Ibid.

84 John A. Rutter, NPS Regional Director, to Emmet E. Willard, DOI Field Representative,

11 April 1972, file A94 Colville Confederated Tribes, LARO.HQ.ADM.

85 "Statement of Spokane Tribal Rights and Policies on Roosevelt Lake, for Presentation to

Secretary's Task Force on Roosevelt Lake," [May 1972], file 8, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat.

#3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

86 John McGue, OIA Acting Commissioner, to USBR Commissioner, 16 Aug. 1946,

LARO.HQ.SUP, file Copy — CODA Historical Files #2.

87 Emmet E. Willard, Chairman, Colville and Spokane Indian Task Force, to Mel Tonasket

and Alex Sherwood, 24 July 1972, file 9, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250,

LARO.HQ.PAO; Mel Tonasket, CCT Chairman, and Alex Sherwood, STI Chairman, to

Emmett [sic] Willard, Chairman, Colville and Spokane Indian Task Force, 27 July 1972, file

9, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; "Task Force Meeting, August 1,

1972," file 9, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

88 Notes from meeting on 29 Aug. 1972 [on CCT stationery], file 9, box 3 of 3, LARO #95,

Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

89 "Roosevelt Lake Task Force Meeting," 19 Sept. 1972, file 9, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat.

#3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

90 Ibid.

91 John A. Rutter, NPS Regional Director, to NPS Director, 27 Nov. 1972, file 10, box 3 of 3,

LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

92 William N. Burgen, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 13 Oct. 1972, file 9,

box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Robert D. Dellwo, Dellwo, Rudolf &

Grant, to Emmett [sic] Willard, 30 Oct. 1972, file 9, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250,

LARO.HQ.PAO.

93 R. K. Seely, USBR Operations Manager, Coulee Dam, to USBR Regional Director, Boise,

28 Nov. 1972, file 10, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:46 PM]

94 Glenn F. Galbraith, STI Executive Director, to William N. Burgen, LARO Superintendent,

8 Feb. 1973, file Copy - CODA Hist. Files #2, LARO.HQ.SUP; Burgen to Galbraith, 13 Feb.

1973, file Copy - CODA Hist. Files #2, LARO.HQ.SUP; Burgen to NPS Regional Director,

16 Feb. 1973, file Copy - CODA Hist. Files #2, LARO.HQ.SUP; Burgen to NPS Regional

Director, 2 March 1973, file Copy - CODA Hist. Files #2, LARO.HQ.SUP.

95 John A. Rutter, NPS Regional Director, to NPS Associate Director of Operations, 12 April

1973, file Copy - CODA Hist. Files #2, LARO.HQ.SUP.

96 Joseph C. Rumburg, Jr., NPS Deputy Associate Director of Operations, to NPS Regional

Director, 20 April 1973, file Copy - CODA Hist. Files #2, LARO.HQ.SUP; William N.

Burgen, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 16 May 1973, file Copy - CODA

Hist. Files #1, LARO.HQ.SUP. According to Arthur C. Hathaway, former LARO Chief of

Interpretation, Glenn Galbraith had refused a request from Indian rights activists to enter the

Spokane Reservation (Hathaway, personal communication to Kathryn L. McKay, 1 March

2001).

97 Alex Sherwood, STI Chairman, to Rogers Morton, Secretary of the Interior, 12 June 1973,

file Staff File of Bill First — Indians — Spokane Tribal Council 1973-1975, box 159, Foley

Coll., WSU.

98 "Position Paper of the Colville Confederated Tribes Regarding the Questions Surrounding

the Construction of Grand Coulee Dam and Lake Roosevelt," ca. Feb. 1973: 12-14, file Copy

— CODA Hist. Files #2, LARO.HQ.SUP; Wayne R. Howe, NPS Acting [Regional] Director,

to Craig Swanson, DOI Regional Director for Management and Budget, Portland, 14 March

1973, file A94 BIA, LARO.HQ.ADM.

99 Paul Larson, LARO Chief Ranger, "Comments — Notes re: Barnaby Island," 3 May 1973,

file 7, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; "Superintendent's Annual Report,

CODA," CY1973: 9, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM.

100 William N. Burgen, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 7 June 1973, file

7, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

101 Ibid.

102 Joseph C. Rumburg, Jr., NPS Acting Associate Director, to NPS Regional Director, 25

April 1973, file Copy — CODA Hist. Files #1, LARO.HQ.SUP; NPS Regional Director to

NPS Associate Director of Operations, 15 June 1973, file 7, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat.

#3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

103 DOI Solicitor to Secretary of the Interior, draft "Opinion on the boundary and status of

title to certain lands of the Colville Indian Reservation,"[ca. July 1973], file A94 Colville

Confederated Tribes, LARO.HQ.ADM; Kent Frizzell, DOI Solicitor, to Secretary of the

Interior, "Opinion on the boundaries of and status of title to certain lands within the Colville

and Spokane Indian Reservations," 3 June 1974, file A44 Tri-party Agreement,

LARO.HQ.ADM.

104 Rogers C. B. Morton, Secretary of the Interior, to Assistant Secretary, Energy and

Resources, Assistant Secretary, Fish, Wildlife and Parks, and BIA Commissioner, 3 June

1974, file 14, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; "K. Cash Notes on TriParty: Prepared for DC Trip w/ Don Tracy," [1988], file Multi-Party Agreement,
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:46 PM]

LARO.HQ.SUP.

105 Edward J. Kurtz, NPS Acting Regional Director, to NPS Deputy Director, 2 Oct. 1974,

file W2623 Situation Information, LARO.HQ.ADM.

106 William N. Burgen, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 7 March 1975, file

Copy — CODA Hist. Files #1, LARO.HQ.SUP; Robert D. Dellwo, Dellwo, Rudolf &

Schroeder, to Roy H. Sampsel, DOI Special Assistant to the Secretary, Portland, 13 May

1975, file 11, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Kelly Cash, former

LARO Assistant Superintendent, personal communication to Nancy F. Renk, 1 June 2000.

107 C. Richard Neely, DOI Assistant Regional Solicitor, to Roy Sampsel, DOI Special

Assistant to the Secretary, 15 July 1974, file 10, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250,

LARO.HQ.PAO.

108 James H. Stevens, Spokane Agency Superintendent, to File, 26 June 1974, file 14, box 3

of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; John A. Rutter, NPS Regional Director, to

Rodney J. Vissia, USBR Regional Director, and Francis E. Briscoe, BIA Portland Area

Director, 28 April 1975, file 7, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO;

Conveyance of Responsibility For Operation of Campground and Receipt of Property, signed

by Alfred E. McCoy, Spokane Tribal Business Council, and William N. Burgen, LARO

Superintendent, 15 May 1975, file 7, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO;

Conveyance of Responsibility For Operation of Campground and Receipt of Property, signed

by Al Aubertin, CCT Business Council and William N. Burgen, LARO Superintendent, 16

May 1975, file 7, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

109 C. Richard Neely, DOI Assistant Regional Solicitor, to Roy Sampsel, DOI Special

Assistant to the Secretary, 15 July 1974, file 10, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250,

LARO.HQ.PAO; Neely to Robert D. Dellwo, Dellwo, Rudolf & Schroeder, 17 Dec. 1974,

file 6, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Dellwo to Neely, 20 Dec. 1974,

file 7, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Neely to DOI Field Solicitor, 27

Dec. 1974, file 7, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

110 Resolution [proposed ], Spokane Business Council, [ca. Feb. 1975], file Copy — CODA

Hist. Files #1, LARO.HQ.SUP; Resolution 1975-235, Colville Business Council, 7 April

1975, file 6, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

111 William N. Burgen, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Associate Regional Director, 23 April

1975, file A94 Colville Confederated Tribe, LARO.HQ.ADM.

112 William W. Dunmire, LARO Superintendent, "Summary of Meeting with Colville

Confederated Tribes Fish & Game Committee, Nespelem, 18 Oct. 1979," file 11, box 3 of 3,

LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Dunmire to NPS Regional Director, 16 Nov. 1979,

file 7 and file 11, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

113 Gary J. Kuiper, LARO Superintendent, to Alan C. Stat [sic], 14 Dec. 1984, file A44 TriParty Agreement, LARO.HQ.ADM; Alan C. Stay, CCT Attorney, to Kuiper, 2 Jan. 1985, file

Multi-Party Management Agreement thru 1986, LARO.HQ.SUP; Stay to CCT Land &

Forestry Committee and Fish & Wildlife Committee, 2 Jan. 1985, file Multi-Party

Management Agreement thru 1986, LARO.HQ.SUP.

114 Robert A. Olson, USBR Acting Commissioner, to NPS Director, 20 Feb. 1985, file 16,

box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; LARO Superintendent to NPS Regional
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:46 PM]

Director, 12 March 1985, file A44 Tri-Party Agreement, LARO.HQ.ADM.

115 Donald E. Tracy, USBR Project Manager, to LARO Superintendent, 9 Oct. 1985, file

A44 Tri-Party Agreement, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Final. Minutes Freeboard Lands Management

Meeting — October 30, 1985," file Multi-Party Management Agreement thru 1986,

LARO.HQ.SUP; "Finalized Draft, Minutes Freeboard Lands Management Meeting —

December 9, 1985," file Multi-Party Management Agreement thru 1986, LARO.HQ.SUP.

116 George M. Davis, Colville Agency Superintendent, to USBR Project Manager, 2 Jan.

1986, file A44 Tri-Party Agreement, LARO.HQ.ADM.

117 Al Aubertin, Colville Business Council Chairman, to Gary J. Kuiper, LARO

Superintendent, Don Tracy, USBR Project Manager, and George Davis, Colville Agency

Superintendent, 9 Jan. 1986, file A44 Tri-Party Agreement, LARO.HQ.ADM.

118 "Final, Minutes Freeboard Lands Management Meeting, January 15, 1986," file Copy —

CODA Hist. Files. #1, LARO.HQ.SUP; "Draft, Minutes Freeboard Lands Management

Meeting, March 18, 1986," file Copy — CODA Hist. Files #1, LARO.HQ.SUP; Ron Sarff,

NPS Regional Office, facsimile to LARO Superintendent, 14 Jan. 1986, file Tri-Party Notes

and Copies, LARO.HQ.SUP.

119 Patrick J. Hamilton, BIA Area Personnel Officer, to Colville Agency Superintendent and

Spokane Agency Superintendent, 21 Jan. 1986, file Multi-Party Management Agreement thru

1986, LARO.HQ.SUP.

120 William J. Briggle, NPS Acting Regional Director, draft memo to NPS Assistant Director

for Personnel and Administrative Services, 20 Jan. 1986, file Colville Confederated Tribes,

LARO.HQ.SUP.

121 Stanley Speaks, BIA Area Director, to Don Tracy, USBR Project Manager, 7 Feb. 1986,

unlabeled file, LARO.HQ.SUP; L. W. Lloyd, USBR Regional Director, to USBR Project

Manager, 3 March 1986, file 12, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

122 Gary J. Kuiper, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Acting Regional Director, 4 April 1986,

file A44 Tri-Party Agreement, LARO.HQ.ADM; Kelly Cash, former LARO Assistant

Superintendent, personal communication to Nancy F. Renk, 1 June 2000; "Briefing

Statement, Coulee Dam National Recreation Area (CODA), Renegotiation of Tri-Party

Agreement," 20 May 1987, file Multi-Party Agreement 1987, LARO.HQ.SUP. The Lake

Roosevelt Concession Management Plan, approved in January 1991, limited the total number

of concessions and houseboats lake-wide. More importantly, it allotted concessions

proportionately according to the amount of land managed, giving the Reservation Zone 45

percent of the total (CCT, NPS, STI, USBR, BIA, "Lake Roosevelt Concession Management

Plan," Jan. 1991: 6-10).

123 Charles H. Odegaard, NPS Regional Director, to NPS Deputy Director, 1 July 1987, file

A44 Tri-Party Agreement, LARO.HQ.ADM; Mel Tonasket, Colville Business Council

Chairman, to Tom Foley, U.S. House of Representatives, 9 July 1987, file 100th Cong./Dept.

Files/Dept. of Interior/Bureau of Indian Affairs — Lake Roosevelt Management Plan, box

276, Foley Coll., WSU.

124 Draft Response to Proposed Lake Roosevelt Management Agreement, 27 July 1987, file

Multi-Party Agreement 1987, LARO.HQ.SUP.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:46 PM]

125 David A. (signature illegible), Office of the Solicitor, to Howard Shafferman, DOI

Deputy Solicitor, 6 Aug. 1987, file Copy — CODA Hist. Files #1, LARO.HQ.SUP; Briefing

Statement [prepared by NPS Regional Office for Secretary of the Interior], 30 Sept. 1987, file

Multi-Party Agreement 1987, LARO.HQ.SUP.

126 Mel Tonasket, Colville Business Council Chairman, and Joe V. Flett, Spokane Tribal

Council Chairman, to James W. Ziglar, Assistant Secretary for Water and Science, 6 Aug.

1987, unlabeled file, LARO.HQ.SUP.

127 Charles H. Odegaard, NPS Regional Director, to NPS Director, 8 Dec. 1987, file A44

Tri-Party Agreement, LARO.HQ.ADM.

128 Catherine Wilson, Special Assistant to Assistant Secretary of Indian Affairs, to Haydn

Lee, Special Assistant to USBR Commissioner, 6 Jan. 1988, file A44 Tri-Party Agreement,

LARO.HQ.ADM.

129 George M. Davis, Colville Agency Superintendent, to LARO Superintendent, 9 Feb.

1988, file Colville Confederated Tribes, LARO.HQ.SUP.

130 "Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, New Management Agreement," 18 April 1988,

loose papers, LARO.HQ.SUP; CCT press release, "BIA Official Conducts Field Meetings on

Lake Roosevelt Multi-Party Agreement," 26 May 1988, loose papers, LARO.HQ.SUP;

"Negotiation of Agreement for Management of Lake Roosevelt, Coulee Dam National

Recreation Area," briefing statement prepared for NPS Deputy Regional Director, 26 May

1988, loose papers, LARO.HQ.SUP; "Multi-party agreement to manage lake resources,"

Wilbur Register, 2 June 1988; Kelly Cash, former LARO Assistant Superintendent, personal

communication to Nancy F. Renk, 1 June 2000.

131 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1988:1, file A2621 Superintendent's

Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Review of language concerning the Management of Lake

Roosevelt as contained in the House Appropriations Bill, p. 47," 28 July 1988, unlabeled file,

LARO.HQ.SUP; Kelly Cash, former LARO Assistant Superintendent, personal

communication to Nancy F. Renk, 1 June 2000.

132 Lawrence E. Cox, DOI Regional Solicitor, to Dennis Daugherty, Associate Solicitor,

Division of Indian Affairs, [ca. January 1989], file 13, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250,

LARO.HQ.PAO; "Lake Roosevelt Management Agreement Meeting, October 25-26, 1989,

Washington, D.C.," file Multi-Party Agreement, LARO.HQ.SUP; Negotiating Team

Agreement, 8 March 1990, file A44 Multi-Party Agreement, LARO.HQ.ADM.

133 Kelly Cash, former LARO Assistant Superintendent, personal communication to Gretchen

Luxenberg, 1 March 2001.

134 Lake Roosevelt Cooperative Management Agreement, 5 April 1990: 1-3, file Multiparty

Agrmt April 1990, LARO.HQ.ADM.

135 Negotiating Team Agreement, 8 March 1990, file A44 Multi-Party Agreement,

LARO.HQ.ADM.

136 Ibid., 4-9.

137 Ibid., 9-10, 14.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:46 PM]

138 Jude C. Stensgar, Chairman, Colville Business Council, to Gary J. Kuiper, LARO

Superintendent, 4 April 1990, file Copy — CODA Historical Files #1, LARO.HQ.SUP.

139 Ibid., 12; Kelly Cash, former LARO Assistant Superintendent, personal communication to

Nancy F. Renk, 1 June 2000.

140 Ibid.; "Tribes celebrate having a say in lake's management," The Star, 26 April 1990, p. 1.

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

laro/adhi/adhi4n.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4a.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:48 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 4:

Agreements and Disagreements: From TriParty Agreement to Multi-Party Agreement

(continued)

Act of June 29, 1940

With waters rising rapidly, Congress finally enacted legislation, drafted by Reclamation and

the OIA, to acquire Indian lands for the Grand Coulee project. A few months prior to

passage, John C. Page, Commissioner of Reclamation, had suggested wording to tighten up

the language concerning Indian rights. This limitation was needed, he explained, to help the

Bureau "sponsor the greatest possible development of reservoirs" by working with other

federal agencies. He believed that the limits of any reserved rights had to be clearly defined

before the agencies could effectively plan their work. [10] The Act of June 29, 1940

(Acquisition of Indian Lands for Grand Coulee Dam, 54 Stat.703), gave the United States "all

the right, title, and interest of the Indians in and to the tribal and allotted lands within the

Spokane and Colville Reservations," up to 1,310-foot elevation, except at the Klaxta townsite

where the government was allowed to take lands above that line. In addition, the act gave the

government the right to take additional reservation lands "from time to time" as needed for

utilities and roads in connection with the Grand Coulee project. The Secretary of the Interior

was allowed to determine "just and equitable compensation," with payments for tribal lands

being transferred to the appropriate tribal account. Compensation due to individual owners

was transferred to the Superintendent of the Colville Agency to credit to the person's account.

The Secretary of the Interior was then permitted to use these funds to purchase other lands

and improvements or move existing improvements to a new site to benefit the allottee. [11]

Section 1 of the 1940 Act contained a key paragraph that has generated more confusion,

controversy, and pages of legal opinion than probably any other document pertaining to the

Grand Coulee project. It states,

The Secretary of the Interior, in lieu of reserving rights of hunting, fishing, and

boating to the Indians in the areas granted under this Act, shall set aside

approximately one-quarter of the entire reservoir area for the paramount use of

the Indians of the Spokane and Colville Reservations for hunting, fishing, and

boating purposes, which rights shall be subject only to such reasonable

regulations as the Secretary may prescribe for the protection and conservation of

fish and wildlife: Provided, That the exercise of the Indians' rights shall not

interfere with project operations. The Secretary shall also, where necessary, grant

to the Indians reasonable rights of access to such area or areas across any project

lands. [12]

The Committee on Problem No. 26, set up to provide guidance for the recreational

development of the reservoir area, wrestled with the implications of this paragraph. What

area was included in "approximately one-quarter of the entire reservoir"? What did
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4a.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:48 PM]

"paramount use" mean? What rights were Indians giving up in exchange for one-quarter of

the reservoir? "Isn't the setting aside of one-fourth of the entire reservoir area for the

paramount use of the Indians going to create some serious difficulties?" asked one committee

member. [13] The problems became immediately apparent and during the next year, state and

federal officials planning the new recreation area realized they needed help, particularly from

the Indians. Unable to obtain advice from the tribes, a subcommittee appointed to clarify the

1940 Act concluded that the area reserved for Indians applied to the water only and

recommended that this be adjacent to reservation lands. It further determined that

"paramount" was not "exclusive," so non-Indians could fish in an area designated for the

paramount use of the Indians as long as they had a special license like that needed for fishing

on reservation lands. Details for administration of the area set aside for the Indians would be

worked out between the OIA and the agency chosen to administer recreation in the new

reservoir. [14]

Across the lake, the Colville Business Council tried to make sense of the same issues. Mr.

Adolph, a Council member, noted that Indians had not been consulted prior to either

construction of the dam or passage of the Act of June 29, 1940. "And still today, we were not

asked what did we want," he reminded the Council. "The 1/4 that was offered to us, there is a

question as to where it may be taken. Therefore, I say let us take it slowly and consider it

thoroughly as far as our lake rights are concerned." Following questions from other Council

members, Colville Agency Superintendent Robertson said that one-quarter of the total

reservoir area would amount to approximately 22,255 acres, yet if they used the reservation

boundary of the middle of the river, the Indians would get over 33,600, an increase of more

than 11,000 acres. Mr. Lemery picked up on this point. Remembering the loss of the north

half of the reservation, he challenged fellow Council members: "We Indians are dumb and I

guess we got to admit it," he said. "If you consent to concede these 11,600 acres, you are

conceding your right to the boundary in the middle of the river. I think you should stand on

your ground, and if you have to bring a suit, you should do it." Carthon Patrie, OIA Acting

Regional Forester with the Colville Indian Agency, agreed that the Council did not need to

rush this matter but he applied some pressure by suggesting that the sooner they could tell the

Secretary what they wanted, the more favorable response they would get. He thought they

could probably get the reservoir area bordering the reservations out to the thread of the river.

By the end of the meeting, the Council refused to accept the terms of the Act of June 29,

1940, and instead chose "to retain all rights, powers and privileges heretofore held by them

by virtue of previous treaties and/or agreements between said Indians and the United States

Government." [15]

The Spokane Indians reacted with similar concerns. At a tribal council meeting held in

January 1941, Superintendent Robertson gave figures for one-quarter of the reservoir area but

explained that if the Indians got all of the Spokane River and half of the Columbia River

where they bordered reservations, they would get 40,480 acres. He told them that the

Secretary of the Interior had authority to set this much land aside for the tribes, but he wanted

to hear views from the Indians. After much discussion, the Council passed a resolution "that

we should have all the rights and full control of the entire Columbia Basin Lake, to the 1310

level, where it borders on the Spokane reservation, as long as these rights do not interfer [sic]

with the operation of the Grand Coulee project; provided that the acceptance of this area does

not jeopardize any claims the Spokane Indians may have because of losses sustained by the

tribe." [16] Late in 1941, a delegation of members from both the CCT and STI went to

Washington, D.C., to protest the limitation of their rights directly to the OIA. The outcome of

this trip is unknown. [17]

Local OIA officials reiterated the Indians' statements and noted that both tribes were more

concerned about their rights than the amount of land. They recognized the great potential for

both commercial and recreational development of the new reservoir and they wanted to be
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4a.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:48 PM]

able to participate. There was still great resentment on the reservations over the way land

acquisition had been handled, and Superintendent F. A. Gross warned, "There is far more at

stake than the hunting, fishing, and boating privileges interpreted in the strict sense of the

meaning of these words." He went on to make several farsighted recommendations, many of

which were finally embodied in the 1990 Multi-Party Agreement. These included Indian

rights in an area of more than 40,000 acres; full control, including licensing, over activities

and concessions for fishing, hunting, and boating between the 1,310 line and the thread of the

Columbia and on the entire Spokane River; a deciding vote on decisions to allow

commercial, business, grazing, and other uses on the freeboard lands adjoining their

reservations; exemption from federal and state fishing regulations; and finally, steps to

prevent pollution of the reservoir. [18]

Interagency Agreement

In addition to working through the implications of the 1940 act, many of the same people

were working on a memorandum of agreement for planning, development, and administration

of recreation in the reservoir area. Both Secretary of the Interior Harold L. Ickes and National

Park Service Director Newton B. Drury had approved negotiations among the Park Service,

Reclamation, and OIA. Indeed, the results were a foregone conclusion, and the

announcement that the Park Service would soon be taking over jurisdiction of the reservoir

was released nine days before the agreement was drafted. The agency relied heavily on its

experience at Boulder Dam National Recreation Area, and Boulder Superintendent Guy D.

Edwards played a key role in producing the agreement. Edwards arrived a week early to meet

with Claude E. Greider, State Supervisor, and Raymond E. Hoyt, Chief of the Recreation

Planning Division. Greider and Hoyt had written a rough draft based on the interbureau

agreement used at Boulder Dam. They were joined by Charles L. Gable, Chief of Park

Operators Division, and the four men refined the draft to eliminate items that had not worked

well at Boulder Dam. Edwards and Greider then drove to Coulee Dam to represent the Park

Service at the meeting to formally draft the interbureau agreement. [19]

Attending the meeting on September 25-26, 1941, were F. A. Gross, Superintendent of the

Colville Reservation; Carthon R. Patrie, OIA Regional Forester; Melvin L. Robertson,

Colville Indian Agency; L. N. Runnels, Colville Business Council; Claude E. Greider, State

Supervisor for the Park Service; Guy B. Edwards, Superintendent at Boulder Dam NRA;

Frank A. Banks, Reclamation Supervising Engineer; Philip R. Nalder, Reclamation Associate

Engineer; and the Land Clerk from the Colville Indian Agency. Edwards warmed up the

group with a presentation on Boulder Dam NRA, discussing its history, development, and

administration. Greider then took over and presented the agreement. Discussion proceeded

paragraph by paragraph, and the group referred as needed to both the MOA for Boulder Dam

NRA, approved on October 13, 1936, and the Cooperative Agreement between the OIA and

the Park Service concerning the Hualpai Indian Reservation, approved November 11, 1937.

[20]

Although they made few changes in the draft agreement during two days of negotiations,

each of the three agencies was able to present its views. Reclamation was concerned about its

potential liability for injuries or damages due to landslides, so a special clause excluding them

from damage suits was inserted into the agreement. The OIA remained concerned about

Indian rights and insisted on having the authority to approve any leases or permits for use of

the freeboard lands adjoining the reservations. In addition, it wanted to ensure that fees from

licenses, permits, and leases for hunting, fishing, and boating in the area were used to benefit

Indians. The Park Service balked, however, at the OIA's request to assume total jurisdiction

over the Indian lands acquired under the 1940 act and insisted on administering all the lands

as the only way to implement Park Service objectives. The agency further argued that a strict
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4a.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:48 PM]

interpretation of the 1940 act gave Indians one-quarter of the water surface and only a

"reasonable right of ingress and egress across the strip of land between the water surface and

the 1310 line." At the conclusion of the meeting, a draft MOA was in place and endorsed by

all attendees. [21]

This draft agreement never went into effect because Park Service Director Drury wanted to

wait until detailed studies of the recreation area were completed and the agency had resolved

the question of the area's national significance. The Director received a copy of the document

within a week of its signing in September 1941, along with a memo from the Regional

Director who stressed the importance of securing adequate funding to administer the new area

before signing the agreement. Formal agreement on management of the recreation area

remained in limbo until Reclamation and the Park Service signed a memorandum of

agreement on July 22, 1942, that assigned planning and administration of the area to the Park

Service. This was renewed annually through 1946. [22]

1945 Solicitor's Opinion

The question of Indian rights under the Act of June 29, 1940 (Acquisition of Indian Lands for

Grand Coulee Dam), continued to concern the agencies working in the newly formed

reservoir area. There were calls for a Solicitor's opinion as early as September 1941 when

Leroy D. Arnold, OIA Director of Forestry, suggested that such a decision was needed "to

obviate any possible unpleasant misunderstandings or disagreements later on." [23] Two

years later, Walter V. Woehlke, with the OIA in Chicago, urged the Secretary to define

Indian rights soon and went on to offer his interpretation of their paramount rights. These

included the right to hunt and fish, without license fees, within the exterior boundaries of

their reservations; the right to build and operate docking facilities and rent boats, all without

license fees; and the right to use shore lands to water stock. In addition, he urged that the

OIA be given jurisdiction over all the freeboard land within reservation boundaries. [24]

Predictably, both the Park Service and Reclamation objected to Woehlke's ideas, particularly

the suggestion that the OIA manage reservation shore lands. Greider stressed the need for a

single agency to maintain full administrative responsibility throughout the reservoir area, and

he claimed that the public interest would not be served by Woehlke's plan to give Indians

exclusive rights along the shore. "Undoubtedly, any qualified agency responsible for the

administration of the area as a whole could amply provide for all legitimate interests of the

Indians," wrote Greider, "and accomplish it in a manner that would not jeopardize certain

esthetic, recreational, or other values which should be preserved." [25] Frank A. Banks

agreed and added, "I am somewhat concerned because of the change in attitude of the Indian

Service officials." [26]

The controversy and bickering ended, at least for a while, with the Solicitor's Opinion of

December 29, 1945. Solicitor Warner G. Gardner did not resolve all issues and he left key

decisions to the Secretary of the Interior, but he did lay the groundwork for nearly thirty

years of jurisdiction at Lake Roosevelt. According to his opinion, the one-quarter of the

reservoir area to be set aside for the Indians could include freeboard lands as well as water

area, if the Secretary wished. Specific areas had to be allocated to the tribes, either one area

to be shared or two separate areas; Gardner suggested that the one-quarter area be divided

according to population, with 75 percent going to the CCT and 25 percent to the STI.

Furthermore, these lands should be adjacent to or near reservation lands to ensure rights of

access to the reservoir. "Other things being equal, this means that they should be located

along the former shoreline of the Indian lands," wrote Gardner. The rights of ingress and

egress across the freeboard lands should be proportionate with the intended use of the

Indians' part of the reservoir. For instance, tribal members would be allowed to build a
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4a.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:48 PM]

reasonable number of docks for their boating operations and could build other structures to

use in hunting and fishing. On the question of rights, Gardner ruled that "the special rights

granted to the Indians under the act were themselves obviously deemed to be a form of

compensation for the riparian rights of the Indians for which no separate compensation had

been made." While these were not exclusive rights, the Secretary had the power "to make the

Indian rights exclusive where necessary to insure the realization of their privileges." Gardner

refused to decide whether Indians had the right to grant licenses to others, but he did rule that

they should not be charged fees for hunting, fishing, or boating and would be subject only to

reasonable regulations to help protect and conserve wildlife. [27]

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

laro/adhi/adhi4a.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:49 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 5:

Endnotes

1 Conrad L. Wirth, NPS Supervisor of Recreation and Land Planning, to NPS Acting

Regional Director, 26 Oct. 1939, file 3, box 1, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; telegram from

John R. White, NPS Regional Director, to Phillip [sic] Kearney, NPS Associate Landscape

Architect, 7 March 1941, file 5, box 1, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; [Claude E. Greider,

LARO Supervisor], "A Very Brief History of National Park Service Activities in the Franklin

D. Roosevelt Lake Area," ca. 1 Feb. 1946, file H14 Project Histories (USBR),

LARO.HQ.ADM; U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, Annual Project

History, Columbia Basin Project, 1948: 55, on file at Grand Coulee Project Office, Grand

Coulee, Washington; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," FY1947: 3, file 3, box 3, RG

079-89-001, NARA-PSR; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," FY1948: 1-2, file 3,

box 3, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

2 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," FY1947: 3, file 3, box 3, RG 079-89-001,

NARA-PSR.

3 Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 27 Sept. 1948, file 1,

box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

4 Claude E. Greider, LARO Supervisor, to NPS Director, 29 Oct. 1945, box 4, History —

Coulee Dam NRA, LARO.HQ.LIB; Greider to NPS Director, 14 July 1950: 3, file 3, box 3,

RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Greider to F. A. Banks, USBR Supervising Engineer, 23 Aug.

1948, file 17, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

5 Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to William S. Royce, [Secretary to Walt Horan,

U.S. House], 19 Sept. 1947, file Coulee Rec. Area 1948-52, box 216, Horan Coll., WSU.

6 Don and Connie Everts, interview with Nancy F. Renk, 7 December 1999, Tape 1-A, tape

and index on file, LARO.HQ.

7 Lawrence C. Merriam, NPS Regional Director, to P. R. Nalder, USBR District Manager, 7

Aug. 1953, file 18, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.ADM; Barry Mackintosh,

NPS Historian, email to Kathryn L. McKay, 22 Nov. 1999.

8 Everts interview, Tape 1-B.

9 Harold W. Maysent, President, Washington Kamloops, Inc., to Sen. Henry M. Jackson, 31

July 1956, file 12, box 32, Access. 3560-3, Jackson Papers, UW.

10 Barry Mackintosh, NPS Historian, email to Kathryn L. McKay, 22 Nov. 1999; Lawrence

C. Merriam, NPS Regional Director, to NPS Director, 25 Jan. 1952, file History of NPS,

CODA, drawer 5, LARO.HQ.RMO; Don Everts, telephone interview with Kathryn L.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:49 PM]

McKay, 3 March 2000, notes on file, LARO.HQ; Everts interview, Tape 1-B; Harold W.

Maysent, President, Washington Kamloops, Inc., to Sen. Henry M. Jackson, 18 July 1956,

file 12, box 32, Access. 3560-3, Jackson Papers, UW; "Have Coffee Hour," Star, 30 Jan.

1958.

11 Mrs. Homer (Sis) Robinson and Don Everts, interview with Nancy F. Renk, 6 Dec. 1999,

Tape 1-A and 1-B, tape and index on file, LARO.HQ.

12 Ibid., Tape 2-A [quote], 1-A; Everts, interview, Tape 1-B.

13 Robinson and Everts interview, Tape 1-A, 2-A; Barry Mackintosh, NPS Historian, email

to Kathryn L. McKay, 22 Nov. 1999.

14 Draft press release, "New Superintendent for Coulee Dam," 22 Feb. 1967, file Interior Dept

— National Park Service, box 252, May Coll., WSU; Gary J. Kuiper, interview with Nancy

F. Renk, 10 Dec. 1999, Tape 2-B, tape and index on file, LARO.HQ; Barry Mackintosh, NPS

Historian, email to Kathryn L. McKay, 22 Nov. 1999; "New superintendent tells changes

coming in Coulee recreation area," Davenport Times, 29 June 1967, p. 3.

15 "New National Park Superintendent," Star, 30 Nov. 1967, p. 9; NPS press release, "Howe

to Coulee Dam, Wash., National Recreation Area," 31 July 1969, file Interior Dept. —

National Park Service, box 338, May Coll., WSU; Barry Mackintosh, NPS Historian, email to

Kathryn L. McKay, 22 Nov. 1999.

16 "Howe to Coulee Dam, Wash., National Recreation Area," NPS press release, 31 July

1969, file Interior Dept. — National Park Service, box 338, May Coll., WSU; "Park Official

Begins Duties in Coulee Dam," Spokane Chronicle, 14 Sept. 1969; Barry Mackintosh, NPS

Historian, email to Kathryn L. McKay, 22 Nov. 1999.

17 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1972: 2, file A2621 Superintendent's

Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; Barry Mackintosh, NPS Historian, email to Kathryn L.

McKay, 22 Nov. 1999.

18 Barry Mackintosh, NPS Historian, email to Kathryn L. McKay, 22 Nov. 1999; Area

Statistics, Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, 16 June 1975, file L1429 Summary of

Acreage, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1976: 9, file

A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report,

CODA," CY1977: 4, file H2621 Annual Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM.

19 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1976: 7, file A2621 Superintendent's

Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM.

20 Ibid., 8.

21 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1977: 1, file H2621 Annual Reports,

LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1978: 3, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report,

CODA," CY1979: 5, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM;

"Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1980: 4, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual

Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1981: 7, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Information Background, Coulee Dam

National Recreation Area," 17 June 1980, file 1, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250,
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:49 PM]

LARO.HQ.PAO; Barry Mackintosh, NPS Historian, email to Kathryn L. McKay, 22 Nov.

1999.

22 LARO, "Draft General Management Plan/Environmental Impact Statement, Lake

Roosevelt National Recreation Area," Sept. 1998: 3; "Superintendent's Annual Report,

CODA," CY1978: 2, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM;

"Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1979: 2, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual

Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1980: 1, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; LARO, "General Management Plan,

Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 10 July 1980: 1-3, 5, 16, 18, 24, 26-38, notebook

GMP, Environmental Assessment, LARO.HQ.CIO.

23 Barry Mackintosh, NPS Historian, email to Kathryn L. McKay, 22 Nov. 1999; "Park

Service stalwart to retire," Wenatchee World, 31 March 1993: 9; "Superintendent's Annual

Report, CODA," CY1993:4, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Kuiper interview, Tape 1-A.

24 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1983: 1, file H2621 Annual Reports,

LARO.HQ.ADM; "Lake Roosevelt Forum Newsletter," 17 (Winter 1995): 1; Kuiper

interview, Tapes 1-B, 2-A.

25 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1989: 2, 11, file A2621 Superintendent's

Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA,"

CY1990: 6, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; "No

lifeguard for lake this summer," Wilbur Register, 30 March 1989; LARO, "Budget Issues,"

Briefing Statement, n.d., file A26 Briefing Statements, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Cong. Tom Foley

Announces House Passing Funds for Lake Roosevelt," Republic News-Miner, 25 Oct. 1990;

"Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1991: 10, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual

Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1992: 8, file

A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual

Report, CODA," CY1993: 13, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-,

LARO.HQ.ADM.

26 "Tays takes over position as NPS superintendent for Coulee Dam Recreation Area,"

Wilbur Register, 11 August 1993; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1993: 4, file

A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; Gerald W. Tays, interview

with Nancy F. Renk, 20 July 2000, Tape 1-A, tape and index on file LARO.HQ.

27 Two articles in the Star presented the perspective of both tribal and county officials on the

events leading up to the transfer of Superintendent Tays. See Scott Hunter, "Park Service

head ousted," Star, 27 March 1996:1, and Scott Hunter, "New group wants Tays far away,"

Star, 3 April 1996. Gerald W. Tays offered his account of the circumstances surrounding his

departure from LARO in a taped interview with Nancy F. Renk (Tape 3-A).

28 Vaughn L. Baker, interview with Nancy F. Renk, 9 Dec. 1999, Tape 1-A, tape and index

on file, LARO.HQ.

29 Ibid.; LARO, Briefing Paper, prepared for Regional Director and Deputy Regional

Director, 15 May 1998, Briefing Statements notebook, LARO.HQ.ADM; Vaughn Baker,

LARO Superintendent, "In Search of Common Ground: Planning for the Future of Lake

Roosevelt," Jan. 1997, file K3415 Press Releases — CODA, LARO.HQ.ADM.

30 Baker interview, Tapes 1-A, 1-B.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:49 PM]

31 Ibid.

32 Ibid., Tape 2-A; "Lack of money hampers NPS entertainment, education projects," Star, 27

March 1996; LARO, "Draft General Management Plan," Sept. 1998: 30, 96.

33 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1977: 7, file H2621 Annual Reports,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Arthur C. Hathaway, personal communication to Kathryn L. McKay, 1

March 2001; Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1990: 3, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; Superintendent's Annual Report,

CODA," CY1991: 6, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM;

Gary J. Kuiper, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Deputy Regional Director, 2 April 1991, file

WASO/SSO Reports/Correspondence, drawer 1, LARO.HQ.RMO; LARO, "Resource

Management Update," January 1994, file CODA Resource Management Updates, drawer 3,

LARO.HQ.RMO; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," Jan. 1994 —Sept. 1995: 14, file

A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM.

34 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," Jan. 1994 — Sept. 1995: 5, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; Jim Thomson, NPS Regional

Archeologist, to Adeline Fredin, CCT Tribal Historian, 21 Sept. 1995.

35 Gerald W. Tays, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Deputy Regional Director, 20 May 1994,

file A54 Operations Evaluation 1994-95, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Operations Evaluation

Executive Summary, Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 20-24 June 1994, file A54

Operations Evaluation 1994-95, LARO.HQ.ADM.

36 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," Jan. 1994 — Sept. 1995: 4-6, 12-13, 19, file

A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual

Report, CODA," FY1996: 1-2, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-,

LARO.HQ.ADM.

37 Everts interview, Tape 1-B; "Meeting with Mr. Emmet E. Willard, - Secretary's Field

Representative, Portland, concerning Coulee Dam, & Chief Joseph Dam," 7 Feb. 1972, file

A94 BIA, LARO.HQ.ADM.

38 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1978: 4-5, file A2621 Superintendent's

Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1979:4-5,

file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual

Report, CODA," CY1980: 3, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM;

"Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1981: 6, file H2621 Superintendent's Annual

Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1983: 7, file

H2621 Annual Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA,"

CY1984: 8, file H2621 Annual Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report,

CODA," CY1985: 12, file H2621 Annual Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM.

39 Patrick J. Hamilton, BIA Area Personnel Officer, to Colville Agency Superintendent and

Spokane Agency Superintendent, 21 Jan. 1986, file Multi-Party Management Agreement thru

1986, LARO.HQ.SUP; William J. Briggle, NPS Acting Regional Director, draft memo to

NPS Assistant Director for Personnel and Administrative Services, 20 Jan. 1986, file Colville

Confederated Tribes, LARO.HQ.SUP; NPS Associate Director, Budget and Administration

and Assistant to Director for Human Resources, to NPS Regional Directors, Managers of

Harpers Ferry and Denver Service Centers, and WASO Personnel Officer, 24 Sept. 1992, file

P30 Appointment Requirements and Procedures, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:49 PM]

Report, CODA," CY1992: 14, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Gil Goodrich, LARO Chief Ranger, to LARO Superintendent, 16 Dec.

1997, file P2217 Temporary Positions 1992 -, LARO.HQ.ADM; Tays interview, Tape 2-A;

Vaughn Baker, LARO Superintendent, personal communication to Nancy F. Renk, 1 March

2001.

40 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1981: 8, file H2621 Superintendent's

Annual Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM.

41 National Parks and Conservation Association, Interpretation: Key to the Park Experience

(Washington, D.C., Feb. 1988), 65; National Parks and Conservation Association, Investing

in Park Futures: The National Park System Plan: A Blueprint for Tomorrow (Washington,

D.C.: National Parks and Conservation Association, 1988), 18; "Superintendent's Annual

Report, CODA," CY1972: 10, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM;

"Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1982: 5, file H2621 Annual Reports,

LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1985: 4, file H2621 Annual

Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM.

42 Polly Welts Kaufman, National Parks and the Woman's Voice: A History (Albuquerque:

University of New Mexico Press, 1996), 128-129; John C. Miles, Guardians of the Parks: A

History of the National Parks and Conservation Association (Washington, D.C.: Taylor &

Francis and the National Parks and Conservation Association, 1995), 199-204; Scott C.

Weaver, Student Conservation Association Director of Field Operations, to Gary J. Kuiper,

LARO Superintendent, 2 Feb. 1990, file A1619 Meetings, Recommendations,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Weaver to Kuiper, 5 Dec. 1991, file SCA Program Info., drawer 3,

LARO.HQ.RMO; Raquel Anissa Jones, Student Conservation Association College Program

Coordinator, to Karen Taylor-Goodrich, LARO Chief of Resource Management, 16 Feb.

1993, file SCA Program Info., drawer 3, LARO.HQ.RMO; Weaver to Gerald W. Tays,

LARO Superintendent, 12 Jan. 1994, file SCA Program Info., drawer 3, LARO.HQ.RMO;

Daniel R. Brown, "CODA Statement for Interpretation, FY93," signed 18 Feb. 1993, file

K1817 Interpretive Plan, LARO.HQ.CIO.

43 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1977: 10, file H2621 Annual Reports,

LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1978: 1, 12, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report,

CODA," CY1979: 12, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM;

"Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1982: 3-4, file H2621 Annual Reports,

LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1985: 11, file H2621

Annual Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1988: 11,

file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual

Report, CODA," CY1989: 9, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-,

LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1990: 10, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report,

CODA," CY1991: 10, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM;

"Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1992: 6, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual

Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1993: 8, file

A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual

Report, CODA," Jan. 1994 — Sept. 1995: 19, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports,

1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," FY1996: 8, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM.

44 Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Director, 5 Dec. 1947, file 16, box 136,

RG 079-89-004, NARA-PSR; Greider to NPS Director, 7 April 1948, file 17, box 136, RG
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:49 PM]

079-89-004, NARA-PSR; Greider to NPS Director, 9 Nov. 1948, file 17, box 136, RG 079-

89-004, NARA-PSR; Greider to NPS Director, 11 Sept. 1950, file 19, box 136, RG 079-89-

004, NARA-PSR; Everts, interview, Tape 1-B; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," 15

May 1962: 3, 5, file A2621 Annual Reports Field Areas 1-1-62 to 12-31-62, box 4, RG 79-

95-05, NARA-PSR.

45 Project Construction Proposal, approved by John A. Rutter, NPS Regional Director, 25

Feb. 1971, file D5027 Radio Communication/Misc., LARO.HQ.ADM; Ralph R. McFadden,

Chief of Power and Telephone, EP&D, WSC, to Director, Western Service Center, 9 Aug.

1971, file D5027 Radio Communication/Misc., LARO.HQ.ADM; James M. Stump, NPS

DSC, "Engineering Report on Two-Way Radio Communication Facilities, Coulee Dam

National Recreation Area," Nov. 1972, file D5027 Radio Communication/Misc.,

LARO.HQ.ADM; William Burgen, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 10

Oct. 1973, file D5027 Radio Communication/Misc., LARO.HQ.ADM; Everts, interview,

Tape 1-B.

46 William Burgen, LARO Superintendent, to Daniel J. Tobin, Jr., Chairman, Mount Rainier

Natural History Association, 21 Feb. 1974, file D5027 Radio Repeater, LARO.HQ.ADM;

"Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1974: 12, 15, 20, file A2621 Superintendent's

Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Proposed Radio Additions," 29 July 1974, file D5027

Radio Repeater, LARO.HQ.ADM; Burgen to USBR Acting Operations Manager, 3 Oct.

1974, file D5027 Radio Repeater, LARO.HQ.ADM; John H. Shoaf, NPS Electronics

Engineer, DSC, to NPS Team Manager, Pacific Northwest Team, DSC, 18 July 1975, file

D5027 Radio Repeater, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA,"

CY1975: 14, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; Ray Dashiell,

LARO South District Maintenance Supervisor, email to Nancy F. Renk, 2 Nov. 2000.

47 Pacific Northwest Region, "Radio Communications Plan — Questionnaire," ca. 1994, file

D5027 Misc. Radio Correspondence and Telephone, LARO.HQ.ADM; NPS Associate

Director, Park Operations and Education, to NPS Superintendents, Regional Directors, and

Office Managers, 2 July 1998, file D5027 Misc. Radio Correspondence and Telephone,

LARO.HQ.ADM; NPS, "Narrowband Radio Data Call," Summer 1998, file D5027 Misc.

Radio Correspondence and Telephone, LARO.HQ.ADM.

48 NPS, "Narrowband Radio Data Call," Summer 1998, file D5027 Misc. Radio

Correspondence and Telephone, LARO.HQ.ADM; Paul A. Larson, LARO Chief of

Interpretation &Resource Management, to Stevens County Sheriff, 26 March 1975, file

D5027 Radio Repeater, LARO.HQ.ADM; Gary J. Kuiper, LARO Superintendent to Richard

P. Nourse, Stevens County Department of Emergency Services, 30 Nov. 1984, file D5027

Cooperative Radio Frequency Agreement, LARO.HQ.ADM; Kuiper to Gilbert F. Hanson,

Secretary, Lincoln County Fire Protection District #7, 17 Feb. 1987, file D5027 Radio

Communication/Misc., LARO.HQ.ADM; Rick D. Anderson, Fire Radio Coordinator, Fire

Chief Stevens County #2, to Darrell J. Cook, LARO Chief Ranger, 1 Sept. 1989, file D5027

Misc. Radio Correspondence and Telephone, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual

Report, CODA," FY1996: 15, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-,

LARO.HQ.ADM.

49 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1982: 6, file H2621 Annual Reports,

LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1984: 8, file H2621 Annual

Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM.

50 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1988: 2-3, file A2621 Superintendent's

Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1991: 11,
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:49 PM]

file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM.

51 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1989: 6, file A2621 Superintendent's

Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM.

52 Ibid., 5-6; Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1992: 7, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report,

CODA," Jan. 1994 — Sept. 1995: 13-14, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-,

LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," FY1996: 3, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM.

53 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1974: 9, file A2621 Superintendent's

Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1975:12,

file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; Gary J. Kuiper, LARO

Superintendent to Roland C. Cooke, District Administrator, 6 Aug. 1985, file D66 Signs,

Markers, Memorials, LARO.HQ.ADM.

54 NPS, "Master Plan of Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," chapter 3 (29 Jan. 1965),

19, file D18 Master Planning 1965-67, LARO.HQ.ADM.

55 Bill and Doris Schieber, interview with Nancy F. Renk, 7 Dec. 1999, Tape 1-B, tape and

index on file LARO.HQ; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1972: 6, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report,

CODA," CY1973: 9, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM;

"Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1974: 9, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual

Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1976: 26, file

A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report,

CODA," CY1977: 10, file H2621 Annual Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM; William Burgen,

LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 23 July 1976, file D66 Signs, Markers,

Memorials, LARO.HQ.ADM.

56 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1985: 7, file H2621 Annual Reports,

LARO.HQ.ADM; LARO, "Sign Plan," March 1990, file D66 Sign Committee,

LARO.HQ.CIO.

57 Edwin S. Townsley, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, to Tom Foley, U.S. House of

Representatives, file 95th Cong/Dept. Files/Dept. of Interior — Bureau of Reclamation —

Lake Roosevelt Drawdown, box 238, Foley Coll., WSU. At the crest of the 1948 floods, Lake

Roosevelt had a fifty-foot fall between the Canadian boundary and Grand Coulee Dam;

during high water, there is an appreciable current on the lake. See USBR, Project History

1948, 233; Paul Pitzer, Grand Coulee: Harnessing a Dream (Pullman: Washington State

University Press, 1994), 258-260.

58 John W. Keys, III, USBR Regional Director, to Thomas S. Foley, U.S. House of

Representatives, 5 Aug. 1988, file 100th Cong./Dept. Files/Dept. of Interior/Bur. of Recl. —

Lake Roosevelt Drawdown," box 276, Foley Coll., WSU. Reclamation generally maintains

Banks Lake within 1.5 feet of full pool during the recreation season, from Memorial Day to

Labor Day.

59 Special use permit forms, file 2, box 10, RG 079-89-001, NARA — PSR; USBR,

Recreational Development of Roosevelt Lake: Columbia Basin Joint Investigations, Problem

26 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1945), 46; A. T. Scholz, et al.,
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:49 PM]

"Feasibility Report on Restoration of Lake Roosevelt Fisheries," (Cheney, Wash.: Eastern

Washington University, ca. 1986), 20.

60 O. E. Walsh, U.S. Army Corps Division Engineer, to George Tichy, Roosevelt Lake Log

Owners Association, Secretary, 23 Feb. 1951, file Roosevelt Lake Rec. Area, 1951, 36-A-1-b,

box 6, Dept. of Conservation, Director's Papers, WSA; Lynden M. Tesch, President Kettle

Falls Lions Club, to Arthur B. Langlie, Governor of Washington, 7 Feb. 1951, file Cons. and

Dev. — Columbia Basin Commission, 1951-52, box 10, Langlie Papers, WSA; "Statement of

Roosevelt Lake Log Owners Assn., Inc., to President's Water Resources Policy Commission,"

7 Dec. 1950, file Roosevelt Lake Rec. Area, 1951: 1-10, 13, 36-A-1-b, box 6, Dept. of

Conservation, Director's Papers, WSA.

61 Ralph W. Johnson, "The Canada-United States Controversy over the Columbia River,"

University of Washington Law Review 41 (August 1966): 680, 740; USBR, Project History

1982, 91.

62 NPS, A Master Plan for Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, Washington: Preliminary

Working Draft, Feb. 1968: 25, file D18 Master Plan, LARO.HQ.ADM.

63 L. V. Downs, USBR Assistant Project Manager, to Files, 2 Feb. 1967, file A94, 3rd Power

Plant: Changes in Water Line...1960-74, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250,

LARO.HQ.PAO; Scholz, "Lake Roosevelt Fisheries," 20; Pitzer, Grand Coulee, 258, 346,

348, 349; "Statement of Operations Functions, Grand Coulee Dam and Reservoir," Dec.

1987, file A44 Triparty Agreement, LARO.HQ.ADM; Lance G. Beckman, et al.,

"Assessment of the Fisheries and Limnology in Lake F. D. Roosevelt, 1980-83, Final Report

1985," (Seattle: U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, 1985), 4; Roberta Ulrich, "Justice Delayed: A

Sixty Year Battle for Indian Fishing Sites" (M. A. thesis, Portland State University, 1996),

154-55; "Lake Roosevelt's Level Changes Draw Criticism," newspaper clipping [1960s],

Limnology box, LARO.HQ.LIB.

64 Wayne R. Howe, LARO Superintendent, "Coulee Dam National Recreation Area

Management Objectives," 23 Feb. 1971: 2, file D18 Maintenance Planning Program,

LARO.HQ.ADM; William N. Burgen, LARO Superintendent, to Robert E. Evans, USBR

Project Manager, 2 June 1975, file A94 3rd Power Plant: Changes in Water Line...1960-74,

box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; PCP R-87, file D46 [?] (file is not

numbered) Project Construction Proposals, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual

Report, CODA," CY1976: 3, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM.

65 Bill Delaney, "Fluctuating Lake Level Mitigation Study: Coulee Dam National Recreation

Area," April 1989: 21, 96, LARO.HQ.RMO; Gary Kuiper, "Statement for Management

Coulee Dam Recreation Area," 1989: 6, file D18 SFM 1989, LARO.HQ.ADM.

66 Bill Delaney and R. Felton Brunson, "Task Directive: Fluctuating Lake Level Mitigation

Study, Park General Package 240, Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 1986: 2-3, file

A44 Agreements, Correspondence with BPA, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual

Report, CODA," CY1984: 3, file H2621 Annual Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM; Gordon D. Boyd,

LARO Chief Interpretation & Resource Management, to LARO Superintendent, 24 July

1984, file A44 MOA Debris Control, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report,

CODA," CY1985: 1, file H2621 Annual Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM; R. F. Brunson, NPS

Civil Engineer, DSC, to NPS Assistant Manager of Alaska/Pacific Northwest/Western team,

DSC, 24 June 1985, file D30 Dev't & Maint. (Fed Hwy Adm) 1983-89, LARO.HQ.ADM.

67 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1985: 3, 5, 8 file H2621 Annual Reports,
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:49 PM]

LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1986: 10, file H2621

Annual Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM; John W. Keys, III, USBR Regional Director, to Thomas

S. Foley, U.S. House of Representatives, 5 Aug. 1988, file 100th Cong./Dept. Files/Dept. of

Interior/Bur. of Recl. — Lake Roosevelt Drawdown, box 276, Foley Coll., WSU.

68 "Water Levels Talked," Wilbur Register, 20 April 1990; George S. Phillips, LARO

Management Assistant, to Files, 10 May 1991, file A40 Conferences & Meetings, BIA, etc.,

LARO.HQ.ADM.

69 Delaney and Brunson, "Task Directive: Fluctuating Lake Level Mitigation Study," 1986:

5-6, 10, 15-16, 108-109, Appendix C, file A44 Agreements, Correspondence with BPA,

LARO.HQ.ADM; R. F. Brunson, NPS Civil Engineer, DSC, to NPS Assistant Manager of

Alaska/Pacific Northwest/Western team, DSC, 24 June 1985, file D30 Dev't & Maint. (Fed

Hwy Adm) 1983-89, LARO.HQ.ADM; Gary J. Kuiper, LARO Superintendent, to Todd S.

Woodard, Special Assistant to Cong. Thomas S. Foley, 21 Dec. 1988, file L30 Land Use —

Special Use Permits 1988, LARO.HQ.ADM; Lake Roosevelt Coordinating Committee, "A

Report On: Management of Lake Roosevelt" 6 May 1993: 8, file Mgmt. of Lake Roosevelt,

box 4, LARO.HQ.USA; DSC, "Coulee Dam National Recreation Area: Lake Facilities

Retrofit, CODA-264-R, Project Manual," Jan. 1993: 01010-2, LARO.HQ; Gerald W. Tays,

LARO Superintendent, "Statement for Management, Coulee Dam National Recreation Area,"

1995: table, file D18 Statements for Management, LARO.HQ.RMO; Kelly Cash, personal

communication to Nancy F. Renk, 1 June 2000. The NPS facilities studied included launch

floats, courtesy floats, log booms, buoys, and launch ramps. The study did not include the

effects of drawdowns on facilities under special use permits, fisheries, or cultural resources.

70 Lisa K. Bucy and William H. Funk, Lake Roosevelt Management Plan, prepared for the

Lake Roosevelt Water Quality Council (Pullman, Wash.: WRC Report No. 93, State of

Washington Water Research Center, 1996), 3; Scholz, "Lake Roosevelt Fisheries," 21;

"Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," Jan. 1994 — Sept. 1995: 4, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM. The final quote is in LARO,

"Draft General Management Plan," Sept. 1998: 17.

71 Fred O. Jones, "Report on Geologic Conditions at the Gifford-Inchelium Ferry Landings,

Stevens and Ferry Counties, Washington," Spokane: USGS, 1949: 15; USBR, Project History

1941, 60; USBR, Project History 1949, 70-71; Fred O. Jones, Daniel R. Embody, and

Warren L. Peterson, "Landslides along the Columbia River Valley, Northeastern Washington"

(Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper

367, 1961), 1, 10, 31; LARO, "A Boater's Guide to Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake," 1973: 11,

file K3814 Lake Roos Boater's Guide, LARO.HQ.CIO; LARO, "Draft General Management

Plan," Sept. 1998: 80.

72 Frank A. Banks, USBR District Manager, to Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, 20

Oct. 1949, file F17, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Greider to NPS

Regional Director, 17 Aug. 1949, file LARO.94.3249.5, LARO.HQ.ADM; T. J. Mutch,

USBR, to Files, 25 March 1969, file L54 Water Matters, LARO.HQ.ADM; Bert A. Hall,

Final Construction Report on Lake Roosevelt Reservoir (Coulee Dam, Wash.: USBR, 1952),

41; USBR, Project History 1941, 59-60; USBR, Project History 1949, 87.

73 L. V. Downs, USBR Assistant Project Manager, to Files, 26 June 1969, file L14

Acquisition & Disposal of Lands 1964-1970, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250,

LARO.HQ.PAO; "Position Paper of the Colville Confederated Tribes Regarding the

Questions Surrounding the Construction of Grand Coulee Dam and Lake Roosevelt," 2 March

1973: 14, file A94 BIA, LARO.HQ.ADM.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:49 PM]

74 O. A. Tomlinson, NPS Regional Director, to E. B. Eckel, USGS Chief, Section of

Engineering Geology, 8 Nov. 1948, file 10, box 8, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Claude E.

Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Director, 7 Jan. 1949, file 17, box 136, RG 079-89-

004, NARA-PSR; Greider to NPS Director, 12 Jan. 1950, file 18, box 136, RG 079-89-004,

NARA-PSR; Sanford Hill, NPS Assistant Regional Director, to Greider, 17 Aug. 1951, file

D18 Planning Program, closed 6/3/53, LARO.HQ.ADM; Greider to USBR District Manager,

23 Feb. 1951, file 18, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. 3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

75 Annual Safety & Management Review, Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake and Coulee Dam

National Recreation Area, Aug. 4 thru 6, 1969," 3, file 715 Columbia Basin Project,

Administration of Recreational Areas, Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake, Boise USBR; NPS, "A

Master Plan for Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, Washington: Preliminary Working

Draft," Feb. 1968: 39, file D18 Master Plan, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Master Plan of Coulee Dam

National Recreation Area," 1965: ch. 3, p. 11, file D18 Master Planning 1965-67,

LARO.HQ.ADM; R. L. Schuster, "Reservoir-Induced Landslides," Bulletin of the

International Association of Engineering Geology 20 (1979): 11, 13; Gary Kuiper,

"Statement for Management, Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 1989: 7, file D18 SFM

1989, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1972: 12, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM.

76 W. F. Ford, USBR Special Services Officer, to USBR Power Supervisor, 11 Oct. 1960,

file D5031 Collection & Disposal of Debris & Trash, LARO.HQ.ADM; Jon L. Riedel, "Lake

Roosevelt National Recreation Area, Washington, Water Resources Scoping Report"

National Park Service, March 1997, 5, 67-68; Greg W. Behrens and Phillip J. Hansen,

"Geology and Related Construction Problems of the Grand Coulee Dam Project," p. 362 in N.

L. Joseph et al, eds., Geologic Guidebook for Washington and Adjacent Areas (Washington

Division of Geology and Earth Resources, Information Circular No. 86, 1989).

77 Jones, "Report on Geologic Conditions at the Gifford-Inchelium Ferry Landings," 3, 13; F.

A. Banks, USBR District Manager, to USBR Regional Director, 7 Dec. 1949, file L30 SUP...

1940-50, box 1 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; USBR, Project History 1949,

87; Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 5 Dec. 1949, file

L30 SUP...1940-50, box 1 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

78 Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 30 Jan. 1950, file

L30 SUP...1940-50, box 1 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Newton B. Drury,

NPS Director, to Secretary of Interior, 20 April 1950, file L14 Landslide Studies 1945-1959,

box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Lawrence G. Merriam, NPS Regional

Director, to NPS Director, 8 Dec. 1950, file L30 SUP...1940-50, box 1 of 3, LARO #95, Cat.

#3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Greider to NPS Regional Director, 19 Jan. 1951, file L30 SUP...

1951-52, box 1 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Drury to Walt Horan, U.S.

House of Representatives, 21 Feb. 1951, file Coulee Rec. Area 1948-52, box 216, Horan

Collection, WSU; C. E. Persons, NPS Acting Assistant Regional Director, to NPS Director,

30 March 1951, file L30 SUP...1951-52, box 1 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250,

LARO.HQ.PAO; Drury to Secretary of the Interior, 29 June 1950, file L30 SUP 1940-50 (1

of 3), box 1 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Greider to NPS Regional

Director, 27 Sept. 1950, fileL30 SUP 1940-50 (1 of 3), box 1 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250,

LARO.HQ.PAO; O. A. Tomlinson, NPS Regional Director, to Walter McAviney, 27 Oct.

1950, file L30 SUP 1940-50 (1 of 3), box 1 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO;

Drury to Warren G. Magnuson, 28 Nov. 1950, file Coulee Rec. Area 1948-52, box 216,

Horan Coll., WSU; Claude L. Naff, Fred Wilson, and J. C. Atwood, Stevens County

Commissioners, to Horan, 2 January 1951, file Coulee Rec. Area 1948-52, box 216, Horan
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:49 PM]

Coll., WSU; Drury to Horan, 21 Feb. 1951, file Coulee Rec. Area 1948-52, box 216, Horan

Coll., WSU.

79 USBR, Project History 1974, 29; USBR, Project History 1975, 13-14; "Superintendent's

Annual Report, CODA," CY1975: 18, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Judith Sprankle, "Part Two — Ferrying the Columbia," Gold Historian 2

(Dec. 23, 1981): 17; Chris Cowbrough, "The End of an Era for Ferry Service," Colville

Statesman-Examiner, 28 Sept. 1994.

80 Robinson and Everts interview, Tape 1-B; A. B. Lafferty, President Lafferty

Transportation Company, to M. Gale Beals, Lincoln Lumber Company, 4 June 1948, file 8,

box 11, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Don Everts, retired LARO maintenance worker, phone

interview with Kathryn L. McKay, 3 March 2000, notes on file, LARO.HQ.

81 Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to John T. Raftis, Attorney, 4 April 1947, file 2,

box 10, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Greider to NPS Director, 4 June 1948, file 17, box

136, RG 079-89-004, NARA-PSR; Greider to all logging permittees (NPS and BIA), 7 May

1948, file 2, box 10, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; A. B. Lafferty, President Lafferty

Transportation Company, to M. Gale Beals, Lincoln Lumber Company, 4 June 1948, file 8,

box 11, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Herbert Maier, NPS Associate Regional Director, to

NPS Director, 15 June 1948, file 8, box 11, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; NPS Acting

Assistant Director to NPS Regional Director, 24 Sept. 1948, file 1, box 10, RG 079-89-001,

NARA-PSR.

82 Herbert Maier, NPS Acting Regional Director, to A. B. Lafferty, President Lafferty

Transportation Company, 16 Oct. 1952, file 7, box 11, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Maier

to Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, 26 Nov. 1952, file 1, box 10, RG 079-89-001,

NARA-PSR.

83 Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to A. B. Lafferty, President Lafferty

Transportation Company, 1 July 1949, file 7, box 11, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Greider

to NPS Regional Director, 8 Aug. 1949, file 1, box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Greider

to NPS Director, 15 Jan. 1950, file 3, box 3, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Greider to NPS

Regional Director, 9 April 1951, file 1, box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

84 [author unknown], "Analysis of attached ‘Remarks by the Manager of the Grand Coulee

Navigation Company,'" 14 Jan. 1953, file 1, box 10, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Claude E.

Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Director, 14 April 1950, file 19, box 136, RG 079-

89-004, NARA-PSR; Greider to NPS Regional Director, 9 April 1951, file 1, box 6, RG 079-

89-001, NARA-PSR.

85 Frank A. Kittredge, U.S. Army Corps Chief Engineer, Region 3, to NPS Director, 13

September 1950, file 1, box 9, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

86 Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to John P. Buehler, U.S. Army Corps of

Engineers Seattle District, 3 May 1951, file 1, box 9, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; NPS

Assistant Regional Director to USBR Regional Director, 12 Jan. 1960, file D5031 Collection

& Disposal of Debris & Trash, LARO.HQ.ADM; Electrical West 125 (Dec. 1960): 31.

87 Chief, Columbia River Recreation Survey Branch, to NPS Regional Director, 2 Nov. 1960,

file D5031 Collection & Disposal of Debris & Trash, LARO.HQ.ADM; USBR, Project

History 1961, 18; "Report of F. Gordon Whitaker, Chairman, Debris Control Subcommittee,

to the CBIAC at Jackson, Wyoming, on September 14 & 15, 1961," 1-4, file D5031
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:49 PM]

Collection & Disposal of Debris & Trash, LARO.HQ.ADM.

88 [Homer W. Robinson, LARO Superintendent], "Proposed Program of Debris Collection

and Disposal on Shorelines, Lake Roosevelt," 1961: 1-2, 4, file D5031 Collection & Disposal

of Debris & Trash, LARO.HQ.ADM; NPS Regional Director to NPS Director, 21 Feb. 1961,

file D5031 Collection & Disposal of Debris & Trash, LARO.HQ.ADM; LARO

Superintendent to NPS Director, 29 May 1961, file A2621 Annual Reports Field Areas 1-1-

61 to 12-31-61, box 4, RG 079-95-05, NARA-PSR; "Summary of Meeting Held July 12,

1961, at Ephrata, Washington on Problems of Administration of Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake

Area," 3, file D5031 Collection & Disposal of Debris & Trash, LARO.HQ.ADM.

89 Homer Robinson, "Report of Lakeshore Cleanup, Coulee Dam National Recreation Area,

1962," file D3217 Debris Removal ca. 1956-68, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250,

LARO.HQ.PAO; A. F. Drysdale, LARO District Ranger, to LARO Superintendent, 4 Dec.

1962, file D5031 Collection & Disposal of Debris & Trash, LARO.HQ.ADM; Homer

Robinson, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Director, 27 May 1963, file A2621 Annual Reports

Field Areas 1-1-63 to 12-31-63, box 4, RG 079-95-05, NARA-PSR. The 1963 funding for

the program came from Accelerated Public Works monies; for the other years of the early

1960s, the funding came from Washington Office and Regional Office reserves.

90 "Master Plan of Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 1965: ch. 3, 8-9, file D18 Master

Planning 1965-67, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Boat Tows Around Dams," Wenatchee Daily World, 8

July 1968, p. 4.

91 "Recapitulations of National Park Service Funds Expanded [sic] on Shoreline Cleanup,"

file D3217 Debris Removal ca. 1956-68, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250,

LARO.HQ.PAO; "Annual Safety & Management Review, Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake and

Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, Aug. 4 thru 6, 1969," file 715 Columbia Basin

Project, Administration of Recreational Areas, Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake, Boise USBR;

"Natural Sciences Resource Studies Problem: Collection and Disposal of Debris on FDR

Lake," 23 Nov. 1971, file D5031 Debris Removal Proposals, LARO.HQ.ADM.

92 Greenacres Consulting Corporation, "Potential Uses for the Woody Debris in Roosevelt

Lake," Dec. 1972: 2-3, 8-9, 11. In 1975, LARO staff considered a special use permit for the

Addy Aluminum Plant to convert woody debris from the lake to wood chips, but the plant

had easier sources of chips ("Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1975: 17, file

A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM).

93 William N. Burgen, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 27 Feb. 1976, file

D5031 Debris Removal Proposals, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Appendix B: Pilot Program to

Remove Beached Debris from Lake Roosevelt," 22 Dec. 1976, file D3217 (old 1023) Report

for Cleanup of 1967 Flood Debris, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO;

William W. Dunmire, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 14 Oct. 1977, file

D22 Proposed Public Works Program, LARO.HQ.ADM.

94 Ronald R. McKown, "Environmental Evaluation of the Proposed Debris Cleanup Program

on Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake," USBR, 1978: 1-3, file A44 MOA Debris Control,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Gerald F. Marco, CCT Fishery Biologist, to Ronald R. McKown, USBR,

24 Feb. 1978, file A44 MOA Debris Control, LARO.HQ.ADM; F. L. Eaton and R. J. Bute,

USBR, to USBR Project Manager, 23 March 1977, file A94 Debris Cleanup,

LARO.HQ.ADM; USBR Acting Project Manager to USBR Regional Director, 14 Oct. 1977,

appendix in USBR, Project History 1977; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA,"

CY1984: 9, file H2621 Annual Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM. McKown noted that the debris
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:49 PM]

was difficult to market because of its low fuel value and because much of it had accumulated

silt and sand that destroyed saw blades and chippers.

95 William W. Dunmire, LARO Superintendent, to USBR Project Manager, 4 Jan. 1980, file

A94 Debris Cleanup, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1981,

file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; Scott Hebner, LARO Natural

Resources Specialist, phone interview with Kathryn L. McKay, 3 March 2000, notes on file,

LARO.HQ; R. E. Etheridge, USBR Project Manager, to USBR Regional Director, 4 Nov.

1984 [?], file D5031 Debris Removal Proposals, LARO.HQ.ADM.

96 "Lake Roosevelt Shore Line Improvement Project," n.d., file Environment Misc. — Lake

Roosevelt (2 of 2), box 71, Morrison Collection, WSU; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Acting

Supervisor, Olympia, to USBR Regional Environmental Officer, 19 Dec. 1990, file Shoreline

Debris Removal, Artificial Reef, drawer 3, LARO.HQ.RMO; USBR and CCT, "Cooperative

Agreement: Lake Roosevelt Debris Removal Project," 1 Feb. 1991, file Shoreline Debris

Removal, Artificial Reef, drawer 3, LARO.HQ.RMO; Jude Stensgar, Colville Business

Council Chairman, to Steve Clark, USBR Project Manager, 28 May 1991, file D5031 Debris

Removal Proposals, LARO.HQ.ADM.

97 NPS, USBR, "Memorandum of Agreement No. 1425-4-MA-10-00830," file A44 MOA

Debris Control, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," Jan. 1994 —

Sept. 1995: 3, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM.

98 Ray Dashiell, LARO Maintenance Supervisor, South District, phone interview with

Kathryn L. McKay, 2 March 2000, notes on file, LARO.HQ.

99 NPS, "Regional GIS Plan," Nov. 1994: 2, 4, 10, file N16 GIS, LARO.HQ.ADM.

100 Gary J. Kuiper, LARO Superintendent, to Resource Management Specialist, NPS

Regional Office, 15 Feb. 1991, file L30 Land Use 1/92-6/92, LARO.HQ.ADM; NPS,

"Regional GIS Plan," Nov. 1994: 6, 8-10, file N16 GIS, LARO.HQ.ADM.

101 "Forum Meeting Minutes," 16 Jan. 1991: 7, file Lake Roosevelt, Grant County

Commissioners Office, Ephrata, Washington; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA,"

CY1993: 18, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM;

"Superintendent's Report, CODA" Jan. 1994 — Sept. 1995: 17-18, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report,

CODA," FY1996: 12, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM;

Project Statement, LARO-I-003.010, "Analyze Threats to Cultural Resources at Lake

Roosevelt NRA," [ca. Sept. 1997], file GIS Program, drawer 2, LARO.HQ.RMO.

102 Charles P. Woodbury, LARO Acting Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 25 Jan.

1968, file L50 Geographic Place Names and Area Terminology, LARO.HQ.ADM; Raymond

O. Mulvany, NPS Acting Regional Director, to LARO Superintendent, 5 March 1968, file

L50 Geographic Place Names and Area Terminology, LARO.HQ.ADM.

103 Grant W. Sharpe, Professor of Outdoor Recreation, UW, to David A. Richie, LARO

Superintendent, 11 July 1968, inside following report: Edward G. Roberts, "A Report on the

Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," Sept. 1969, LARO.HQ.CIO; Richie to NPS District

Director, Northwest Region, 7 July 1969, L50 Geographic Place Names and Area

Terminology, LARO.HQ.ADM.

104 Jerry Hunter, Kettle Falls Chamber of Commerce President, to Charles H. Odegaard, NPS
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:49 PM]

Regional Director, 2 Feb. 1988, file H2 Name Change CODA to LARO 1987, box 3 of 3,

LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.ADM; Richard L. Winters, NPS Acting Regional

Director, to Brock Adams, U.S. Senate, 16 March 1988, file A3615 Service and Personnel

1987, LARO.HQ.ADM; Trina J. A. Dice, Grand Coulee Dam Area Chamber of Commerce

Manager, to Gerald W. Tays, LARO Superintendent, 19 Sept. 1994, file A38 Public

Relations, LARO.HQ.ADM; Kuiper interview, Tape 1-A; Tays to Lake Roosevelt

Coordinating Committee, 8 March 1995, file Multi-Party Agreement April 1990,

LARO.HQ.ADM.

105 "Superintendent's Report, CODA" Jan. 1994 — Sept. 1995: 5; Charles H. Odegaard, NPS

Regional Director, to Secretary of the Interior, 4 Oct. 1994, file L50 CODA/LARO Name

Change 7/96 -, LARO.HQ.ADM; Vaughn Baker, LARO Superintendent, to Lake Roosevelt

Coordinating Committee, 24 Sept. 1996, file L50 CODA/LARO Name Change 7/96 -,

LARO.HQ.ADM; John K. Wiley, "Dam's recreation area will keep its old name,"

Spokesman-Review, 2 Oct. 1996; Chad Cain, "NPS to officially change name of local park,"

Star, 11 Dec. 1996; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," Jan. 1994 — Sept. 1995: 5,

file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; Baker, email to Mike

Walsh, NP-WASO-ITD, 24 June 1997; Kuiper interview, Tape 1-A; Baker interview, Tape

2-A.

106 LARO, "Statement for Management," 3 March 1986: 8-9, file D18 SFM 1989,

LARO.HQ.ADM.

107 NPS, "Columbia River Reservoir Area, Washington, General Report and Development

Outline," June 1944: 9, USA.3.1, LARO.HQ.100; Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent

to F. A. Banks, USBR Supervising Engineer, 21 Jan. 1946, file LARO.94.3249.3,

LARO.HQ.ADM; H. M. Miller, NPS Acting Director, to USBR Commissioner, 30 Sept.

1947, file 715 Columbia Basin Project, Administration of Recreational Areas, Franklin D.

Roosevelt Lake, Boise USBR.

108 F. A. Banks to Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, 9 Oct. 1947, file

LARO.94.3249.3, LARO.HQ.ADM; Wesley R. Nelson, USBR Acting Commissioner, to

USBR Regional Director, 28 Feb. 1948, file LARO.94.3249.5, LARO.HQ.ADM; Conrad L.

Wirth, NPS Chief of Lands, to NPS Regional Director, 11 March 1948, file

LARO.94.3249.5, LARO.HQ.ADM; Greider to NPS Regional Director, 30 March 1948, file

LARO.94.3249.5, LARO.HQ.ADM; Greider to Director, 7 April 1948, file 17, box 136, RG079-89-004, NARA-PSR; Greider to NPS Regional Director, 17 Aug. 1949, file

LARO.94.3249.5, LARO.HQ.ADM; USBR, Project History 1949, 86.

109 USBR, Summary of meeting in Ephrata, 12 July 1961, file D5031 Collection and

Disposal of Debris and Trash, LARO.HQ.ADM; LARO, Management Objectives, 15 March

1971, file D18 Planning Program, LARO.HQ.ADM.

110 LARO, "Draft, General Management Plan," Sept. 1998: 32.

111 Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 9 July 1943, file

LARO.94.3249.7, LARO.HQ.ADM; Herbert Maier, NPS Acting Regional Director, to

Greider, 15 July 1943, file LARO.94.3249.7, LARO.HQ.ADM; Maier to Greider, 25 Oct.

1943, file LARO.94.3249.7, LARO.HQ.ADM; Agreement, Lincoln County Book of Deeds,

Book 91: 207, 14 Jan. 1944, file LARO.94.3249.8, LARO.HQ.ADM.

112 Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to USBR District Manager, 17 June 1952, file

1, box 8, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Donation Deed, Raymond L. and Vesta M. Johnson
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:49 PM]

to USA, 2 July 1952, file LARO.94.3249.9, LARO.HQ.ADM; LARO, press release, 14 July

1952, file LARO.94.3249.9, LARO.HQ.ADM; Greider to NPS Regional Director, 10 Feb.

1953, file LARO.94.3249.10, LARO.HQ.ADM.

113 Charles H. Odegaard, NPS Director, to Washington State Parks and Recreation

Commission, 15 Oct. 1973, St. Paul's Mission section, History box 3, LARO.HQ.LIB;

"Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1974: 6, 20, file A2621 Superintendent's

Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; Jerry D. Lee, LARO District Ranger, to Sid Buckley, 8

Feb. 1974, file L1417 St. Paul's Mission, drawer 3, LARO.HQ.RMO; "Superintendent's

Annual Report, CODA," CY1976: 2, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report,

LARO.HQ.ADM; D[on] C[arney], LARO District Ranger, to Files, 9 March 1977, file H14

Kettle Falls Hist. Center, LARO.HQ.CIO; Kettle Falls Historical Center, ca. 1978, file H14

Kettle Falls Historical Center, LARO.HQ.CIO; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA,"

CY1983: 3, file H2621 Annual Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report,

CODA," CY1984: 5, file H2621 Annual Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM; Gary J. Kuiper, LARO

Superintendent to Earl Davenport, Washington Water Power, 7 Nov. 1986, file

LARO.94.3249.23, LARO.HQ.ADM; Earl J. Davenport, Washington Water Power District

Manager, to Richard Amenell, USBR Realty Specialist, 17 Feb. 1987, file Kettle Falls

Letters, box 1 of 3, LARO.HQ.PAO; A. W. Pearson, USBR Grand Coulee, to USBR

Regional Director, 25 Feb. 1987, file Kettle Falls Letters, box 1 of 3, LARO.HQ.PAO.

114 LARO, "Special Park Use Management Plan, 11 August 1990: 15.

115 John Scott, LARO North District Ranger, to LARO Chief Ranger, 5 March 1991, file

LARO.94.3249.17, LARO.HQ.ADM; LARO North District Ranger to LARO Chief Ranger,

n.d., file LARO.94.3249.17, LARO.HQ.ADM; A. W. Pearson, USBR Acting Project

Manager, to USBR Regional Director, 21 June 1991, file LARO.94.3249.18,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Gary J. Kuiper, LARO Superintendent, to Larry D. Hester, 28 June 1991,

file LARO.94.3249.18, LARO.HQ.ADM; Richard D. Just, Boise Cascade Regional Manager,

to Donald W. Moos, Senior Policy Advisor [for Sen. Slade Gorton?], 29 Aug. 1991, file

LARO.94.3249.15, LARO.HQ.ADM.

116 USBR Acting Regional Supervisor of Water, Power, and Lands, to USBR Project

Manager, 17 Sept. 1991, file LARO.94.3249.15, LARO.HQ.ADM; 212 — USBR Realty

Specialist to USBR Realty Files, 24 Sept. 1991, file LARO.94.3249.15, LARO.HQ.ADM;

William J. Briggle, NPS Regional Director, to Slade Gorton, U.S. Senate, 1 Oct. 1991, file

L30 Land Use 7-12, 1991, LARO.HQ.ADM; Richard D. Just, Boise Cascade Regional

Manager, to Donald W. Moos, Senior Policy Advisor [for Sen. Slade Gorton?], 29 Aug.

1991, file LARO.94.3249.15, LARO.HQ.ADM.

117 Advertisements in Exchange, 10-16 Oct. 1991: 23, and Nickel's Worth, 11 Oct. 1991: 43,

file LARO.94.3249.16, LARO.HQ.ADM; Call/visitor record, Frank Ossiander, [Citizens for a

Clean Columbia], to G. S. Phillips, LARO Management Assistant, 2 Oct. 1991, file

LARO.94.3249.16, LARO.HQ.ADM; Call/visitor record, Phillips to Kathy at Nickel's Worth,

and Aaron Spurway at Exchange, 10 Oct. 1991, file LARO.94.3249.16, LARO.HQ.ADM;

Ossiander to Thomas Foley, U.S. House of Representatives, 18 April 1992, file

LARO.94.3249.18, LARO.HQ.ADM.

118 S.R. 1324, 103d Cong., 1st Sess., Congressional Record, (30 July 1993), file

LARO.94.3249.14, LARO.HQ.ADM; Congress, Senate, Subcommittee on Public Lands,

National Parks and Forests, Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, "Statement of

John Keys, Pacific Northwest Regional Director for the Bureau of Reclamation," S. 1324,

103d Cong., 2d. Sess., 23 March 1994, file LARO.94.3249.14, LARO.HQ.ADM;
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:49 PM]

"Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1993: 4, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual

Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," Jan. 1994 —

Sept. 1995: 3, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; Roberta

Miller, LARO Program Assistant, email to Nancy F. Renk, 21 March 2000.

119 Thoralf Torkelson, USBR, to USBR files, 14 April 1943, file 1, box 3, RG 079-89-001,

NARA-PSR; NPS Director, confidential memo to NPS Regional Director, 2 May 1949, file

History of NPS, CODA, drawer 5, LARO.HQ.RMO.

120 O. A. Tomlinson, NPS Regional Director, confidential memo to NPS Director, 10 May

1949, file History of NPS, CODA, drawer 5, LARO.HQ.RMO.

121 Conrad L. Wirth, NPS Director, to NPS Regional Director, 10 June 1952, file 2, box 9,

RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional

Director, 26 June 1952, file 2, box 9, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

122 Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 12 Sept. 1952, file

2, box 9, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Lawrence C. Merriam, NPS Regional Director, to

NPS Director, 6 Aug. 1952, file 2, box 9, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Greider to NPS

Regional Director, 14 Aug. 1952, file 2, box 9, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

123 Herbert Maier, NPS Acting Regional Director, to NPS Director, 29 Oct. 1952, file 2, box

9, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Lawrence C. Merriam, NPS Regional Director, to NPS

Region III Director, 30 April 1953, file 2, box 9, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Hubert H.

Walter, [Columbia Basin Commission], to Conrad L. Wirth, NPS Director, 4 Nov. 1954, file

3 of 3 Recreation, box 34, Columbia Basin Commission, WSA; W. A. Galbraith to Lawrence

Merriam, NPS Regional Director, 1 Sept. 1954, file 3 of 3 Recreation, box 34, Columbia

Basin Commission, WSA; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," FY 1955: 6, file A2621

Annual Reports Reg. 4 1955 & 1956 FYs, box 3, RG 79-95-05, NARA-PSR.

124 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," FY1955: 5, file A2621 Annual Reports Reg. 4

1955 & 1956 FYs, box 3, RG 79-95-05, NARA-PSR; "Superintendent's Narrative Report,"

11 Sept. 1964: 2, file A2615 M. Narrative Reports CODA CY1964, box 2, RG 79-95-05,

NARA-PSR; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1987: 7, file H2621 Annual

Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM; Vaughn Baker, LARO Superintendent, personal communication

to Nancy F. Renk, 1 March 2001.

125 Office of the Secretary of the Interior to Thomas S. Foley, U.S. House of Representatives,

7 Oct. 1981, file 97th Cong./Dept. Files/Dept. of Interior — Nat'l Park Service, box 252,

Foley Coll., WSU; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1976: 5, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report,

CODA," CY1981: 2, file H2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM; Arthur

C. Hathaway, retired LARO employee, personal communication to Kathryn L. McKay, 1

March 2001.

126 "Counties want Lake Roosevelt plan on concessions hauled out, refitted," Wenatchee

World, 13 July 1988; Andy M. Rustemeyer, Chairman of Lincoln County Board of

Commissioners and Upper Columbia River Counties, to Thomas S. Foley, U.S. House of

Representatives, 17 June 1988, file Wilderness-Lake Roosevelt Management Plan, 2 of 2, box

80, Foley Coll., WSU; Jay Weber and others, Upper Columbia River Counties, to Foley, file

Lincoln County, box 1 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Rustemeyer to Tom

McKern, Stevens County Commissioner, 4 Sept. 1991, file Lake Roosevelt, Grant County

Commissioners Office, Ephrata, Washington.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:49 PM]

127 "County, NPS earn grant for boat launch," Davenport Times, 9 Nov. 1989; "Boat ramp

project joint effort, ready July 1, facilities coming," Wilbur Register, 27 June 1991; Ted

Hopkins, "County reaches agreement with NPS over Lincoln Mill boat launch," Davenport

Times, 3 Aug. 1995.

128 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between Stevens Commissioners, Washington

and National Park Service, Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, 6 Sept. 1994, file

Multiparty Agreement April 1990, LARO.HQ.ADM; Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)

between Lincoln County Commissioners, Washington and National Park Service, Coulee

Dam National Recreation Area, ca. May 1995, file MOU-NPS/USCG, drawer 5,

LARO.HQ.RMO; Gerald W. Tays, LARO Superintendent, to Lake Roosevelt Coordinating

Committee, 8 March 1995, file Multi-Party Agreement April 1990, LARO.HQ.ADM; Lake

Roosevelt Forum, 25 May 1994, file Lake Roosevelt Forum, drawer 2, LARO.HQ.RMO;

Tays to Alan [Mack], 16 June 1995, file MOU-NPS/USCG, drawer 5, LARO.HQ.RMO;

Vaughn Baker, LARO Superintendent, personal communication to Nancy F. Renk, 1 June

2000.

129 William R. Lowry, The Capacity for Wonder: Preserving National Parks (Washington,

D.C.: The Brookings Institution, 1994), 25, 32-33, 41-44, 51-53; NPS, "Lake Roosevelt Boat

Trip," 2 April 1991, file Congressional Info/Committee Designation, drawer 1,

LARO.HQ.RMO.

130 Linda Baker, [aide to Sen. Slade Gorton?], email to Gary J. Kuiper, LARO

Superintendent, 16 March 1992, Cong. Corr. notebook, LARO.HQ.ADM.

131 NPS Director to Slade Gorton, drafted by G. S. Phillips, 18 March 1992, Cong. Corr.

notebook, LARO.HQ.ADM.

132 Gary J. Kuiper, LARO Superintendent, to Brock Adams, U.S. Senate, 12 Jan. 1992, file

Funding Proposals — All Sources, drawer 2, LARO.HQ.RMO; "Meeting addresses local

concerns on Lake Roosevelt management," Wilbur Register, 22 Oct. 1992; Lake Roosevelt

Coordinating Committee, "A Report on: Management of Lake Roosevelt," prepared in

response to 1993 Appropriations Committee Directive, Senate Report 102-345, 6 May 1993,

file Management of Lake Roosevelt, box 4, LARO.HQ.USA; "Superintendent's Annual

Report, CODA," CY1992: 1-2, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-,

LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1993: 3, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; Briefing statement prepared for

Secretary Babbitt, "Lake Roosevelt Cooperative Management Agreement," Sept. 1993, file

A38 Briefing Statements, LARO.HQ.ADM; Vaughn Baker, LARO Superintendent, personal

communication to Nancy F. Renk, 1 June 2000; Kelly Cash, retired LARO Assistant

Superintendent, personal communication to Nancy F. Renk, 1 June 2000.

133 Lake Roosevelt Coordinating Committee, draft letter to members of Washington

Congressional delegation, [July 1994], file Multi-Party Agreement April 1990,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Vaughn Baker, LARO Superintendent, to Grant County Commissioners,

24 Oct. 1996, file Lake Roosevelt, Grant County Commissioners Office, Ephrata,

Washington; Baker interview, Tape 1-B.

134 "Bringing People to the Table: The Lake Roosevelt Forum," n.d., file Lake Roosevelt

Forum, drawer 2, LARO.HQ.RMO; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1988: 1,

file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; Kelly Cash, retired LARO

Assistant Superintendent, personal communication to Nancy F. Renk, 1 June 2000; "Lake
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:49 PM]

Roosevelt Forum: Here Today, for Yesterday and Tomorrow," n.d., file Lake Roosevelt

Forum, drawer 2, LARO.HQ.RMO.

135 "Superintendent's Annual Reports, CODA," CY1989: 1, file A2621 Superintendent's

Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Reports, CODA,"

CY1990: 1, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Lake

Roosevelt Forum: Past and Present," n.d., file K14 Lake Roosevelt Forum, LARO.HQ.CIO;

Vaughn Baker, LARO Superintendent, to Human Resources Manager, NPS Pacific West

Division, 18 Aug. 1998, file A20 Forum, LARO.HQ.ADM; Lake Roosevelt Forum,

"Strategic Plan," July 1998, file Lake Roosevelt Forum, drawer 2, LARO.HQ.RMO; Baker

interview, Tape 1-B.

136 Kelly Cash, retired LARO Assistant Superintendent, personal communication to Nancy F.

Renk, 1 June 2000.

137 William C. Everhart, The National Park Service (New York: Praeger Publishers, 1972),

54; LARO Superintendent to NPS Director, 27 May 1963, file A2621 Annual Reports Field

Areas 1-1-63 to 12-31-63, box 4, RG 079-95-05, NARA-PSR; LARO, "Master Plan," Feb.

1963, ch. 4, p. 20, file D18 Master Plan 1962, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250,

LARO.HQ.PAO; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1978: 7, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report,

CODA," CY1982: 5, file H2621 Annual Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's

Annual Report, CODA," 1983: 5, file H2621 Annual Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM;

"Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1985: 4, file H2621 Annual Reports,

LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY 1991: 8, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report,

CODA," CY1992: 14, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM;

"Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1993: 10; "Superintendent's Annual Report,

CODA," Jan. 1994 — Sept. 1995: 11, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-,

LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," FY1996: 6, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; Roberta Miller, LARO Program

Assistant, personal communication to Nancy F. Renk, 1 June 2000.

138 Lake Roosevelt Cooperative Management Agreement, 5 April 1990: IV.E, file Multiparty

Agrmt April 1990, LARO.HQ.ADM.

139 Tays interview, Tape 2-A.

140 Baker interview, Tape 1-B.

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

laro/adhi/adhi5n.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5a.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:52 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 5:

Charting the Course: Managers and

Management Issues (continued)

Staff Reorganization

Over the years, there have been various reorganizations of the staff at LARO, primarily

reflecting changes in emphasis within the National Park Service. For instance, the ranger and

interpretation divisions merged in 1969 to form the division of Interpretation and Resource

Management. This divided once again in 1977 to form two new divisions: 1) Visitor

Protection and Resource Management and 2) Interpretation and Visitor Services. The

interpretive staff position was converted at this time to Chief of Interpretation. This change

followed the trend in the Park Service during this period away from the old-style rangers,

who performed a wide variety of tasks, to specialists trained for more particular duties.

Continuing this trend, LARO reorganized the Ranger Division in 1990 to form a separate

Division of Interpretation. The park hired its first Interpreter for the South District in 1991.

LARO also worked to create a new Resources Management Division during this time. It

began with a Natural Resources Specialist trainee in 1990 who, two years later, became the

Resources Management Specialist in charge of both natural and cultural resources. LARO

hired the first Archeologist in 1993 and the following year moved all into the new Division of

Resources Management. [33]

During the mid-1990s, efforts to cut the size of the federal bureaucracy led to a major

reorganization of the National Park Service. The former Regions were consolidated into

larger Field Areas that, in turn, were broken into "Clusters" where management was directed

by committee. LARO became part of the Columbia Cascades Cluster, with the System

Support Office in Seattle. It, in turn, was part of the Pacific West Field Area, with

headquarters in San Francisco. Several LARO employees began serving on the advisory

committee. A result of this reorganization and downsizing was that individual parks took over

a number of functions that the regional offices had done in the past. One of these with critical

implications for LARO was the transfer of responsibility for compliance with Section 106 of

the National Historic Preservation Act to the park Superintendent. [34]

Concurrent with this overall reorganization of the Park Service, LARO underwent a major

park reorganization in 1994. Early that summer, a scaled-down Operations Evaluation

emphasized the areas of Administration, Concessions, and Interpretation. The Park Service

was particularly concerned with the traditional park organization that they believed

encouraged thought and actions along division lines. To counter this, the evaluators

recommended increased emphasis on teamwork to break down divisions and improve

communications. They suggested reassigning some duties to free administrative staff from

various clerical functions. In addition, they recommended combining similar functions into

one position, along with adding "interest and complexity" to support positions within the

districts. In the area of concessions, the evaluators stressed the need for a new GMP to help
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5a.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:52 PM]

the park assess the rapid growth and ensure that any development plans were well conceived.

Finally, the team praised the "impressive changes" made in the interpretive program but

emphasized the lack of understanding among park staff over the role of interpretation in a

recreational park. They recommended development of a five-year Interpretive Plan. The

evaluators ranked LARO's management of facilities and grounds as "outstanding." [35]

The results of the Operations Evaluation led to a considerable reorganization within the

Division of Administration. LARO consolidated the administrative workload, assigning these

tasks to the lowest possible level within the organization. It also placed all administrative

positions within the park into the Division of Administration, redescribing and upgrading

many of these jobs. The end result was a Chief of Administration who supervised a team of

specialists and support staff at Headquarters and two Administrative Technicians in each

district. With the retirement of the Assistant Superintendent in 1995, this position was

discontinued and replaced with a Civil Engineer assigned to the Maintenance Division. In

addition, LARO upgraded four Subdistrict Rangers, two District Rangers, and the Chief

Ranger to fully implement the Ranger Careers initiative. The park also reorganized its

original three districts (Kettle Falls, Fort Spokane, and Coulee Dam) into two, with the North

District office at Kettle Falls and the South District office at Fort Spokane. [36]

Diversity in the Workforce

With LARO adjacent to two Indian reservations, the Park Service was aware early on of the

good potential for diverse workforce. Seasonal labor positions initially offered the best

opportunity for employment with the agency. Don Everts, long-time LARO employee,

remembered many tribal members who worked with maintenance crews throughout the park,

with many concentrating on the lakewide debris cleanup. He also recalled Superintendent

Wayne Howe saying that he would not look for minorities outside the region when he had

two reservations with available labor next door. Indeed, Howe hired two Indians for

permanent staff positions by 1972, using the provision for Excepted Appointments as

suggested by the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA). [37]

LARO began keeping count of women and minorities in its workforce at least by the late

1970s. For instance, in 1978 LARO hired thirty-two seasonals in Maintenance, including six

American Indians (two women and four men). Another Indian man and an Asian woman

worked as seasonal rangers that year. In addition, the park was making a special effort to do

business with minority-owned firms. To increase employment of tribal members, LARO

began making personal contacts with the CCT, the STI, and the American Indian Community

Center in Spokane at least by 1979. These contacts expanded in 1983 to include the Yakima

Tribal Employment Office. Although the seasonal labor force included both women and

minorities, all nine vacancies for permanent positions in 1981 were filled with non-minority

men. [38]

During the mid-1980s, the Park Service once again looked into ways to use Excepted Service

Appointing Authority to provide Indian preference at LARO. Because this could be used only

for jobs related to providing service to Indians, LARO calculated that it could justify using

the authority to hire three seasonal employees. By 1992, however, the Office of the Solicitor

restricted this authority to the BIA. The Park Service encouraged its units to convert any

Indians hired under Excepted Service to career service if the individual had worked three

continuous years and had a satisfactory record of work. LARO hired a seasonal interpreter

from the CCT in FY1993, sharing the cost equally through the Job Training and Placement

Act. The success of this appointment encouraged the park to pursue a similar agreement the

following year with the STI. In 1995, Superintendent Tays tried to fill the vacant Chief of

Interpretation position with a highly qualified woman who was a CCT tribal member; he was
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5a.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:52 PM]

disappointed, but not surprised, when she accepted a much better offer from the private

sector. Late in 1997, LARO developed additional strategies to increase the diversity of its

seasonal workforce, based on a full range of demographic variables. The park planned to use

the Veteran's Readjustment Appointment Authority and Contiguous Area Appointment

Authority to supplement established Park Service hiring practices. In June 2000, LARO hired

Frank Andrews as the Team Leader for Planning and Resource Management. Andrews, a

Colville tribal member, had worked for the BIA as an environmental protection specialist in

Washington, Oregon, and Alaska. He became the first local tribal member to hold a

management level position at LARO. [39]

VIPs, SCA, and YCC

The National Park Service uses several programs to provide supplemental labor at park units

nationwide. One of the most popular is the Volunteers in Parks (VIP), established in 1970.

Although the intent of the program was to augment the services normally provided, VIPs

frequently perform ordinary Park Service duties, especially in interpretation. Such volunteers

help the agency deal with inadequate budgets and staffing. LARO had a VIP program at least

by 1972, when volunteers led campfire programs and helped run the information desk. The

program has grown over the years, benefiting the park in many ways. During 1981,

volunteers worked nearly 1,400 hours for a total park expenditure of not quite $700, or less

than fifty cents per hour, "a genuine deal for us and a good experience for the volunteer."

[40] By 1982, VIPs worked as campground hosts in addition to interpretation. The park

estimated that the twenty-nine volunteers in 1985 donated nearly $35,000 worth of labor. [41]

The Student Conservation Program (later Student Conservation Association, or SCA) was

established in 1957 to help supplement staff in National Park units and other federal lands.

With just a couple of pilot projects initially, the program expanded to fourteen parks by 1969.

LARO had a student volunteer by 1990 who worked in the interpretation program at Fort

Spokane. In subsequent years, SCA volunteers have worked also in resource management.

[42]

The SCA served as a model for the Youth Conservation Corps (YCC), a program for

teenagers. LARO hosted its first YCC camp in 1977 and the program, while small, has

continued every year since. That first year, ten enrollees and three supervisors rebuilt the

Lava Bluff Trail, built and cleared fire trails, repaired fencing, worked on timber stand

improvement, and helped control noxious weeds. The group also constructed a short-lived,

tent-frame YCC camp at Coulee Dam. The program expanded to twenty-four enrollees the

following year and was complemented with a non-resident Young Adult Conservation Corps

(YACC), with ten workers. Over the years, YCC and YACC crews have worked on a wide

variety of maintenance projects that the regular park workforce would have been unable to

complete. Project costs were split evenly between regional energy accounts and LARO. As

Park Service funding dwindled during the 1980s, LARO dropped the YACC program in

FY1982 and cut back on the YCC in 1985, dropping to between seven and ten enrollees per

year. The park added a Native Youth Corps, sponsored by the STI, for 1994; the eight

participants worked with the YCC group, concentrating on maintenance projects in the Fort

Spokane District. [43]

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

laro/adhi/adhi5a.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:55 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 6:

Endnotes

1 Don Everts, phone interview with Kathryn L. McKay, 3 March 2000, notes on file,

LARO.HQ; Daniel Brown, phone interview with Kathryn L. McKay, 3 March 2000.

2 Foster Rhea Dulles, America Learns to Play: a History of Popular Recreation, 1607-1940

(Gloucester, Mass.: Peter Smith, 1959), 397.

3 NPS, National Parks for the 21st Century: The Vail Agenda: Report and Recommendations

to the Director of the National Park Service from the Steering Committee of the 75th

Anniversary Symposium. (Washington, D.C.: 1992), 68.

4 Marion Clawson, Land and Water for Recreation: Opportunities, Problems, and Policies

(Chicago: Rand, McNally, 1963), 27-28, 34, 49, 52, 55.

5 Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Director, 11 Sept. 1950, file 19, box 136,

RG 079-89-004, NARA-PSR; CODA, "Resource Management Plan and Environmental

Assessment" (1981), 13; Greider to NPS Director, 14 July 1950, file 3, box 3, RG 079-89-

001, NARA-PSR.

6 NPS, "A Master Plan for Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, Washington: Preliminary

Working Draft," Feb. 1968: 12, file D18 Master Plan, LARO.HQ.ADM; CODA, "Museum

Prospectus: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 1958, 17, 18, 20; CODA, "Statement for

Interpretation type document," Oct. 1957: 10-11, LARO.HQ.CIO; "Master Plan for the

Preservation and Use of Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," Feb. 1963: ch. 4, p. 12, file

D18 Master Plan 1962, box 3 of 3, LARO #95 Cat #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

7 Byron Fish, "Grand Coulee's Undiscovered Lake," Ford Times, (1954): 42.

8 "Master Plan for the Preservation and Use of Coulee Dam National Recreation Area,"

March 1963: 8, file D18 Master Plan 1962, box 3 of 3, LARO #95 Cat #3250,

LARO.HQ.PAO; LARO, "Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area: 5 Year Strategic Plan,

1998-2002," 1997: 9, box Cultural Resource Mgmt., LARO.HQ.SUP.

9 "Master Plan," August 1964: 33, ch. 1, file D18 Master Plan 1964-67, box 3 of 3, LARO

#95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; CODA, "Recreation and Wildlife Summary, Calendar

Year 1976," file N2621 Annual Aquatic Resources Rept., LARO.HQ.ADM.

10 Maureen H. McDonough and Donald R. Field, "Coulee Dam National Recreation Area:

Visitor Use Patterns and Preferences" (Seattle: NPS, College of Forest Resources, UW,

1979), vii, viii, ix, 16, 55, 66, 74, 79, 84; CODA, "Annual Statement for Interpretation and

Visitor Services: CODA," 1981: 9, Statement for Interpretation notebook, LARO.HQ.CIO.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:55 PM]

This study was conducted in order to provide information needed for the 1980 General

Management Plan.

11 LARO, "Draft General Management Plan/Environmental Impact Statement: Lake

Roosevelt National Recreation Area" ( Sept. 1998), 72; Kelly K. Cash, "Statement for

Management, Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 1992, notebook GMP, Environ.

Assessment, etc., LARO.HQ.CIO.

12 Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Director, 14 July 1950, file 3, box 3, RG

079-89-001, NARA-PSR; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA" CY1977: 1, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; Howard J. Haiges, Jr., to LARO

Superintendent, 28 July, 1988, file N4617 Demography 1991-, LARO.HQ.ADM; Homer W.

Robinson to NPS Regional Director, 11 Sept., 1964, file D18 Master Plan 1964-1967, box 3

of 3, LARO #93 Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; "Public Use Reporting and Counting

Instructions, CODA," 24 Feb., 1992, file N4617 Demography 199-, LARO.HQ.ADM;

"Superintendent's Annual Report , CODA," CY1988: 9-10, file A2621 Superintendent's

Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; Roberta Miller, phone interview with Kathryn L. McKay,

29 Feb. 2000, notes on file, LARO.HQ. Miller notes that visitation spikes often seem to

reflect good fishing years. She also believes that the counts do not catch all of the boat

launches.

13 Donald C. Swain, "The National Park Service and the New Deal, 1933-1940," Pacific

Historical Review 41 (August 1972): 324.

14 Barry Mackintosh, The National Parks: Shaping the System (Wash., D.C.: NPS, 1985), 52;

NPS, A Study of the Park and Recreation Problem of the United States (Wash., D.C.: GPO,

1941), i; Linda Flint McClelland, Building the National Parks: Historic Landscape Design

and Construction (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1998), 420, 422; Ethan Carr,

Wilderness by Design: Landscape Architecture and the National Park Service (Lincoln,

Neb.: University of Nebraska Press, 1998), 272, 274, 276-77; Richard F. Knapp and Charles

E. Hartsoe, Play for America: The National Recreation Association, 1906-1965 (Arlington:

National Recreation and Park Association, 1979), 124.

15 Ronald A. Foresta, America's National Parks and Their Keepers (Wash., D.C.: Resources

for the Future, 1984), 47; Carr, Wilderness by Design, 271-72; Mackintosh, Shaping the

System, 56; Richard West Sellars, Preserving Nature in the National Parks: A History (New

Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1997), 138-39. The quote is from NPS, Park and

Recreation Problem, 53.

16 Gordon Cooper Olson, "A History of Natural Resources Management Within the National

Park Service" (M.A. thesis, Slippery Rock University, 1986), 154-55; Sellars, Preserving

Nature, 174-75; Loran Fraser, Chief, Office of Policy, to George R. Nethercutt, Jr., U.S.

House of Representatives, 23 Dec. 1997, file L30 Lands 1/97-, LARO.HQ.ADM; John Ise,

Our National Park Policy: A Critical History (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press,

1961), 468.

17 Quoted in Mark W. T. Harvey, Symbol of Wilderness: Echo Park and the American

Conservation Movement (Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1994), 67.

18 Sellars, Preserving Nature, 150, 175-76; Elmo R. Richardson, Dams, Parks, and Politics:

Resource Development and Preservation in the Truman-Eisenhower Era (Lexington:

University Press of Kentucky, 1973), 14.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:55 PM]

19 Ernest Davidson, NPS Regional Landscape Architect, to NPS Regional Director, 13 Nov.

1940, file 2, box 1, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; F. A. Banks, USBR Supervising Engineer,

to USBR Commissioner, 9 July 1941, file 815 Columbia Basin Project, Administration of

Recreational Areas, Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake, USBR Boise; Claude E. Greider, NPS State

Supervisor, to NPS Regional Director, 26 Nov. 1940, file 2, box 1, RG79-89-001, NARAPSR.

20 USBR, Recreational Development of Roosevelt Lake: Columbia Basin Joint Investigations,

Problem 26 (Wash., D.C.: GPO, 1945), xv; NPS Regional Director to NPS Director, 31 Oct.

1940, file 2, box 1, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Conrad L. Wirth, NPS Supervisor of

Recreation and Land Planning, to NPS Acting Regional Director, 26 Oct. 1939, file 3, box 1,

RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

21 USBR, Problem 26, passim.

22 Thoralf Torkelson, USBR, to File, 14 April 1943, file 1, box 3, RG 079-89-001, NARAPSR; Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Director, 30 June 1948, file 3, box 3,

RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to William S.

Royce, Secretary to Walt Horan, U.S. House of Representatives, 19 Sept. 1947, file Coulee

Rec. Area 1948-52, box 216, Horan Coll., WSU.

23 Herbert Maier, NPS Acting Regional Director, to NPS Regional Director, 10 April 1946,

file 3, box 3, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; "1946 History of National Park Service on

Columbia River Reservoir Area," file H14 Project Histories (USBR), LARO.HQ.ADM;

"Annual Report of Events, Uses, Developments, and Problems, Coulee Dam Recreational

Area, June 2,1947," 1, file 3, box 3, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; "Memorandum of

Agreement among the Bureau of Reclamation, National Park Service, and Office of Indian

Affairs Relating to the Planning, Development, and Administration of the Coulee Dam

Recreational Area," 18 Dec. 1946: 4-6, file 2: A44 Tri-Party: Mat'ls Relating to Tri-Bureau

Agreement, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Claude E. Greider, LARO

Superintendent, to Pressley Watts, Wenatchee World, 16 Dec. 1952, box 4 "History - Coulee

Dam NRA," LARO.HQ.LIB.

24 CODA, "Master Plan Development Outline," 29 Jan. 1948 draft of first section: 2, file D18

Planning Program, closed 6/3/53, LARO.HQ.ADM; USBR, Annual Project History,

Columbia Basin Project, 1944, 45; Claude Greider, LARO Recreation Planner, to Frank A.

Banks, USBR Project Engineer, 29 Oct. 1945, box 4, "History - Coulee Dam NRA,"

LARO.HQ.LIB.

25 Carr, Wilderness by Design, 254-55; Claude E. Greider, LARO Recreation Planner, to

Frank Banks, USBR Project Engineer, 23 April 1943, file 1, box 3, RG 079-89-001, NARAPSR.

26 NPS, "Columbia River Reservoir Area, Washington: General Report and Development

Outline," June 1944: 6-7, LARO.HQ.100-USA.3.1.

27 Ibid., 9, 11, 16; McClelland, Building the National Parks, 441, 443-44, 456.

28 NPS, "Columbia River Reservoir Area, Washington: General Report and Development

Outline," June 1944: 7-8, LARO.HQ.100-USA.3.1.

29 Hugh Peyton, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 25 Feb. 1954, file D18
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:55 PM]

Master Plan 1953-June '54, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

30 Harvey, Symbol of Wilderness, 58; "Annual Report of Events, Uses, Developments, and

Problems, Coulee Dam Recreational Area, June 2, 1947," 2, file 3, box 3, RG 079-89-001,

NARA-PSR; NPS, Park and Recreation Problem, 14-15; NPS, "Columbia River Reservoir

Area, Washington: General Report and Development Outline," June 1944: 4, LARO.HQ.100-

USA.3.1; "Boating on the Grand Coulee Dam Reservoir," Reclamation Era 30 (Dec. 1940):

349; Ray L. Owens, Commodore, Grand Coulee Dam Yacht Club, to Walt Horan, U.S.

House of Representatives, 8 June 1951, file Coulee Rec. Area, 1948-52, box 216, Horan

Coll., WSU; Claude E. Greider, Recreation Planner, to NPS Director, 29 Oct. 1945, Box 4,

"History - Coulee Dam NRA," LARO.HQ.LIB.

31 USBR, Problem 26, 4, 27; Bob H. Hansen, "159-Mile Lake To Have Big Role," Seattle

Post-Intelligencer, 14 Nov. 1946; "Lake Roosevelt - Paradise Found," Reclamation Era

(Sept. 1946).

32"Area Operations Program," in CODA, "Coulee Dam Recreational Area Master Plan

Development Outline," 1948, file D18 Master Plan 1948, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250,

LARO.HQ.PAO; Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 18

Dec. 1947, file 1, box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Greider to Kirby Billingsley,

Wenatchee, 17 June 1949, file 5, box 208, Magnuson Papers, UW; "General Theme of

Development," in CODA, "Coulee Dam Recreational Area Master Plan Development

Outline," 1948, D18 Master Plan 1948, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO;

"Coulee Dam Recreational Area Master Plan Development Outline," 1948, file D18 Master

Plan 1948, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; "Annual Report of Events,

Uses, Developments, and Problems, Coulee Dam Recreational Area, June 2, 1947," file 3,

box 3, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; "Factors Affecting Recreational Development and Use,"

(draft Master Plan Development Outline), 4 Feb. 1948, file D18 Planning Program, closed

6/3/53, LARO.HQ.ADM. The NPS actually took over the area under the terms of the 1946

agreement on July 1, 1947 ("A Brief History of National Park Service Activities in Coulee

Dam Recreational Area, 1947," file Coulee Rec. Area 1948-52, file 1, box 6, RG 079-89-001,

NARA-PSR).

33 "Annual Report of Events, Uses, Developments, and Problems, Coulee Dam Recreational

Area, June 2, 1947," file 3, box 3, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

34 C. Grover Wilson, Chair, Publicity-Tourist Bureau, Spokane Chamber of Commerce, to

Warren G. Magnuson, U.S. Senate, 1 Feb. 1950, file 1, box 6, RG —079-89-001, NARAPSR; Cliff Hutsell, "Remarks by the Manager of the Grand Coulee Navigation Company," 14

Jan. 1953: 6, file 1, box 10, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Claude E. Greider, LARO

Superintendent, to NPS Director, 30 June 1948, file 3, box 3, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR;

Greider to NPS Director, 5 Sept. 1947, file 16, box 136, RG 079-89-004, NARA — PSR;

Greider to NPS Director, 9 June 1953, file D18 Planning Program, closed 6/3/53,

LARO.HQ.ADM; LARO Superintendent to NPS Director, 15 June 1955, file A2621 Annual

Reports Reg 4 1955 & 1956 FYs, box 3, RG 079-95-05, NARA-PSR; Greider to NPS

Director, 12 Jan. 1950, file 18, box 136, RG 079-89-004, NARA-PSR.

35 W. G. Carnes, Acting Chief of Development, 27 Sept. 1948, file D18 Planning Program,

closed 6/3/53, LARO.HQ.ADM; Newton Drury, NPS Director, to Walt Horan, U.S. House of

Representatives, 13 Feb. 1948, file 1, box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; "Factors Affecting

Recreational Development and Use," (draft Master Plan Development Outline), 4 Feb. 1948,

file D18 Planning Program, closed 6/3/53, LARO.HQ.ADM.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:55 PM]

36 F.A. Banks, USBR District Manager, to Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, 15 Dec.

1948, file 715 Columbia Basin Project, Administration of Recreational Areas, Franklin D.

Roosevelt Lake, USBR Boise.

37 Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to Pete J. Limacher, Chairman, Publicity

Tourist Committee, Spokane Chamber of Commerce, 29 July 1948, file Coulee Rec. Area

1948-52, box 216, Horan Coll., WSU; Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to Kirby

Billingsley, Wenatchee, 17 June 1949, file 5, box 208, Magnuson Papers, UW; "Priority List,

Project Construction Program," 23 Nov. 1949, file 1, box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR;

Greider to NPS Regional Director, 17 Aug. 1951, file 10, box 7, RG 079-89-001, NARAPSR.

38 Robert G. Hall, NPS Acting Chief, Western Office, Division of Design & Construction, to

NPS Director, 24 Nov. 1954, file D18 Master Plan July 1954 — June 1956, box 3 of 3,

LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

39 Hugh Peyton, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 14 April 1954, file D18

Master Plan 1953 — June '54, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Robert

G. Hall, NPS Acting Chief, Western Office, Division of Design & Construction, to Peyton, 5

Aug. 1954, file D18 Master Plan July 1954 — June 1956, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250,

LARO.HQ.PAO; Sanford Hill, NPS Chief, Western Office, Division of Design and

Construction, to Peyton, 2 March 1955, file D18 Master Plan July 1954 — June 1956, box 3

of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Herbert Maier, NPS Acting Regional

Director, to Peyton, 25 March 1955, file D18 Master Plan July 1954 — June 1956, box 3 of

3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

40 Lawrence C. Merriam, NPS Regional Director, to NPS Director, 25 Sept. 1951, file 1, box

6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Greider to Merriam, 15 Aug. 1952, file LARO.94.3249.9,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 30

Dec. 1952, file 1, box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

41 Claude E. Greider, NPS Recreation Planner, to F. A. Banks, USBR Supervising Engineer,

21 Jan. 1946, file LARO.94.3249.3, LARO.HQ.ADM; F. A. Banks, USBR District Manager,

to Greider, 9 Oct. 1947, file LARO.94.3249.3, LARO.HQ.ADM; USBR, Project History

1949, 63.

42 Claude E. Greider, NPS Recreation Planner, to NPS Regional Director, 9 July 1943, file 3,

box 3, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Philip Kearney, NPS Landscape Architect, to Greider,

25 April 1941, file 5, box 1, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Claude E. Greider, LARO

Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 23 Jan. 1953, file 1, box 8, RG 079-89-001,

NARA-PSR; Greider to NPS Regional Director, [1943], file LARO.94.3249.7,

LARO.HQ.ADM; CODA, Press Release, 14 July 1952, file LARO.94.3249.9,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Hugh Peyton, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Director, 12 June 1956, file

A2621 Annual Reports Field Areas 1-1-56 to 12-31-56, box 3, RG 079-95-05, NARA-PSR.

43 Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to Kirby Billingsley, Wenatchee, 17 June 1949,

file 5, box 208, Magnuson Papers, UW.

44 Ise, Our National Park Policy, 447, 455; USBR, Project History 1949, 63; Claude E.

Greider, LARO Superintendent, to USBR District Manager, 3 July 1951, file 1, box 6, RG

079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Walt Horan, U.S. House of Representatives, to W. C. Howe,

Chairman, Spokane County Republican Central Committee, 18 April 1950, file Coulee Rec.

Area 1948-52, box 216, Horan Coll., WSU; William C. Everhart, The National Park Service
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:55 PM]

(New York: Praeger Publishers, 1972), 35; USBR, Project History 1948, 55, 56.

45 Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to J. R. Cumming, Spokane Chamber of

Commerce, 10 Oct. 1950, file 1, box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

46 USBR, Project History 1950, ch. IV, Part I; Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to

NPS Director, 14 July 1950, file 3, box 3, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Greider to NPS

Regional Director, 23 May 1952, file 1, box 8, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; A. E. Demaray,

NPS Director, to Walt Horan, U.S. House of Representatives, 21 May 1951, file Coulee Rec.

Area 1948-52, box 216, Horan Coll. WSU; NPS, "Mission 66 for Coulee Dam Recreation

Area," 1957: 2; LARO Superintendent to NPS Director, 15 June 1955, file A2621 Annual

Reports Reg 4 1955 & 1956 FYs, box 3, RG 079-95-05, NARA-PSR.

47 H. G. Fowler, NPS Landscape Architect, to NPS Regional Landscape Architect, 22 Aug.

1952, file 7, box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Gary Kuiper, LARO Superintendent,

"Statement for Management," 1989, file D18 Statement for Management, 1989,

LARO.HQ.ADM; "Policies and Agreements" in CODA, "Coulee Dam Recreational Area

Master Plan Development Outline," 1948, file D18 Master Plan 1948, box 3 of 3, LARO #95,

Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

48 Robert H. Coombs, LARO Acting Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 3 Dec. 1953,

file D18 Master Plan 1953-June '54, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

49 Newton Drury, NPS Director, to Walt Horan, U.S. House of Representatives, 13 Feb.

1948, file Coulee Rec. Area 1948-52, box 216, Horan Coll., WSU; "Significance of the Area"

in CODA, "Coulee Dam Recreational Area Master Plan Development Outline," 1948, file

D18 Master Plan 1948, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Harold A.

Gangmark and Leonard A. Fulton, "Preliminary Surveys of Roosevelt Lake in Relation to

Game Fishes" (Wash., D.C.: U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Special Scientific Report:

Fisheries No. 5, 1949), 1; Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Director, 11

Aug. 1948, file 17, box 136, RG 079-89-004, NARA-PSR; "Factors Affecting Recreational

Development and Use" (draft Master Plan Development Outline), 4 Feb. 1948: 19-20, file

D18 Planning Program, closed 6/3/53, LARO.HQ.ADM.

50 "Factors Affecting Recreational Development and Use," (draft Master Plan Development

Outline), 4 Feb. 1948, file D18 Planning Program, closed 6/3/53, LARO.HQ.ADM; Wafford

Conrad, "Probing the Depths of Lake Roosevelt," Reclamation Era 34 (March 1948): 57-58;

USBR, Project History 1942, 68, 73; USBR, Project History 1943, 64; USBR, Project

History 1944, 45; USBR, Project History 1947, 128.

51 Hugh M. Miller, NPS Acting Director, to NPS Regional Director, 8 May 1946, file History

of NPS, CODA, drawer 5, LARO.HQ.RMO; Claude E. Greider, LARO Supervisor, to NPS

Regional Director, 5 Nov. 1948, file History of NPS, CODA, drawer 5, LARO.HQ.RMO; O.

A. Tomlinson, NPS Regional Director, to Chief, Columbia Basin Commission, 10 Nov. 1948,

file Proposed Regulations CODA, drawer 5, LARO.HQ.RMO.

52 Herbert Maier, NPS Acting Regional Director, to NPS Director, 20 Oct. 1949, file History

of NPS, CODA, drawer 5, LARO.HQ.RMO; transcript of meeting of NPS personnel with

interested groups and individuals, 1 June 1951: 21, file 715 Columbia Basin Project,

Administration of Recreational Areas, Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake, USBR Boise; "Rough

Draft, 9-22-48 [proposed regulations for LARO]," file History of NPS, CODA, drawer 5,

LARO.HQ.RMO; "Order No. 2633, Code of Federal Regulations, Title 36 — Parks and

Forests, Chapter 1 — National Park Service, Part 1 — General Rules and Regulations, Part 2
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:55 PM]

— General Rules and Regulations — National Recreational Areas, Part 23 — Lake Mead

Recreational Area," 9 May 1951: 4-12, file Roosevelt Lake Rec. Area, 1951, 36-A-1-b, box

6, Dept. of Conservation, Director's Papers, WSA; "Title 36 — Parks, Forests, and

Memorials, Chapter I — National Park Service, Department of Interior, Part I — General

Rules and Regulations, Part 2 — General Rules and Regulations, National Recreational

Areas," 1952: 6-11, file Proposed Regulations, CODA, drawer 5, LARO.HQ.RMO;

Lawrence C. Merriam, NPS Regional Director, to P. R. Nalder, USBR District Manager, 7

Aug. 1953, file 18, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

53 USBR, Project History 1950, 59; Fred O. Jones, "Geological Aspects of Developing the

Grand Coulee as a Part of the Coulee Dam Recreational Area, Washington," 1950: 1,

Glaciation section, Geology box, LARO.HQ.LIB; Duncan Mills, NPS Regional Chief of

Public Services, to NPS Regional Director, 10 April 1951, file 1, box 10, RG 079-89-001,

NARA-PSR; Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 20 July

1951, file 2, box 9, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Greider to NPS Regional Director, 13 June

1952, file D18 Planning Programs, closed 6/3/53, LARO.HQ.ADM; Don Everts, phone

interview; Sanford Hill, NPS Assistant Regional Director, to Claude E. Greider, CODA

Superintendent, 23 April 1953, file 1, box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

54 Everhart, The National Park Service, 36.

55 Ise, Our National Policy, 547; Sellars, Preserving Nature, 173; Conrad L. Wirth, Parks,

Politics, and the People (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1980), 265-67;

McClelland, Building the National Parks, 462-63.

56 NPS, Western Office of Design and Construction, Division of Landscape Architecture,

"Preliminary Cost Estimate, CODA," Dec. 1965, LARO.HQ.100-USA.4.4.

57 McClelland, Building the National Parks, 452-64; NPS, "A Master Plan for Coulee Dam

National Recreation Area, Washington: Preliminary Working Draft," Feb. 1968, file D18

Master Plan, LARO.HQ.ADM.

58 Hugh Peyton, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 22 March 1957, file D18

Planning Programs...1957-59, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; CODA,

"Mission 66 Prospectus: Coulee Dam National Recreation Areas," 24 April 1956 (revised

1956-62), file A5419 Mission 66, LARO.HQ.ADM; NPS, "Mission 66 for CODA," 3-4; E.T.

Scoyen, NPS Associate Director, to Kenneth B. Brown, Davenport Chamber of Commerce,

27 March 1957, file 12, box 32, Accession 3560-3, Jackson Papers, UW; Paul F. McCrary,

"Interpretive Prospectus for Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 25 Sept. 1964: 9, file

K1817 Interpretive Prospectus: Coulee Dam NRA 1964, LARO.HQ.CIO. A detailed list with

dates of construction and locations of all LARO facilities in 1963 is provided in CODA,

"Master Plan for Preservation and Use of Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," Sept.

1963, vol. III, sec. H, pp. 2-9, file D18 Master Plan Nov-Dec 1963, box 3 of 3, LARO #95,

Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

59 Hugh Peyton, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Director, 18 June 1957, file A2621 Annual

Reports Field Areas 1-1-57 to 12-31-57, box 3, RG 079-95-05, NARA-PSR.

60 CODA, Mission 66 Prospectus: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 24 April 1956

(revised 1956-62), file A5419 Mission 66, LARO.HQ.ADM.

61 NPS, "Notice of Approval, Coulee Dam National Recreation Area Prospectus, " 12 April

1957, file Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, 1952-69, HFC. For development schedules
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:55 PM]

for specific projects, see CODA, "Mission 66 Prospectus: Coulee Dam National Recreation

Area," 24 April 1956 (revised 1956-62), file A5419 Mission 66, LARO.HQ.ADM. For an

excellent map showing the proposed work at each development site, see "Physical

Improvements, Mission 66, Part of the Master Plan: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area,"

May 1957, drawer 3, wood cabinet, LARO.HQ.100-USA.

62 Mrs. Homer (Sis) Robinson and Don Everts, interview with Nancy F. Renk, 6 Dec. 1999,

Tape 1-A, tape and index on file, LARO.HQ.

63 NPS, "A Master Plan for Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, Washington: Preliminary

Working Draft," Feb. 1968: 47, 48, file D18 Master Plan, LARO.HQ.ADM.

64 NPS Director to Walt Horan, U.S. House of Representatives, 12 April 1962, box 216,

Horan Coll, WSU; Howard Chapman, LARO Superintendent, to Ford S. Barrett, Barrett &

Follevaag, 14 Sept. 1967, file A44 Triparty Agreement, LARO.HQ.ADM. In preparing the

1968 plan, Superintendent Chapman contacted the STI (and presumably also the CCT) to

learn of their plans for public use developments in the vicinity of LARO.

65 NPS, "A Master Plan for Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, Washington: Preliminary

Working Draft," Feb. 1968: 19, file D18 Master Plan, LARO.HQ.ADM.

66 "Annual Safety & Management Review, Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake and Coulee Dam

National Recreation Area, Aug. 4 thru 6, 1969," file 715 Columbia Basin Project —

Administration of Recreation Areas — FDR Lake, USBR Boise; USBR, Project History

1968, 8, 12; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1972, file A2621 Supt's Annual

Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; Art Hathaway, former LARO employee, personal communication

to Kathryn L. McKay, 1 March 2001.

67 Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Director, 11 Sept. 1950, file 19, box

136, RG 079-89-004, NARA-PSR; Sanford Hill, NPS Assistant Regional Director, to NPS

Director, 13 Feb. 1952, file D18 Planning Program closed 6/3/53, LARO.HQ.ADM; Frank

Hewlett, "Fort Spokane Will Be Used for Visitors," Spokesman-Review, 12 May 1960.

68 USBR, Project History 1969, 47; "New Superintendent Tells Changes Coming,"

Davenport Times, 26 June 1967; Howard H. Chapman, LARO Superintendent, to NPS

Regional Director, 9 May 1967, file A94 Third Power Plant: Changes in Water Line...1960-

74, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; W. E. Rawlings, USBR Project

Manager, to LARO Superintendent, 20 Aug. 1968, file A94 3rd Power Plant: Other

Ramifications 1966-76, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; David A.

Richie, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 1 May 1968, file A55 Agrmt —

North Marina, LARO.HQ.ADM; Edward A. Hummel, NPS Assistant Director, to Thomas S.

Foley, U.S. House of Representatives, 11 Aug. 1967, file A44 Agrmt — North Marina,

LARO.HQ.ADM.

69 "New Housing Devt for Lake Roosevelt," Davenport Times, 21 Sept. 1967; Robert A.

Burns, LARO District Park Ranger, to Files, 21 Dec. 1967, file Lincoln Co. Plans, Seven

Bays Estates, LARO.HQ.PAO; L. Keith Hellstrom, Landscape Architect, to David Richie,

LARO Superintendent, 15 Feb. 1968, file Lincoln Co. Plans, Seven Bays Estates,

LARO.HQ.PAO; Charles P. Woodbury, LARO Acting Superintendent, to Seven Bays, Inc.,

16 Feb. 1968, file Lincoln Co. Plans, Seven Bays Estates, LARO.HQ.PAO; David Riche,

LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 7 May 1968, file Lincoln Co. Plans, Seven

Bays Estates, LARO.HQ.PAO.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:55 PM]

70 Foresta, America's National Parks, 65; Outdoor Recreation Resources Review

Commission, Outdoor Recreation for Americans: A Report to the President and to the

Congress by the Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission (Wash., D.C.: 1962), 3-

4, 9; LARO, "5 Year Strategic Plan, 1998-2002," 1997: 6, in CRM box, LARO.HQ.SUP. The

quote is from the last source listed. The Bureau of Outdoor Recreation was dismantled in

1981.

71 Kenneth W. Brooks, Grand Coulee Dam Environmental Plan (prepared for the USBR,

1968), 3, 55, 66; David A. Richie, LARO Superintendent, to Kenneth W. Brooks, Architect,

19 June 1969, file D18 Maintenance Planning Program, LARO.HQ.ADM; Paul Pitzer, Grand

Coulee: Harnessing a Dream (Pullman: Washington State University Press, 1994), 352;

Craig Sprankle, USBR, Coulee Dam, phone interview with Kathryn L. McKay, 8 March

2000, notes on file, LARO.HQ.

72 David C. Wynecoop, Children of the Sun: A History of the Spokane Indians (Wellpinit,

Wash.: 1969), 43.

73 Kent Frizzell, DOI Solicitor, to Secretary of the Interior, "Opinion on the boundaries of

and status of title to certain lands within the Columbia and Spokane Indian Reservations," 3

June 1974: 6, 20, 22, 24, 26, file A44 Tri-party Agreement, LARO.HQ.ADM. These reserved

rights were still, of course, limited in that they could not interfere with project operations and

were subject to regulations to conserve fish and wildlife.

74 Robert D. Dellwo, Attorney, to Roy H. Sampsel, Special Assistant to the Secretary of the

Interior, 13 March 1975, file 11, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO;

"Effects of 1974 Solicitor's Opinion on National Park Service Administration of Lake

Roosevelt," May 1988: 2, unlabeled file, LARO.HQ.SUP.

75 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1975: 17, file A2621 Supt's Annual Report,

LARO.HQ.ADM; "Facility Inventory of Recreation Sites in Indian Zone Done March 3,

1975," 1-3, file 7, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Everts interview,

Tape 2-A; Charles H. Odegaard, NPS Regional Director, to NPS Director, 8 Dec. 1987, file

A44 Triparty Agreement, LARO.HQ.ADM.

76 Temple A. Reynolds, NPS Associate Regional Director, to NPS Regional Director, 30 Oct.

1978, file A5427 Field Office Personnel, LARO.HQ.ADM.

77 "No Lifeguard for Lake This Summer," Wilbur Register, 30 March 1989; William

Dunmire, "Statement for Management: CODA," 15 Dec. 1978: 20, file D18 Statements for

Mgmt, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1979, 1, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; Michael L. Blankenship, NPS Regional

Law Enforcement Specialist, to NPS Regional Chief, Resource Management and Visitor

Protection, 21 Sept. 1989, file W2623 Situation Info, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's

Annual Report, CODA," CY1981, file A2521 Supt's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM;

CODA, "Development/Advance Planning (Program)," 18 March 1983, file D230 Dev't &

Maint. (Fed Hwy Admin) 1983-89, LARO.HQ.ADM.

78 CCT, "Summary of Activities on Lake Roosevelt," April 1988, 2, file Wilderness — Lake

Roosevelt Management Plan (1 of 2), box 80, Morrison Coll., WSU; CCT, "Colville Tribe

Seeks Appropriations," 1989, file Environment Misc. — Lake Roosevelt (2 of 2), box 71,

Morrison Coll., WSU; USBR, "Annual Safety and Management Review: CODA Including

Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake, August 22 through 24, 1978, 3, file 715 Columbia Basin Project

— Lands — Admin. Of Rec. Areas, USBR Boise; Vaughn Baker, LARO Superintendent,
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:55 PM]

email to Kathryn L. McKay, 10 April 2001.

79 Kelly K. Cash, LARO Acting Superintendent, to Mr. And Mrs. R. L. Frostad, 15 Aug.

1986, file A3821 Individuals, LARO.HQ.ADM.

80 Howard Chapman, LARO Superintendent, to Ford S. Barrett, Barrett & Follevaag, 14

Sept. 1967, file A44 Triparty Agreement, LARO.HQ.ADM; CODA, "Resource Management

Plan and Environmental Assessment," 1982: 10, file D18 General Management Plan, box 1

of 3, LARO.HQ.PAO; Kelly K. Cash, LARO Acting Superintendent, to Thomas S. Foley,

U.S. House of Representatives, 20 Aug. 1986, file 99th Cong./Dept. Files/Dept. of

Interior/Nat'l Park Service — Part 2," box 269, Foley Coll, WSU.

81 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1976, 30, file A2621 Supt's Annual Report,

LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1977, 3, file A2621 Annual

Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM; William W. Dunmire, LARO Superintendent, to USBR Project

Manager, 16 June 1978, file A44 USBR Launch Ramps, LARO.HQ.ADM.

82 Bill Delaney and R. Felton Brunson, "Task Directive: Fluctuating Lake Level Mitigation

Study, Park General Package 240, Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 1986, appendix

C, file A44 Agreements, Correspondence with BPA, LARO.HQ.ADM; Ray Dashiell, phone

interview with Kathryn L. McKay, 2 March 2000, notes on file, LARO.HQ.

83 "Lake Roosevelt Cooperative Management Agreement," April 1990: 2-11, file Multiparty

Agreement April 1990, LARO.HQ.ADM; LRCC, "A Report On: Management of Lake

Roosevelt," 6 May 1993, file Mgmt. of Lake Roosevelt, box 4, LARO.HQ.100-USA.

84 LARO, "Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area: 5 Year Strategic Plan, 1998-2002,"

1997: 15, CRM box, LARO.HQ.SUP.

85 CODA, "Housing Management Plan," 1988: 3, file F7423 Employee Housing,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Kelly K. Cash, "Statement for Management, Coulee Dam National

Recreation Area," 1992: 11, 18, notebook GMP, Environ. Assessment, etc., LARO.HQ.CIO.

The five concession operations mentioned in 1988 were probably Kettle Falls, Seven Bays,

Keller Ferry, Spring Canyon, and Daisy.

86 National Parks and Conservation Association, Planning and Public Involvement:

Constituency Building for the Parks (Wash., D.C.: National Parks and Conservation

Association, 1988), 6; "FONSI: Proposed General Management Plan, Coulee Dam National

Recreation Area, Washington," 1980: 2, notebook GMP, Environ. Assessment, etc.,

LARO.HQ.CIO; NPS, "Environmental Assessment for the General Management Plan,

CODA" 1979: 55.

87 LARO, Draft General Management Plan/Environmental Impact Statement, Sept. 1998:

abstract, v, 27-28, 32-35. The name of the national recreation area officially changed from

Coulee Dam to Lake Roosevelt in 1997.

88 LARO, Draft General Management Plan, 1998: 15, 161, 163; Gerald W. Tays, LARO

Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 5 Dec. 1994, file F30 Budget Formulation 1994,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Robert D. Waterhouse, NPS Regional Chief, Project Programming, to NPS

Director, 4 Sept. 1952, file 1, box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

89 Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area Newsletter 4," Sept. 1998, LARO.HQ.CIO; Rob
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:55 PM]

Kauder, "Park Service Not Moving Toward Jet Ski Regulation on Lake Roosevelt," [Grand

Coulee] Star, 12 Aug. 1998; Lynne Brougher, LARO Education Specialist, personal

communication to Kathryn L. McKay, 1 June 2000.

90 Charles H. Odegaard, NPS Regional Director, to Donald E. Horton, [1991], file

LARO.3252.96.5, LARO.HQ.RMO.

91 LARO, Draft General Management Plan, 1998: 3, 96; CODA, "Proposed Launch Ramps,

Lake Roosevelt, Amendment to the General Management Plan and Environmental

Assessment," Dec. 1991: 1-6, file D18 Launch Ramp 1991, LARO.HQ.ADM; Gerald W.

Tays, interview with Nancy F. Renk, Tape 1-A, 20 July 2000, tape and index on file,

LARO.HQ; Richard L. Winters, LARO Acting Superintendent, to Keith R. Green, President,

Lake Roosevelt Property Owner's Association, 12 April 1996, file LARO.94.2349.24,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Dashiell phone interview; Kelly Cash, former LARO Assistant

Superintendent, personal communication to Kathryn L. McKay, 1 March 2001.

92 Vaughn L. Baker, LARO Superintendent, form letter, 15 Oct. 1996, file L30 Lands 1/97-,

LARO.HQ.ADM; "County, NPS Earn Grant for Boat Launch," Davenport Times, 9 Nov.

1989. There is no long-term agreement in place for cooperative management of the boat

ramp.

93 LARO, Draft General Management Plan, 1998: 10.

94 Barry Mackintosh, Visitor Fees in the National Park System: A Legislative and

Administrative History (Wash., D.C.: NPS, 1983), 84-85; Gary Kuiper, LARO

Superintendent, to Judith Boekel of Wilbur, 28 July 1992, file W34 Law Enforcement 1992,

LARO.HQ.ADM.

95 Mackintosh, Visitor Fees, 20-21, 25; USDI, NPS, A Master Plan for Coulee Dam National

Recreation Area, Washington: Preliminary Draft, Feb. 1968: 47, file D18 Master Plan,

LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1978: 8, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report,

CODA," CY1976: 14, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM.

96 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1984: 10, file H2621 Annual Reports,

LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," FY1982: 8, file H2621 Annual

Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM; proposal attached to Gary Kuiper, LARO Superintendent, to NPS

Acting Regional Director, 17 Nov. 1986, file F5419 Fees & Revenues 1987-88,

LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1987: 5, file H2621 Annual

Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1993: 2, file

A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual

Report, CODA," CY1989: 2, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-,

LARO.HQ.ADM.

97 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1994-95: 4, 7, file A2621 Superintendent's

Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; Briefing Statement: OIG File No. 96VI-703R,

GCD National Recreation Area, 20 June 1996, file A3615 Complaints — Service,

LARO.HQ.ADM; William C. Walters, NPS Deputy Field Director, to Mary Lou Butler of

Noxon, Montana, 13 May 1996, Congressional Correspondence Notebook, 1996-,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Denis P. Galvin, NPS Deputy Director, to NPS Associate Directors,

Regional Directors, and Park Superintendents, 12 March 1997, file F5419 Fee Demo

Program 1996-97, LARO.HQ.ADM; Dashiell phone interview.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:55 PM]

98 Denis P. Galvin, NPS Deputy Director, to NPS Associate Directors, Regional Directors,

and Park Superintendents, 12 March 1997, file F5419 Fee Demo Program 1996-97,

LARO.HQ.ADM; CODA, "Visitation and Fees a Good Combination for Lake Roosevelt,"

press release, file K3415 Press Releases — CODA, LARO.HQ.ADM; LARO, Draft General

Management Plan, 1998: 31.

99 Mackintosh, Visitor Fees, 52; "Coulee Dam National Recreation Area Evaluation Date

05/15/89," file A5419 Operations Evaluation 1989: 14, LARO.HQ.ADM; LARO, Draft

General Management Plan, 1998: v; "New Camping Regs for Non-Colvilles," The Star, 5

April 1995; William C. Walters, NPS Deputy Field Director, Pacific West Area, to Slade

Gorton, U.S. Senate, 16 Aug. 1995, file L34 Recreation Activities, LARO.HQ.ADM.

100 Gordon D. Boyd, LARO Acting Superintendent, to Prof. Mario Rodriguez, Costa Rica, 6

Dec. 1985, file K14 Information Requests, LARO.HQ.ADM.

101 LARO, Draft General Management Plan, 1998: 98; Claude E. Greider, LARO

Superintendent, to NPS Director, 14 April 1950, file 19, box 36, RG 079-89-004, NARAPSR; Arthur G. Holmes, "Report on Forest Protection Requirements: Coulee Dam National

Recreation Area" 30 May 1961: 8, file D18 Master Plan 1961, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat.

#3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Dan Mason, phone interview with Kathryn L. McKay, 2 March

2000, notes on file, LARO.HQ.

102 National Parks and Conservation Association, To Preserve Unimpaired: The Challenge of

Protecting Park Resources (Wash., D.C.: National Parks and Conservation Association,

1988), 167-68; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1972: 13, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; Miller phone interview; Dan Mason,

LARO Chief Ranger, personal communication to Kathryn L. McKay, 20 Sept. 2000. Figures

on visitor safety incidents are found in Superintendent's annual reports and in the annual law

enforcement summaries.

103 "Young Ladies Are Lifeguards," Davenport Times, 27 Aug. 1964: 3.

104 Mason phone interview.

105 Daniel R. Brown, "Coulee Dam National Recreation area Statement for Interpretation,

FY93," 18 Feb. 1993: 15, file K1817 Interpretive Plan, LARO.HQ.CIO; "1982 Update of

Statement for Interpretation and Visitor Services for Fiscal Year 1983, Part 1.2," 3, notebook

Statement for Interpretation, LARO.HQ.CIO; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA,"

CY1993: 1, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM;

"Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1974: 20-21, file A2621 Superintendent's

Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; William Dunmire, LARO Superintendent, to NPS

Regional Director, 17 Nov. 1978, file N3615 Pollution — Air, LARO.HQ.ADM.

106 Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 27 Feb. 1947, file 1,

box 9, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Greider to District Coast Guard Officer, Seattle, 3

March 1947, file 1, box 9, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; A. R. Demaray, NPS Associate

Director, to NPS Regional Director, 1 Sept. 1948, file Proposed Regulations CODA, drawer

5, LARO.HQ.RMO; NPS Director to Secretary of Interior, 27 Sept. 1951, file History of

NPS, CODA, drawer 5, LARO.HQ.RMO; CODA, "Mission 66 Prospectus: Coulee Dam

National Recreation Area," 24 April 1956 (revised 1956-62), file A5419 Mission 66,

LARO.HQ.ADM.

107
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:55 PM]

 CODA, "Master Plan of Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 1965, ch. 3: 5, 11, file

D18 Master Planning 1965-67, LARO.HQ.ADM; CODA, "Annual Aquatic Resources Report

for 1966," 1-2, file N2621 Annual Aquatic Resources Rept., LARO.HQ.ADM. The annual

law enforcement summaries are in file W2621 Annual Law Enforcement Summary,

LARO.HQ.ADM.

108 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1976: 21, file A2621 Supt's Annual

Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1977: 5, file A2621

Supt's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1978:

8, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; CODA, Lake Roosevelt

Mirror, vol. 1 (summer 1980), Newspapers notebook, box 7, Pitzer Coll., WSA-CRB; J. Jerry

Rumburg, LARO Park Naturalist, to David C. Guilbert, 17 Oct. 1979, file K14 Information

Requests, LARO.HQ.ADM; McDonough and Field, "Visitor Use Patterns," x.

109 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1977: 6, file A2621 Superintendent's

Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; USBR, "Annual Safety and Management Review: Coulee

Dam National Recreation Area Including Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake, August 22 through 24,

1978," 7, file 715 Col. Basin Project — Lands — Admin. Of Rec. Areas, USBR Boise; Gary

Kuiper, LARO Superintendent, to U.S. Coast Guard Director Auxiliary, 25 Feb. 1987, file

A94 U.S. Coast Guard, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA,"

CY1988: 8, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; Cletis Rodgers,

LARO Chief of Operations, to Ranger and Maintenance District Supervisors, 21 May 1993,

file D24 Maint and Rehab/Facilities 1992-, LARO.HQ.ADM; Vaughn Baker, LARO

Superintendent, to W. D. Widenhoeft, Commander, Coast Guard, 5 May 1998, file D24

Maint and Rehab/Facilities 1992-, LARO.HQ.ADM; Mason phone interview.

110 CODA, "Proposed Launch Ramps, Lake Roosevelt, Amendment to the General

Management Plan and Environmental Assessment," 1991: 6, file L7617 FONSI Launch

Ramps 1992, LARO.HQ.ADM; Reg Morgan, "Coast Guard Patrols Roosevelt," Wenatchee

World, 26 Aug. 1992; Brown, "Statement for Interpretation, FY93"; Kelly K. Cash,

"Statement for Management, Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 1992: Appendix A,

GMP, Environ. Assessment, etc. notebook, LARO.HQ.CIO; Claude E. Greider, LARO

Superintendent, to NPS Director, 10 June 1950, file 19, box 136, RG 079-89-004, NARAPSR; Ray Dashiell, LARO Maintenance Mech. Supervisor, personal communication to

Kathryn L. McKay, 1 June 2000.

111 LARO, Draft General Management Plan, 1998: 14, 96; LARO, "NPS Fee Demonstration

Program Project Proposal: Boater Safety Program," 22 Sept. 1997, file F5419 Fee Demo

Program 1996-97, LARO.HQ.ADM; Dan Mason, LARO Chief Ranger, personal

communication to Kathryn L. McKay, 1 June 2000; Dan Mason, LARO Chief Ranger, email

to Kathryn L. McKay, 11 August 2000.

112 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1975: 22, file A2621 Supt's Annual

Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; John Haller, "National Park Service, Coulee Dam National

Recreation Area Emergency Action Plan for Dam Failure and Flooding," August 1984: 1-2,

file W34 Law Enforcement 1984-87, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report,

CODA," CY1992: 10, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM;

NPS, "Columbia Cascades Cluster 1995 Workplan, Coulee Dam National Recreation Area,"

26 June 1995 and 30 Nov. 1995: 9, file A54 CODA Supt. Goals 1992-, LARO.HQ.ADM.

113 CODA, "Master Plan of Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 1965: ch. 3, p. 5, file

D18 Master Planning 1965-67, LARO.HQ.ADM; CODA Superintendent to NPS Director, 14

Sept. 1965, file A2615 M. Narrative Reports CODA CY1965, box 1, RG 079-95-06, NARA-
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:55 PM]

PSR.

114 Edward W. Fisher, DOI Deputy Solicitor, to NPS Director, 24 Aug. 1961: 1, file 3, box 3

of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #33250, LARO.HQ.PAO; C. Richard Neely, DOI Assistant Regional

Solicitor, to NPS Regional Director, 15 Dec. 1970, file W30 Jurisdiction, LARO.HQ.ADM;

C. Richard Neely for the DOI Regional Solicitor to NPS Regional Director, 29 March 1985,

file Copy - CODA Historical Files #1, LARO.HQ.SUP; Arthur Holmes, LARO Chief

Ranger, questionnaire [ca. 1960], file 3, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

115 Sellars, Preserving Nature in the National Parks, 209; "Superintendent's Annual Report,

CODA," CY1972: 4-5, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; Polly

Welts Kaufman, National Parks and the Woman's Voice: A History (Albuquerque: University

of New Mexico Press, 1996), 133; NPCA, To Preserve Unimpaired, 162; Gordon Boyd,

Chief Park Ranger, Olympic National Park, to Chairman, Coulee Dam Operations Evaluation

Team, 26 Aug. 1977, file A5427 Field Office Personnel, LARO.HQ.ADM; CODA, "1975

Case Incidents," file W2621 Annual Law Enforcement Summary, LARO.HQ.ADM;

"Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1977: 6, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual

Report, LARO.HQ.ADM.

116 Vaughn Baker, interview with Nancy F. Renk, 9 Dec. 1999, Tape 2-A, tape and index on

file, LARO.HQ .

117 Judith Boekle, Wilbur, to Gary J. Kuiper, LARO Superintendent, 21 July 1992, file W34

Law Enforcement 1992, LARO.HQ.ADM.

118 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1973: 8, file A2621 Superintendent's

Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1972: 7, file

A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; McDonough and Field, "Visitor

Use Patterns," xi; Richard Berrian to LARO Superintendent, 25 Oct. 1993, file W34 Law

Enforcement 1993-94, LARO.HQ.ADM; Mason phone interview.

119 "Coulee Dam National Recreation Area Evaluation, Date 05/15/89," 13, file A5419

Operations Evaluation 1989, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA,"

FY1982: 9, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "CODA Including

Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake, Annual Safety and Management Review," 9-11 Aug. 1988: 1-2,

file 715 Col. Basin — Admin. of Rec. Areas — NPS, USBR Boise; Gordon D. Boyd, LARO

Chief Ranger, to LARO Administrative Officer, 24 June 1986, file W34 Law Enforcement

1984-87, LARO.HQ.ADM.

120 Thomas Teaford, phone interview with Kathryn L. McKay, 3 August 2000, notes on file,

LARO.HQ.

121 LARO, Draft General Management Plan, 1998: 96; CODA, "Visitor Management —

Resource Protection Assessment Program (VRAP): Park Profile," 29 Jan. 1997: 7, file W34

Law Enforcement 1997-, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA,"

CY1993: 1, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; CODA,

"Annual Law Enforcement Program Report — CY1994," 8 Feb. 1995, file W34 Law

Enforcement 1995-, LARO.HQ.ADM; CODA, "Wildlife Protection Needs Assessment," 26

Feb. 1991, file NPS Wildlife Protection Needs Assess., drawer 3, LARO.FS.1107.

122 Gordon D. Boyd, LARO Acting Superintendent, to Dan D. Berry, Lincoln County

Sheriff, 31 March 1988, file W30 Jurisdiction, LARO.HQ.ADM; Mason phone interview.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:55 PM]

123 "Briefing Paper: Law Enforcement Jurisdiction at Lake Roosevelt National Recreation

Area," n.d., Briefing Statements notebook, LARO.HQ.ADM; Vaughn Baker, LARO

Superintendent, personal communication to Kathryn L. McKay, 1 June 2000;

"Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1973: 14, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual

Report, LARO.HQ.ADM.

124 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1976: 21, file A2621 Superintendent's

Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; Gary J. Kuiper, LARO Superintendent, to Gilbert F.

Hanson, Lincoln County Fire Protection District #7, 17 Feb. 1987, file D5027 Radio

Communication/Misc., LARO.HQ.ADM; "MOU Between CCT Parks and Recreation and

Dept. of the Interior NPS Coulee Dam NRA, June 6, 1996," file H24 Archaeological and

Historical Data 1994, LARO.HQ.ADM.

125 "II. Bringing People to the Table: The Lake Roosevelt Forum," n.d., file Lake Roos.

Forum, drawer 2, LARO.HQ.RMO.

126 Gordon D. Boyd, LARO Chief Park Ranger, to Files, 6 Feb. 1986, file W34 Law

Enforcement 1984-87, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA,"

CY1985: 6, file H2621 Annual Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Questionnaire: Drug Related

Problems: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 15 Oct. 1986: 1-2, file W46 General &

Misc. Reg., LARO.HQ.ADM; Kelly K. Cash, LARO Assistant Superintendent, to NPS

Regional Director, 12 Aug. 1987, file W34 Law Enforcement 1984-87, LARO.HQ.ADM;

William J. Briggle, NPS Deputy Regional Director, to Superintendents, Olympic and LARO,

16 March 1987, file W34 Law Enforcement 1984-87, LARO.HQ.ADM; Darrell J. Cook,

LARO Chief Ranger, to Bob Marriott, NPS Law Enforcement Specialist, WO, 6 March 1991,

file W34 Law Enforcement 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Summary, 1996 Drug Enforcement

Funds; Dan Mason, LARO Chief Ranger, email to Kathryn L. McKay, 11 August 2000;

"Expenditures/Reporting Form," file W34 Law Enforcement 1997-, LARO.HQ.ADM; Mason

phone interview.

127 "Report on the Expenditure of Drug Enforcement Funds in FY 1990," file F2621 —

Annual to 1991, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1991: 6,

file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's

Annual Report, CODA," CY1992: 1, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Gary J. Kuiper, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Law Enforcement

Specialist, 4 Dec. 1992, file S5823 Boats, LARO.HQ.ADM.

128 Robert D. Dellwo, Attorney, to Roy H. Sampsel, Special Assistant to the Secretary of the

Interior, 13 March 1975, file 11, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO;

"Effects of 1974 Solicitor's Opinion on National Park Service Administration of Lake

Roosevelt," May 1988, 2, unlabeled file, LARO.HQ.SUP; Gerald Tays, "Statement for

Management, Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 1995: 18, file D18 Statements for

Management, LARO.HQ.ADM; "CODA Including Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake, Annual

Safety and Mgmt Review," 9-11 Aug. 1988: 3, file 715 Col. Basin — Admin. of Rec. Areas

— NPS, USBR Boise; Dan Morgan, LARO Chief Ranger, email to Kathryn L. McKay, 11

August 2000.

129 William Burgen, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 7 March 1975, file

Copy - CODA Historical Files #1, LARO.HQ.SUP; Lake Roosevelt Coordinating

Committee, "A Report On: Management of Lake Roosevelt," 6 May 1993, file Mgmt. of

Lake Roosevelt, box 4, LARO.HQ.USA; "FONSI: Proposed General Management Plan,

Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, Washington," 1980: 3, notebook GMP, Environ.

Assessment, etc., LARO.HQ.CIO; Bill Butts, Roosevelt Recreation Enterprises, to Kathy
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:55 PM]

Butts and Marty Blum, 10 July 1990, file Multiparty Agreement April 1990,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Rich Landers, "Angler Prevails," Spokesman-Review, 12 Jan. 1994; Baker

interview, Tape 2-A.

130 William W. Dunmire, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Associate Regional Director, 13

July 1979, file A44 — Coop Agreement — Fisheries, LARO.HQ.ADM.

131 Thoralf Torkelson to Files, 14 April 1943, History — Coulee Dam NRA box,

LARO.HQ.LIB; Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 22

Feb. 1943, file 3, box 9, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; "Memorandum of Agreement among

the Bureau of Reclamation, National Park Service, and Office of Indian Affairs Relating to

the Planning, Development, and Administration of the Coulee Dam Recreational Area," 19

Dec. 1946, file 2: A44 Tri-Party: Mat'ls Relating to Tri-Bureau Agreement, box 3 of 3,

LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

132 Arthur G. Holmes, "Report on Forest Protection Requirements: Coulee Dam National

Recreation Area," 30 May 1961, file D18 Master Plan 1961, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat.

#3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

133 O. A. Tomlinson, NPS Regional Director, to NPS Director, 14 March 1949, file 3, box 9,

RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to Mount Rainier

National Park Superintendent, 18 April 19551, file 3, box 9, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR;

"Master Plan Development Outline, Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, Washington:

Forestry," 1952: 1-2, file D18 Master Plan: Forestry, 1952, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat.

#3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Greider to NPS Regional Director, 29 July 1952, file D18 Planning

Programs closed 6/3/53, LARO.HQ.ADM; CODA, "Mission 66 Prospectus: Coulee Dam

National Recreation Area," 24 April 1956 (revised 1956-62), 13, file A5419 Mission 66,

LARO.HQ.ADM.

134 Arthur G. Holmes, "Report on Forest Protection Requirements: Coulee Dam National

Recreation Area," 30 May 1961: 2, 5; "Master Plan for Preservation and Use of Coulee Dam

National Recreation Area," March 1963: vol. III, pp. 4-5, file D18 Master Plan 1962, box 3 of

3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; "Master Plan for the Preservation and Use of

Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," Feb. 1963: ch. 4, p. 13, file D18 Master Plan 1962,

box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; "Cooperative Fire Fighting Agreement

Between National Park Service (Coulee Dam National Recreation Area) and Washington

State Department of Natural Resources (Colville District)," 27 July 1964, file A44

Washington State, LARO.HQ.ADM.

135 CODA, "Fire Management Plan," 29 Sept. 1980: 1, 3, file Y14 Forest Fires Control 76-

81, LARO.HQ.ADM; Olson, "Natural Resources Management," 250; Gary Kuiper, LARO

Superintendent, to Gilbert F. Hanson, Lincoln County Fire Protection District #7, 17 Feb.

1987, file D5027 Radio Communication/Misc., LARO.HQ.ADM; Darrell J. Cook, LARO

Chief Ranger, to NPS Regional Fire Management Office, 30 Dec. 1991, file Y14 Fire

Management 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM.

136 CODA "Fire Management Plan," 29 Sept. 1980: 6, file Y14 Forest Fires Control 76-81,

LARO.HQ.ADM; CODA, "Resource Management Plan and Environmental Assessment,"

1982: 2; Gary Kuiper, "Coulee Dam National Recreation Area Fire Management Plan," 11

Aug. 1986, file Fire Management Information, drawer 2, LARO.HQ.RMO; CODA,

"Resource Management Plan and Environmental Assessment," 1988: 44-46;

"Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," Jan. 1994-Sept. 1995: 16, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; Scott Hebner, phone interview
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:55 PM]

with Kathryn L. McKay, 3 March 2000.

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

laro/adhi/adhi6n.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6a.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:57 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 6:

Family Vacation Lake: Recreation Planning

and Management (continued)

National Park Service Involvement in Reservoir Recreation Planning

Beginning in the 1920s, the National Park Service played a leading role in recreational

planning and development for state and local parks, many of which were later turned over to

the states to manage. Because of the agency's experience with park planning during the

1930s, it often served as a consultant to new state park and recreation systems. [13]

In 1936, an important piece of legislation codified the cooperative relationship the Park

Service had been enjoying with state parks informally since 1921 and through Emergency

Conservation Work since 1933. The Park, Parkway, and Recreation Study Act of 1936

extended the Park Service's role in planning recreational areas and facilities at federal, state,

and local levels throughout the country. As directed by the 1936 act, the Park Service in 1941

published a comprehensive study of public outdoor recreational facilities that outlined future

needs for the nation, excluding areas already being managed by the U.S. Department of

Agriculture. This plan was funded by Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) emergency

conservation work appropriations, and it summarized the philosophy of New Deal

recreational planning. The study noted the need for coordination among the federal agencies

dealing with recreation and asserted that the Park Service was the logical agency to oversee

the work. Four new kinds of national parks were being established or planned: national

recreation areas, recreation demonstration areas ("submarginal lands" converted to

recreational use, generally turned over to state or highway departments after development),

national parkways, and national seashores. The 1936 act allowed the Park Service to plan for

recreational uses of public lands in new areas such as these. [14]

The development of recreation facilities by the Park Service outside the traditional national

parks became increasingly important to the agency in the 1930s. As the 1941 Park Service

report on the nation's recreation facilities commented, "Artificial bodies of water in

interesting settings, and man's ingenuity in creating them, have strong recreational appeal."

Purists criticized Park Service involvement with recreational areas as a lowering of agency

standards; they were uneasy about the consolidation of state and national park planning.

Some also found it ironic that the Park Service was administering recreation at certain

reservoirs while actively fighting dam proposals in areas where dams threatened national

parks and monuments. The Park Service sidestepped the inherent contradictions in its actions

by launching a new recreational program centered on large reservoirs. Some saw this

expansion of recreational opportunities as a good way to relieve visitation pressure on the

traditional national parks. [15]

The first recreational planning by the Park Service done in cooperation with Reclamation was

the planning for Lake Mead, the reservoir created in Nevada and Arizona by Boulder Dam. In

1936, shortly after the dam was completed, Reclamation entered into a Memorandum of
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6a.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:57 PM]

Agreement with the Park Service to create the Boulder Dam Recreational Area, the country's

first NRA. The Park Service was also involved with recreational planning for reservoirs in the

Colorado River basin and in other areas in the early 1940s. Between 1933 and 1964, five

reservoir-based NRAs were added to the National Park System, including Boulder Dam

(renamed Lake Mead in 1947) and Coulee Dam. The emphasis at these NRAs was on

recreation, and consumptive use of park resources such as mining, hunting, and grazing were

permitted. In 1997, even after some NRAs had been turned over to other agencies, the Park

Service was managing twelve NRAs centered on large reservoirs. The reservoirs that the Park

Service continued to manage, including Lake Roosevelt, were believed to have national

rather than state or local significance. [16]

Riding a surfboard on the rising waters behind Grand Coulee Dam,

July 31, 1940. Photo courtesy of Grant County Historical Society and

Museum, BOR Collection.

Newton Drury, National Park Service Director from 1940-1951, believed that national parks

should be limited to outstanding scenic landscapes; he was less than enthusiastic about the

Park Service assuming responsibility for managing recreation on artificial lakes. He did not

object to Lake Mead or Lake Roosevelt, though, because he felt the size of those two

reservoirs made them significant to the nation as a whole. Just as World War II was ending,

Assistant Secretary of the Interior Michael Straus asked Drury to examine the possibilities for

Park Service management of smaller reservoirs expected to be created by future Reclamation

dams. Drury openly objected to this concept, and in a 1952 speech he said that reservoirs like

Lake Mead inevitably became dominated by local sportsmen and business interests, making

them "local romping grounds." [17] Drury was overruled, however, by Straus and by

Secretary of the Interior Harold Ickes. Ickes was attracted by the increased appropriations

such recreation areas might bring the Park Service, and he also felt that NRAs would reduce

the pressure on the system's other units. He and Straus felt Drury was attempting to back off

from a serious responsibility of the Park Service and to retreat from the conflicts involved in

recreation management. [18]

In the early 1940s, Park Service employees debated among themselves the merits of their

agency's administration of Lake Roosevelt. Ernest Davidson, Regional Landscape Architect,

for example, did not believe that the reservoir possessed national recreational significance.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6a.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:57 PM]

He argued that many natural lakes in the Spokane area were not being used to capacity and

that Lake Roosevelt had much less recreational potential than Lake Mead. LARO's first

Superintendent Claude Greider, on the other hand, remained "quite enthusiastic" about the

possibilities of the area. He commented that the ultimate recreational use of the area was

unknown, so planning should emphasize flexible development. [19]

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

laro/adhi/adhi6a.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:59 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 7:

Endnotes

1 "Memorandum of Agreement Between the National Park Service, the Bureau of

Reclamation, and Office of Indian Affairs Relating to the Planning, Development, and

Administration of the Grand Coulee National Recreation Area," 2 Oct. 1941: 11, file 715 Col.

Basin Project, Admin. of Recreational Areas, FDR Lake, USBR Boise; H. W. Bashore,

USBR Acting Commissioner, to DOI First Assistant Secretary, 17 July 1942, file 715

Columbia Basin Project, Administration of Recreational Areas, Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake,

USBR Boise; Claude E. Greider, NPS Recreation Planner, to NPS Regional Director, 30 July

1943, file D18 Planning Program, closed 6/3/53, LARO.HQ.ADM; USBR, Recreational

Development of Roosevelt Lake: Columbia Basin Joint Investigations, Problem 26 (Wash.,

D.C.: GPO, 1945), 36; Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Director, 7 Oct.

1947, file 16, box 136, RG 079-89-004, NARA-PSR; CODA, "Coulee Dam Recreational

Area Master Plan Development Outline," 1948, "Area Operations Program," 2, file D18

Master Plan 1948, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Claude E. Greider,

LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 23 Nov. 1949, file 1, box 6, RG 079-89-

001, NARA-PSR; Mrs. Homer (Sis) Robinson and Don Everts, interview with Nancy F.

Renk, 6 Dec. 1999, Tape 1-A, notes and index on file, LARO.HQ; Don Everts, phone

interview with Kathryn L. McKay, 3 March 2000, notes on file, LARO.HQ.

2 Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 29 Aug. 1950, file 3,

box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Sanford Hill, NPS Assistant Regional Director,

Planning and Construction, to Greider, 11 Sept. 1950, file 3, box 6, RG 079-89-001; Greider

to NPS Regional Director, 17 Oct. 1950, file 3, box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Greider

to NPS Regional Director, 26 Oct. 1950, file 3, box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Greider

to USBR Acting District Manager, 26 Oct. 1950, file 3, box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR;

Greider to NPS Regional Director, 13 Dec. 1950, file 3, box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR;

press release, 28 Feb. 1952, file Nat'l Park Service 1947-64, box 216, Horan Coll., WSU;

Greider to NPS Regional Director, 30 Jan. 1952, file 3, box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

3 "Memorandum of Understanding Covering Furnishing of Building Sites, Utility Services,

and Temporary Office Space at Coulee Dam, Washington," 5 Feb. 1953, file 2, box 3, RG —

079-89-001, NARA-PSR; USBR Special Assistant to the District Manager, to USBR District

Manager, 2 Sept. 1953, file A44 Coop Agrmts BOR Outside Storage Space,

LARO.HQ.ADM; "Memorandum of Agreement Between the Bureau of Reclamation and the

National Park Service," 3 March 1953, file A44 Coop Agrmts BOR Outside Storage Space,

LARO.HQ.ADM.

4 CODA, "Mission 66 Prospectus: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 24 April 1956

(revised 1956-62), file A5419 Mission 66, LARO.HQ.ADM; Lawrence C. Merriam, NPS

Regional Director, to LARO Superintendent, 10 Oct. 1958, file A94 3rd Power Plant:

Changes in Water Line...1960-74, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO;

Homer W. Robinson, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 30 April 1959, file
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:59 PM]

A94 3rd Power Plant: Changes in Water Line...1960-74, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250,

LARO.HQ.PAO; LARO Superintendent to NPS Director, 26 May 1960, file A2621 Annual

Reports Field Areas 1-1-60 to 12-31-60, box 4, RG 079-95-05, NARA-PSR; LARO

Superintendent to NPS Director, 27 May 1963, file A2621 Annual Reports Field Areas 1-1-

63 to 12-31-63, box 4, RG 079-95-05, NARA-PSR.

5 Paul Pitzer, Grand Coulee: Harnessing a Dream (Pullman: Washington State University

Press, 1994), 93, 103-04, 180-81.

6 Claude E. Greider, NPS Recreation Planner, to unknown recipient, 29 Dec. 1941, file 3, box

3, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; H. W. Bashore, USBR Acting Commissioner, to DOI First

Assistant Secretary, 17 July 1942, file 715 Columbia Basin Project, Administration of

Recreational Areas, Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake, USBR Boise; CODA, "Coulee Dam

Recreational Area Master Plan Development Outline," 1948, "Area Operations Program"

section, 2, 4, file D18 Master Plan 1948, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250,

LARO.HQ.PAO; Greider to NPS Director, 11 March 1949, file 18, box 136, RG 079-89-004,

NARA-PSR.

7 Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Director, 14 July 1950, file 3, box 3, RG

079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Greider to NPS Director, 12 Jan. 1951, file 19, box 136, RG 079-

89-004, NARA-PSR; Herbert Maier, NPS Acting Regional Director, to Greider, 8 Feb. 1951,

file A44 Coop Agrmts BOR Outside Storage Space, LARO.HQ.ADM; A. F. Darland, USBR

Supervising Engineer, to Greider, 22 Dec. 1950, file A44 Coop Agrmts BOR Outside Storage

Space, LARO.HQ.ADM; Greider to NPS Regional Director, 13 June 1952, file D18 Planning

Programs, closed 6/3/53, LARO.HQ.ADM; Cliff Hutsell, Manager Grand Coulee Navigation

Co., to Walt Horan, U.S. House of Representatives, 27 April 1951, file Coulee Rec. Area

1948-52, box 216, Horan Coll., WSU.

8 George A. Shipman, "Final Report and Recommendations Regarding the Town of Coulee

Dam" (Ephrata, Wash.: USBR, 1954), 1-2; USBR, Annual Project History, Columbia Basin

Project, 1958, 1; Homer Robinson, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 10

April 1958, file A44 Tri-Party Agrmt - Sites in Coulee Dam, LARO.HQ.ADM; Robinson to

NPS Regional Director, 30 April 1959, file A94 3rd Power Plant: Changes in Water Line...

1960-74, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Robinson to NPS Regional

Director, 17 Aug. 1959, file A44 Tri-Party Agrmt — Sites in Coulee Dam, LARO.HQ.ADM;

CODA Superintendent to NPS Director, 26 May 1960, file A2621 Annual Reports Field

Areas 1-1-60 to 12-31-60, box 4, RG 079-95-05, NARA-PSR.

9 Grand Coulee Dam Bicentennial Association, From Pioneers to Power: Historical Sketches

of the Grand Coulee Dam Area (Nespelem, Wash.: Rima Printing and Graphics, 1976), 162;

LARO Superintendent to NPS Director, 13 Sept. 1966, file A2615 M. Narrative Reports

CODA CY1966, box 1, RG 079-95-05, NARA-PSR; Howard H. Chapman, LARO

Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 9 May 1967, file A94 Third Power Plant: Changes

in Water Line...1960-74, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Ray Dashiell,

phone interview with Kathryn L. McKay, 2 March 2000, notes on file, LARO.HQ. The

houses transferred to the BIA were located at 804 Yucca, 1024 and 1114 Camas, and 1012

Central (Linda Morgan, LARO Budget Analyst, email to Kathryn L. McKay, 11 August

2000).

10 CODA, "Mission 66 Prospectus: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 24 April 1956

(revised 1956-62), file A5419 Mission 66, LARO.HQ.ADM; LARO Superintendent to NPS

Director, 18 June 1957, file A2621 Annual Reports Field Areas 1-1-57 to 12-31-57, box 3,

RG 079-95-05, NARA-PSR; Conrad L. Wirth, Parks, Politics, and the People (Norman:
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:59 PM]

University of Oklahoma Press, 1980), 244; LARO Superintendent to NPS Director, 15 May

1962, file A2621 Annual Reports Field Areas 1-1-62 to 12-31-62, box 4, RG 079-95-05,

NARA-PSR.

11 "Master Plan for the Preservation and Use of Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," Feb.

1963: ch. 4: 7, file D18 Master Plan 1962, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250,

LARO.HQ.PAO; Everts phone interview; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA"

CY1972: 8-9, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM;

"Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1984: 12, file H2621 Annual Reports,

LARO.HQ.ADM; CODA, "General Management Plan" (1980): 5, notebook GMP, Envir.

Assessment, LARO.HQ.CIO.

12 Machelle L. Frye, LARO Housing Officer, to NPS Facility Manager, Pacific-Great Basin

Support Office, 25 Oct. 1996, file F7423 1995-1997, LARO.HQ.ADM.

13 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1985: 7, file H2621 Annual Reports,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Superintendent's Annual Report for CY1986: 4, file H2621 Annual

Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM; CODA, "Housing Management Plan," 1988: 8-9, file F7423

Employee Housing, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1993:

13, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; Linda Morgan,

LARO Budget Analyst, personal communication to Kathryn L. McKay, 1 June 2000.

14 "Housing National Park Service Employees," Nov. 1997, file 10-26, LARO.HQ.CIO;

"Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," FY1996: 9, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual

Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; LARO, Draft General Management Plan/Environmental

Impact Statement: Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area (Sept. 1998), 98; LARO, "5

Year Strategic Plan, 1998-2002," 1997: 4, CRM box, LARO.HQ.SUP; ; Dashiell phone

interview; Vaughn Baker, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 18 Aug. 1998,

file F7423 Housing 1998-, LARO.HQ.ADM.

15 CODA, "Housing Management Plan," 1988: 3, 5-6, 10-12, file F7423 Employee Housing,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Dashiell phone interview; Linda Morgan, LARO Budget Analyst, personal

communication, 1 June 2000.

16 CODA, "Museum Prospectus: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area" (1958), 19.

17 USBR, Project History 1950, ch. IV, part I; CODA, "Road System," 15 July 1953, file

D18 Master Plan 1953-June '54, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

18 CODA, "Mission 66 Prospectus: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 24 April 1956

(revised 1956-62), file A5419 Mission 66, LARO.HQ.ADM; NPS, "Notice of Approval,

Coulee Dam National Recreation Area Prospectus, 12 April 1957: 3, file Coulee Dam

National Recreation Area, 1952 to 1969, HFC; LARO Superintendent to NPS Director, 15

May 1962, file A2621 Annual Reports Field Areas 1-1-62 to 12-31-62, box 4, RG 079-95-

05, NARA-PSR; "Master Plan of Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 1965: ch. 3, p. 14,

file D18 Master Planning 1965-67, LARO.HQ.ADM; William F. Ford, USBR Special

Services Officer, and Albert F. Drysdale, LARO District Ranger, to USBR Power Supervisor,

26 Nov. 1963, file D5031 Collection & Disposal of Debris & Trash, LARO.HQ.ADM; "RMAP Park Profile Input," 25 April 1994: 1, file L76 — Environmental Impact,

LARO.HQ.ADM.

19 NPS and Federal Highway Administration, "Road System Evaluation: Coulee Dam

National Recreation Area," April 1985: iii, 6-7, 12, file Road System Evaluation 1985, box 3,
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:59 PM]

LARO.HQ.USA; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1985: 11, file H2621 Annual

Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM.

20 CODA, Maintenance Questionnaire, April 1980: 1-4, file D30 Roads & Trails,

LARO.HQ.ADM.

21 CODA, "Resource Management Plan and Environmental Assessment," 1982: 14, file D18

General Management Plan, box 1 of 3, LARO.HQ.PAO; Daniel J. Farrell, LARO Land

Management Specialist, to LARO Superintendent, 23 June 1981, notebook Crescent Lake

Cycle Hill Rest. Plan 1986, drawer 3, LARO.FS.1107.

22 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1981: 9, file A2621 Superintendent's

Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; Charles V. Janda, LARO, to NPS Regional Director, 15

Sept. 1980, file N2623 Situation Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Coulee Dam National

Recreation Area: Off-road Operation of Motor Vehicles," 4 Oct. 1983 draft: 2, file W823

Legislation, Enacted, LARO.HQ.ADM; CODA, "Resource Management Plan and

Environmental Assessment," 1982: 3.

23 Gerry Shimek, "A Survey of Unauthorized Roads in the Coulee Dam National Recreation

Area," Moscow: U. of Idaho, Cooperative Park Studies Unit, 1983: 1, file L3027 Roads &

Right-of-Ways, Stevens County, LARO.HQ.ADM; LARO, "Resource Management Plan,

Natural Resources," 1997: Appendix F, pp. 12-13, 15-16, LARO.HQ.RMO; "ORV

Restrictions at Crescent Lake — Eden Harbor Area," press release, 18 March 1982, notebook

Crescent Lake Cycle Hill Rest. Plan 1986, drawer 3, LARO.FS.1107; Gordon D. Boyd,

LARO Chief Interpretation & Resource Management, to LARO Superintendent et al., 11 Oct.

1983, file W3823 Legislation, Enacted, LARO.HQ.ADM; CODA, "Resource Management

Plan and Environmental Assessment," 1988: 17, file Coulee Dam NRA, Nat. Resource

Mgmt. Plan 1988, LARO.HQ.CIO; "Recreation Area Lands Closed to Off-Road Travel,"

press release, 1 May 1992, notebook Congressional Corr., LARO.HQ.ADM; "Lake Roosevelt

Forum, Land Use Committee, May 25, 1994," file Lake Roos. Forum, drawer 2,

LARO.HQ.RMO; LARO, Draft General Management Plan (1998), 18; Dan Mason, phone

interview with Kathryn L. McKay, 2 March 2000, notes on file, LARO.HQ.

24 Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 31 July 1951, file

D18 Planning Program, closed 6/3/53, LARO.HQ.ADM; Greider to USBR District Manager,

17 June 1952, file 1, box 8, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Gary J. Kuiper, LARO

Superintendent, to Stanley G. St. Jeor, 23 April 1987, file L3027 Roads & Right-of-Way,

LARO.HQ.ADM; "Briefing Statement — Easement Requests for Road Access," 2 Dec. 1991,

Briefing Statements notebook, LARO.HQ.ADM; Kelly Cash, LARO Acting Superintendent,

to Todd S. Woodard, Staff Assistant to Thomas S. Foley, U.S. House of Representatives, 16

April 1993, file USBR Easements — Final, box 1 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250,

LARO.HQ.PAO; Charles H. Odegaard, NPS Regional Director, to Foley, 8 Dec. 1998, Cong

Corr. Notebook, LARO.HQ.ADM.

25 Fred G. Campbell, Attorney, to Daniel J. Farrell, LARO, 29 Dec. 1981, file D30 Porcupine

Bay Entrance Rd., LARO.HQ.ADM; C. Richard Neely, Senior Attorney, Office of the DOI

Regional Solicitor, to NPS Regional Director, 25 Feb. 1982, file D30 Porcupine Bay Entrance

Road, LARO.HQ.ADM; Ronald E. Sarff, NPS Acting Deputy Regional Director, to Thomas

S. Foley, U.S. House of Representatives, 6 Nov. 1986, file D30 Porcupine Bay Entrance

Road, LARO.HQ.ADM; Charles H. Odegaard, NPS Regional Director, to Andy Rustemeyer,

County Commissioner Lincoln County, 20 Oct. 1987, file D30 Porcupine Bay Entrance Road,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Dashiell phone interview.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:59 PM]

26 Jerry Rumburg, LARO Chief of Interpretation, to Jane Greverus Perry, Winter Haven,

Florida, 8 Jan. 1981, file K14 Information Requests, LARO.HQ.ADM.

27 CODA, "Mission 66 Prospectus: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 24 April 1956

(revised 1956-62), 50, file A5419 Mission 66, LARO.HQ.ADM; Lennon W. Hooper, DSC,

"National Park Trails: Analytical Report on Trails in Areas of the National Park System,"

March 1973: 22, LARO.HQ.LIB; NPS, "Environmental Assessment for the General

Management Plan, CODA" (1979), 60; William Dunmire, LARO Superintendent, to Files, 25

Jan. 1979, file D30 Roads & Trails, LARO.HQ.ADM; "National Park Service 1980 Trail

Study Questionnaire," 4, file D30 Roads & Trails, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Trail Condition and

Maintenance Needs Questionnaire," 1987, file D30 Roads & Trails, LARO.HQ.ADM. Some

of the trails were built as Youth Conservation Corps projects.

28 R. D. Waterhouse, NPS Acting Regional Engineer, to NPS Regional Director, 17 Aug.

1943, file D18 Planning Program, closed 6/3/53, LARO.HQ.ADM; CODA, "Mission 66

Prospectus: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 24 April 1956 (revised 1956-62): 17, file

A5419 Mission 66, LARO.HQ.ADM.

29 Everts phone interview.

30 Quoted in Paul Read, "Roosevelt Lake's Population — And Problems — Grow," Journal

of Business, Spokesman-Review, 25 May 1989, p. B11. The draft 1963 Master Plan for LARO

includes a detailed 50-page inventory of the national recreation area's utilities, including

information on water systems, sewage, garbage disposal, power, communications, and fuel

systems.

31 Lisa K. Bucy and William H. Funk, Lake Roosevelt Management Plan (Pullman, Wash.:

WRC Report No. 93, State of Washington Water Research Center, 1996), 43; Bill Schieber,

interview with Nancy F. Renk, 7 Dec. 1999, Tape 1-B, notes and index on file, LARO.HQ;

LARO, Draft General Management Plan (1998): 15; Dashiell phone interview; Ray Dashiell,

LARO Maintenance Mech. Supervisor,, email to Kathryn L. McKay, 28 August 2000. Some

backcountry areas cannot have vault toilets because the lack of road access prevents cleaning

them out.

32 Wayne R. Howe, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 13 Jan. 1970, file

D5015 Electricity, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1972: 9,

file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; Dashiell phone interview;

Ralph Byre, Lincoln Electric Cooperative Manager, to William J. Briggle, NPS, 5 Feb. 1991,

file Environment Misc. — Lake Roosevelt, box 71, Morrison Coll., WSU.

33 Transcript of meeting of National Park Service personnel with members of Grand Coulee

Dam Yacht Club and others, 1 June 1951: 12-13, file 715 Columbia Basin Project,

Administration of Recreational Areas, Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake, USBR Boise; LARO

Superintendent to NPS Director, 27 May 1963, file A2621 Annual Reports Field Areas 1-1-

63 to 12-31-63, box 4, RG 079-95-05, NARA-PSR; "Master Plan for Preservation and Use of

Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," Sept. 1963: vol. III, sec. I, p. 32, file D18 Master

Plan Nov.-Dec. 1963, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; "Master Plan of

Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 1965: ch. 3, p. 22, file D18 Master Planning 1965-

67, LARO.HQ.ADM; NPS Associate Director, Management and Operations, to NPS Park

Superintendents et al., 17 Nov. 1976, file D5031 Land Disposal of Solid Waste —

Management, LARO.HQ.ADM; Roger D. Lee, "Report on Survey of Environmental Health

Facilities, CODA," Sept. 1977: 6, file D5031 Sanitation 1972-81, LARO.HQ.ADM; Gary J.

Kuiper, LARO Superintendent, to Andy Rustemeyer, Lincoln County Commissioner, 17 Oct.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:59 PM]

1989, file D5031 Sanitation 1989-1992, LARO.HQ.ADM.

34 Gary J. Kuiper, LARO Superintendent, to Andy Rustemeyer, Lincoln County

Commissioner, 17 Oct. 1989, file D5031 Sanitation 1989-1992, LAROHQ.ADM; "R-MAP

Park Profile Input," 25 April 1994, file L76 — Environmental Impact, LARO.HQ.ADM;

CODA, "Resource Management Plan and Environmental Assessment" (1988), 8; LARO,

"Resource Management Plan, Natural Resources" (1997), Appendix F, "Project Statements,"

pp. 64-65.

35 LARO, "Resource Management Plan: Natural Resources" (1997), 35; John Haller, "Oil and

Hazardous Substance Spill Plan, Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 6 July 1989: 2, 7,

file N36 Pollution/Environmental Quality, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual

Report, CODA," CY1993: 2, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-,

LARO.HQ.ADM.

36 Tom Pope, LARO Administrative Officer, to LARO Division Chiefs and District

Supervisors, 10 Dec. 1990, file S58 Motor-Driven Equipment, LARO.HQ.ADM; Pope to

NPS Acting Regional Property Officer, 17 Jan. 1991, file S58 Motor-Driven Equipment,

LARO.HQ.ADM; CODA, "Storage Tank Management Plan: Coulee Dam National

Recreation Area," 1991: 4, file Underground Storage Tank Plans, LARO.HQ.ADM; Vaughn

Baker, LARO Superintendent, to USBR Acting Power Manager, 24 July 1998, file

Underground Storage Tank Plans, LARO.HQ.ADM.

37 Roger James, Washington Dept. of Health District Engineer, to Hugh Peyton, LARO

Superintendent, 19 March 1954, file D18 Master Plan 1953-June '54, box 3 of 3, LARO #95,

Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; CODA, "Mission 66 Prospectus: Coulee Dam National

Recreation Area," 24 April 1956 (revised 1956-62): 17, 43, file A5419 Mission 66,

LARO.HQ.ADM; "Master Plan of Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 1965: ch. 3, p.

18, file D18 Master Planning 1965-67, LARO.HQ.ADM.

38 Don and Connie Everts, interview with Nancy F. Renk, 7 Dec. 1999, Tape 1-B, tape and

index on file, LARO.HQ.

39 Anderson, "Water Supplies for CODA," 1-2, 19, 21; NPS Regional Chief of Maintenance

to Chairman, Coulee Dam Operations Evaluation team, 24 Aug. 1977, file A5427 Field

Office Personnel, LARO.HQ.ADM.

40 NPS, "Environmental Assessment for the General Management Plan, CODA" (1979), 14;

LARO, Draft General Management Plan (1998), 82; William N. Burgen, LARO

Superintendent, to LARO District Rangers and District Foremen, 21 March 1975, file D5039

Water & Sewage 1975-92, LARO.HQ.ADM; "A Summary of Public Law 93-523," file

D5039 Water & Sewage 1975-92, LARO.HQ.ADM; William N. Burgen, LARO

Superintendent, to all permanent employees, 26 May 1976, file D5039 Water & Sewage

1975-92, LARO.HQ.ADM.

41 William Dunmire, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 20 March 1980, file

D5039 Water & Sewage 1975-92, LARO.HQ.ADM; Roger D. Lee, NPS Regional

Environmental Sanitation Consultant, to NPS Regional Director, 3 Feb. 1981, file D5039

Water & Sewage 1975-92, LARO.HQ.ADM; CODA, "Annual Statement for Interpretation

and Visitor Services: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 1981: 6, Statement for

Interpretation notebook, LARO.HQ.CIO; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA,"

CY1981: 1, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; Jon L. Riedel,

"Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area, Washington, Water Resources Scoping Report"
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:59 PM]

(NPS, 1997), 5.

42 Riedel, "Water Resources," 66; LARO, Draft General Management Plan (1998), 82.

43 Everts phone interview; Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to S. E. Hutton, USBR

Engineer, 21 March 1949, file H14 Project Histories (USBR), LARO.HQ.ADM; "Coulee

Dam Recreational Area Master Plan Development Outline" (1948), "Area Operations

Program" section, p. 2, file D18 Master Plan 1948, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250,

LARO.HQ.PAO.

44 Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Director, 10 June 1950, file 19, box 136,

RG 079-89-004, NARA-PSR; Greider to NPS Director, 12 July 1950, file 19, box 136, RG

079-89-004, NARA-PSR; Greider to NPS Director, 17 Aug. 1951, file 10, box 7, RG 079-89-

001, NARA-PSR; Clifford R. Koester to Columbia Basin Commission, 6 Nov. 1951, file

Recreation (1 of 3), box 34, Columbia Basin Commission, WSA; Greider to NPS Regional

Director, 1 April 1952, file 10, box 7, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

45 CODA, "Mission 66 Prospectus: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 24 April 1956

(revised 1956-62): 20-21, file A5419 Mission 66, LARO.HQ.ADM; Hugh Peyton, LARO

Superintendent, to NPS Director, 15 June 1955, file A2621 Annual Reports Reg 4 1955 &

1956 FYs, box 3, RG 079-95-05, NARA-PSR; "Master Plan of Coulee Dam National

Recreation Area," 1965: ch. 3, p. 17, file D18 Master Planning 1965-67, LARO.HQ.ADM;

Schieber interview, Tape 1-A.

46 Schieber interview, Tape 1-A; Everts interview, Tape 1-A, 1-B; Everts phone interview.

Don Everts, who worked at LARO starting in 1951, said he and Superintendent Hugh Peyton

were both "junk gatherers."

47 Everts interview, Tape 1-B.

48 Everts interview, Tape 1-B.

49 Ibid.

50 PCP Index No. B-46-7, file D46? [no # on file folder], Project Construction Proposals,

LARO.HQ.ADM; "Master Plan of Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 1965: ch. 3, p.

17, file D18 Master Planning 1965-67, LARO.HQ.ADM.

51 "Environmental Assessment: Relocate Portion Sandpit Access Road, Fort Spokane, Coulee

Dam National Recreation Area," 1983: 1, file L7617 EAs & CODA-90, LARO.HQ.ADM;

Dashiell phone interview.

52 LARO Superintendent to NPS Director, 15 May 1962, file A2621 Annual Reports Field

Areas 1-1-62 to 12-31-62, box 4, RG 079-95-05, NARA-PSR; "Master Plan for the

Preservation and Use of Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," Feb. 1963, ch. 3, p. 4 and

ch. 4, p. 24, file D18 Master Plan 1962, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO;

Dashiell phone interview.

53 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1972: 6, 12, file A2621 Superintendent's

Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1976: 26,

27, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; Dashiell phone interview;

"Pacific West Region Directive: PW-016, Regular Cyclic Maintenance Program (RCM)," 3
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:59 PM]

April 1997, file F30 Budget Formulation 1-6, 1997, LARO.HQ.ADM; Ray Dashiell, LARO

Maintenance Mech. Supervisor, email to Kathryn L. McKay, 28 August 2000.

54 Conservation Foundation, National Parks for a New Generation: Visions, Realities,

Prospects (Wash., D.C.: Conservation Foundation, 1985), 130; "1982 Update of Statement

for Interpretation and Visitor Services for Fiscal Year 1983," Part 1.2, Statement for

Interpretation notebook, LARO.HQ.CIO.

55 Dashiell phone interview; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1988: 8, file

A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM;.

56 Gary Kuiper, interview with Nancy F. Renk, 10 Dec. 1999, Tape 2-B, notes and index on

file, LARO.HQ.

57 "Briefing Statement: Workloads and Staffing," 1989, file A26 Briefing Statements,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Dashiell phone interview; Cletis Rodgers, LARO Facility Manager, to

LARO Superintendent, 2 Oct. 1990, file D24 Maint. & Rehab 1981-1991, LARO.HQ.ADM.

58 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1989: 6, file A2621 Superintendent's

Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM.

59 CODA, "Coulee Dam National Recreation Area: Fleet Management Plan," April 1990, file

CODA Fleet Mgmt, box 5, LARO.HQ.USA; Kelly K. Cash, "Statement for Management,

Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 1992: Appendix A, GMP, Environ. Assessment, etc.

notebook, LARO.HQ.CIO; Dashiell phone interview; Linda Morgan, LARO Budget Analyst,

personal communication to Kathryn L. McKay, 1 June 2000.

60 LARO, Draft General Management Plan (1998), 31; "Visitation and Fees a Good

Combination for Lake Roosevelt," press release [n.d.], file K3415 Press Releases — CODA,

LARO.HQ.ADM; "Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area Newsletter 4," Sept. 1998: 4,

file 10-26, LARO.HQ.CIO.

61 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1977: 10, file H2621 Annual Reports,

LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1978: 12, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; Schieber interview, Tape 1-A;

"Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1981, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual

Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1993, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; Ray Dashiell, LARO

Maintenance Mech. Supervisor, email to Kathryn L. McKay, 28 August 2000.

62 Ray Dashiell, LARO Maintenance Mech. Supervisor, email to Kathryn L. McKay, 28

August 2000.

63 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1975: 14, file A2621 Superintendent's

Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM.

64 Everts phone interview; R. D. Waterhouse, NPS Acting Regional Engineer, to NPS

Regional Director, 17 Aug. 1943, file D18 Planning Program, closed 6/3/53,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Dashiell phone interview; LARO Superintendent to NPS Director, 15 June

1955, file A2621 Annual Reports reg 4 1955 & 1956 Fys, box 3, RG 079-95-05, NARAPSR; "Master Plan of Coulee Dam National Recreation Area" (1965), ch. 3, p. 20, file D18

Master Planning 1965-67, LARO.HQ.ADM; Everts interview, Tape 1-B; "Superintendent's
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:59 PM]

Annual Report, CODA," CY1972: 9, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report,

LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1974: 12, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; Gary Kuiper, "Statement for

Management, Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 1989: 14, file D18 SFM 1989,

LARO.HQ.ADM.

65 William Dunmire, LARO Superintendent, to LARO employees, 3 July 1979, file S38

Fuels, LARO.HQ.ADM.

66 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1974: 13, file A2621 Superintendent's

Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1976: 26,

file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; NPS Associate Director,

Management and Operations, to NPS Superintendents, et al., 17 Nov. 1976, file D5031 Land

Disposal of Solid Waste — Management, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual

Report, CODA," CY1978: 1, 12, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report,

LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1979: 1, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "'Land Whales' Near Extinction," The

Lake Roosevelt Mirror, 1 (summer 1980), Newspapers notebook, box 7, Pitzer Coll., WSACRB; Dashiell phone interview; Ray Dashiell, LARO Maintenance Mech. Supervisor, email

to Kathryn L. McKay, 28 August 2000.

67 Wayne Howe, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 25 May 1970, file D32

Grounds, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1975: 13, file

A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report,

CODA," CY1978: 1, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; William

Dunmire, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 29 May 1979, file D3415

Buildings, Construction, & Maint., etc., LARO.HQ.ADM; Everts interview, Tape 2-A;

CODA, "General Management Plan" (1980), errata, notebook GMP, Envir. Assessment,

LARO.HQ.CIO; CODA, "Summary Checklist for Accessibility," 25 Feb. 1988: 1-4, file K18

Handicapped Access Survey Forms, LARO.HQ.ADM; NPS, "Accessibility for People with

Disabilities," Nov. 1997, file 10-26, LARO.HQ.CIO; LARO, Draft General Management

Plan (1998), 14.

68 Dashiell phone interview.

69 "Status of Study for Problem No. 26," 29 Oct. 1940: 12, 15, file 2, box 1, RG 0-79-89-001,

NARA-PSR; Dennis McBride, "Grand Canyon-Boulder Dam Tours, Inc.: Southern Nevada's

First Venture into Commercial Tourism," Nevada Historical Society Quarterly 27 (Summer

1984): 92, 95; F. A. Banks, USBR Supervising Engineer, to USBR Commissioner, 9 July

1941, file 715 Columbia Basin Project, Administration of Recreational Areas, Franklin D.

Roosevelt Lake, USBR Boise.

70 F. A. Gross, Superintendent Colville Indian Agency, to Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 4

Oct. 1943, file Copy - CODA Historical Files #2, LARO.HQ.SUP.

71 R. F. Bessey, Counselor, National Resources Planning Board, to Claude E. Greider, NPS

Recreational Planner, 24 Oct. 1940, file Columbia Basin Area I 1940, box 107, RG 187,

NARA-PAR; F. A. Banks, USBR Supervising Engineer, to USBR Commissioner, 30 Sept.

1941, file Copy - CODA Historical Files #2, LARO.HQ.SUP; Paul Lemargie, DOI Field

Solicitor, to Homer Robinson, LARO Superintendent, 29 Sept. 1958, Coulee Dam NRA

section, History box 4, LARO.HQ.LIB; Claude E. Greider, NPS Recreation Planner, to NPS

Regional Director, 30 July 1943, file D18 Planning Program, closed 6/3/53, LARO.HQ.ADM.

In 1945, the Office of Indian Affairs reported that tribal members were mostly likely to
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:59 PM]

provide boating, campgrounds, bathing beaches, pack trips, and Indian art (USBR, Problem

26: 40).

72 Phil Kearney, NPS Landscape Architect, to Claude E. Greider, NPS Recreation Planner, 16

April 1942, file 3, box 3, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

73 F. A. Banks, USBR Supervising Engineer, to Claude E. Greider, NPS Recreation Planner,

14 Jan. 1943, file 17, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Phil Kearney,

NPS Landscape Architect, to Thoralf Torkelson, USBR Supervising Engineer, 20 Aug. 1942,

box 4, History — Coulee Dam NRA, LARO.HQ.LIB; "Grand Coulee Navigation Company

Prospectus," [Sept. 1951], 10, file 1, box 10, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR. The fees charged

by the NPS in 1943 for gas and oil service for boats was $10 and for gas, oil, supplies, and

boat storage service was $50 per year ("Schedule of Rates for Temporary Special Use

Permits," 1943, file 715 Columbia Basin Project, Administration of Recreational Areas,

Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake, USBR Boise).

74 NPS, "Columbia River Reservoir Area, Washington: General Report and Development

Outline," June 1944, LARO.HQ.100-USA.3.1; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA,"

CY1973: 2, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM.

75 NPS, "Columbia River Reservoir Area, Washington: General Report and Development

Outline," June 1944: 7, LARO.HQ.100-USA.3.1; "Coulee Dam Recreation Area Master Plan,

Development Outline" (1948), "Policies and Agreements" section, p. 3, file D18 Master Plan

1948, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

76 Phil Nalder, USBR, quoted in "Digest of Minutes Committee Meeting on Problem No. 26,

Joint Investigation Columbia Basin Irrigation Project, At Olympia, Washington, 22 May

1941," 12, file Columbia Basin Area — Problem No. 26 1941, box 126, RG 187, NARAPAR.

77 Harvey R. Smith to Newton B. Drury, NPS Director, 15 May 1945 and undated letter, box

85, file 22, Magnuson Papers, UW; Claude E. Greider, NPS Recreation Planner, to NPS

Director, 29 Oct. 1945, box 4, History — Coulee Dam NRA, LARO.HQ.LIB; Greider to F.

A. Banks, USBR Supervising Engineer, 21 Jan. 1946, file LARO.94.3249.3,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Greider to Banks, 8 Feb. 1946, box 4 History — Coulee Dam NRA,

LARO.HQ.LIB.

78 USBR, Problem 26: 4; Claude E. Greider, NPS Recreation Planner, to F. A. Banks, USBR

Supervising Engineer, 19 May 1944, file 6, box 9, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Greider to

Joe Trombley, President, Coulee Dam Amphibious Aircraft, 2 Aug. 1945, file 6, box 9, RG

079-89-001, NARA-PSR; "Grand Coulee Navigation Company Prospectus," [Sept. 1951],

11, file 1, box 10, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

79 Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to William S. Royce, Secretary to Walt Horan,

U.S. House of Representatives, 19 Sept. 1947, file Coulee Rec. Area 1948-52, box 216,

Horan Coll., WSU. Other management concerns of this period included cleaning up the

debris floating on the lake, the need for navigation aids, and improving the fishery.

80 Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 12 Aug. 1947, file 2,

box 10, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Greider to Alfie Decker, Master of Stranger Creek

Grange, 15 Oct. 1947, file 2, box 10, RG 0-79-89-001, NARA-PSR.

81 "Lack of Funds Kills Hopes for Kettle Falls Project," Spokane Daily Chronicle, 11 June
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:59 PM]

1948; John Ise, Our National Park Policy: A Critical History (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins

University Press, 1961), 611.

82 Claude E. Greider, NPS Recreation Planner, to Glen A. Biggart, President, Grand Coulee

Navigation Company, 25 April 1944, file 5, box 9, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Greider to

Biggart, 7 Aug. 1944, file 5, box 9, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Greider to William S.

Royce, Sec. to Walter Horan, U.S. House of Representatives, 19 Sept. 1947, file Coulee Rec.

Area 1948-52, box 216, Horan Coll., WSU; Greider to Henry Robinson, Grand Coulee

Navigation Company, 14 Nov. 1947, file 5, box 9, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

83 Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 27 May 1948, file 5,

box 9, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; A. E. Demaray, NPS Acting Director, to NPS Regional

Director, 20 July 1948, file 5, box 9, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Greider to NPS Regional

Director, 7 Sept. 1948, file 5, box 9, RG 079-89-001; Greider to NPS Director, 7 Jan. 1949,

file 6, box 9, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR. Grand Coulee Navigation Company had a total

net loss of over $14,000 for the years 1947-50 (Burns C. Downey, NPS Chief of Rates

Control, to NPS Chief of Concessions Management, 27 Aug. 1951, file 1, box 10, RG 079-

89-001, NARA-PSR).

84 Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to F. A. Banks, USBR Supervising Engineer, 30

June 1948, file 3, box 3, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Greider to NPS Regional Director, 2

June 1948, file 6, box 9, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; USBR, Project History 1947, 7; O. A.

Tomlinson, NPS Regional Director, to Greider, 24 Feb. 1948, file 6, box 9, RG 079-89-001,

NARA-PSR; Greider to NPS Director, 13 Sept. 1948, file 17, box 136, RG 079-89-004,

NARA-PSR; Greider to NPS Regional Director, 29 Nov. 1948, file 5, box 9, RG 079-89-001,

NARA-PSR; Greider to NPS Director, 12 June 1949, file 18, box 136, RG 079-89-004,

NARA-PSR; USBR, Project History 1949, 63; C. S. Hutsell, Grand Coulee Navigation

Company, to Greider, 14 April 1951, file 1, box 10, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Greider to

USBR District Manager, 27 Feb. 1951, file H14 Project Histories (USBR), LARO.HQ.ADM;

Greider to NPS Director, 14 July 1950, file 3, box 3, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

85 O. A. Tomlinson, NPS Regional Director, to NPS Director, 7 June 1950, file 1, box 6, RG

079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Lawrence C. Merriam, NPS Regional Director, to NPS Director,

31 Jan. 1951, file 1, box 10, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Herbert Maier, NPS Acting

Regional Director, to NPS Director, 14 March 1951, file 1, box 10, RG 079-89-001, NARAPSR.

86 C. S. Hutsell, Grand Coulee Navigation Company, to Claude E. Greider, 13 April 1951,

file 1, box 10, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Sanford Hill, NPS Assistant Regional Director,

to NPS Regional Director, teletype, 28 May 1951, file 1, box 10, RG 079-89-001, NARAPSR; Sanford Hill, NPS Assistant Regional Director, to Greider, teletype, 15 June 1951, file

1, box 10, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Cliff Hutsell, Grand Coulee Navigation Company

Manager, to Walt Horan, U.S. House of Representatives, 27 April 1951, file Coulee Rec.

Area 1948-52, box 216, Horan Coll., WSU; Sanford Hill, NPS Assistant Regional Director, to

NPS Director, 22 Aug. 1951, file 1, box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

87 Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 3 Oct. 1952, file 7,

box 11, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Herbert Maier, NPS Acting Regional Director, to A.

B. Lafferty, President, Lafferty Transportation Company, 16 Oct. 1952, file 7, box 11, RG

079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Greider to NPS Regional Director, 17 Nov. 1952, file 1, box 10,

RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR. Quotes are from the 17 Nov. 1952 letter.

88 Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 7 April 1952, file 1,
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:59 PM]

box 10, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Greider to NPS Regional Director, 16 July 1952, file

1, box 10, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Cliff Hutsell, Grand Coulee Navigation Company

Manager, to Greider, 9 June 1952, file 1, box 10, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Herbert

Maier, NPS Acting Regional Director, to Greider, 25 June 1952, file 1, box 10, RG 079-89-

001, NARA-PSR; Greider to Hutsell, 27 June 1952, file 5, box 9, RG 079-89-001, NARAPSR; Hutsell to Greider, 27 June 1952, file 1, box 10, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Hutsell

to Greider, 27 June 1952, file 1, box 10, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

89 Cliff S. Hutsell, Grand Coulee Navigation Company General Manager, to Sanford Hill,

NPS Assistant Regional Director, 3 Nov. 1952, file 1, box 10, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR

90 C. S. Hutsell, Grand Coulee Navigation Company General Manager, to Sanford Hill, NPS

Assistant Regional Director, 4 Jan. 1953, file 1, box 10, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR;

Lawrence C. Merriam, NPS Regional Director, to NPS Director, 6 Jan. 1953, file 1, box 10,

RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Cliff Hutsell, "Remarks by the Manager of the Grand Coulee

Navigation Company," 14 Jan. 1953: 3, 6, file 1, box 10, RG 0-79-89-001, NARA-PSR;

Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 3 Feb. 1953, file 1, box

10, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

91 A. F. Wilken, Grand Coulee Navigation Company Secretary, to Lawrence C. Merriam,

NPS Regional Director, 24 April 1953, file 1, box 10, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; LARO

Superintendent to NPS Director, 12 June 1956, file A2621 Annual Reports Field Areas 1-1-

56 to 12-31-56, box 3, RG 079-95-05, NARA-PSR.

92 William C. Everhart, The National Park Service (New York: Praeger Publishers, 1972),

121; Ise, Our National Park Policy, 613; National Parks and Conservation Association,

Parks and People: A Natural Relationship: Visitor Use of the National Parks (Wash., D.C.:

National Parks and Conservation Association, 1988), 67, 72; C. Richard Neely for the DOI

Regional Solicitor, to NPS Regional Director, 29 March 1985, file Copy - CODA Historical

Files #1, LARO.HQ.SUP. Currently, the marina concessionaires have possessory interest in

their improvements but Spring Canyon does not (Vaughn Baker, interview with Nancy F.

Renk, 9 Dec. 1999, Tape 2-A, notes and index on file, LARO.HQ).

93 LARO Superintendent to NPS Director, 18 June 1957, file A2621 Annual Reports Field

Areas 1-1-57 to 12-31-57, box 3, RG 079-95-05, NARA-PSR; CODA, "A Map of the

Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, 1958," file K38 Base Map, LARO.HQ.ADM;

CODA, "Mission 66 Prospectus: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 24 April 1956

(revised 1956-622), file A5419 Mission 66, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Master Plan for Preservation

and Use of Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," March 1963: vol. III, sec. C, p. 8, file

D18 Master Plan 1962, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

94 USBR, Project History 1966, Appendix "Recreational and Wildlife Summary."

95 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1972: 3, file A2621 Superintendent's

Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1973: 2, file

A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report,

CODA," CY1974: 4, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM;

"Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1975: 6, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual

Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1976: 9, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report,

CODA," CY1977; 3, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM;

"Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1978: 2, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual

Report, LARO.HQ.ADM.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:59 PM]

96 Temple A. Reynolds, NPS Associate Regional Director, to NPS Regional Director, 30 Oct.

1978, file A5427 Field Office Personnel, LARO.HQ.ADM; Maureen H. McDonough and

Donald R. Field, "Coulee Dam National Recreation Area: Visitor Use Patterns and

Preferences" (Seattle: NPS, College of Forest Resources, UW, 1979), xi; William Dunmire,

"Statement for Management: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 15 Dec. 1978: 22-23,

file D18 Statements for Management, LARO.HQ.ADM.

97 CODA, "Recreation and Wildlife Summary, Calendar Year 1981," file N2621 Annual

Aquatic Resources Rept., LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA,"

CY1981: 2, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; CODA, "Annual

Statement for Interpretation and Visitor Services: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area,"

1981: 7-8, Statement for Interpretation notebook, LARO.HQ.CIO; National Parks &

Conservation Association, Parks and People, 74-75; "Superintendent's Annual Report,

CODA," CY1984: 1, file H2621 Annual Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM.

98 "Master Plan for Preservation and Use of Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," March

1963: vol. III, sec. F, pp. 2-3, file D18 Master Plan 1962, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250,

LARO.HQ.PAO

99 "Lake Roosevelt Multi-Party Management Agreement Chronology of Events and

Historical Background," ca. 1987: 10, file Environment Misc. — Lake Roosevelt (1 of 2),

box 71, Morrison Coll., WSU.

100 Homer W. Robinson, LARO Superintendent, to Paul Lemargie, DOI Field Solicitor, 19

Aug. 1958, file 3, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Lemargie to

Robinson, 29 Sept. 1958, Coulee Dam NRA section, History box 4, LARO.HQ.LIB.

101 Wilkinson, Cragun & Barker, Counsel for STI, "Memo re: Spokane Indian Hunting,

Fishing and Boating Rights in the Lake Roosevelt Indian Zones," 20 May 1959, file A44

Triparty Agreement, LARO.HQ.ADM; Glen A. Wilkinson, Wilkinson, Cragun & Barker, 21

March 1960, box 360, Horan Coll., WSU; Homer W. Robinson, LARO Superintendent, to

NPS Director, 30 Sept. 1959, file 3, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

102 Robert D. Dellwo, Attorney, to Roy H. Sampsel, Special Assistant to the Secretary of the

Interior, 13 May 1975, file 11, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; CCT

Resolution 1975-234, file 6, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

103 Unsigned [member of Grand Coulee Dam Yacht Club] to Rep. Walter Horan, 6 May

1951, file 1, box 10, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

104 Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 23 Sept. 1948, file

6, box 9, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Greider to NPS Regional Director, 17 June 1952, file

1, box 10, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; A. B. Lafferty, President, Lafferty Transportation

Company, to NPS Director, 30 July 1952, file 7, box 11, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR;

Greider to NPS Director, 3 Oct. 1952, file 7, box 11, RG —079-89-001, NARA-PSR;

Greider to NPS Regional Director, 7 Oct. 1952, file 1, box 10, RG —79-89-001, NARAPSR; Herbert Maier, NPS Acting Regional Director, to A. B. Lafferty, 16 Oct. 1952, file 7,

box 11, RG —79-89-001, NARA-PSR. Quote is from Greider to NPS Regional Director, 17

Nov. 1952, file 1, box 10, RG —079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

105 "Price Schedule for Public Services 1948," file 6, box 9, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR;

Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Director, 12 June 1949, file 18, box 136,
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:59 PM]

RG 079-89-004, NARA-PSR; A. E. Demaray, NPS Acting Director, to USBR

Commissioner, 9 March 1951, file 1, box 10, RG 0-79-89-001, NARA-PSR.

106 USBR District Manager to USBR Regional Director, 3 May 1951, file 715 Columbia

Basin Project, Administration of Recreational Areas, Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake, USBR

Boise; Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 19 July 1951,

file 4, box 7, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Lawrence C. Merriam, NPS Regional Director, to

NPS Director, 13 March 1952, file 4, box 7, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

107 Homer W. Robinson, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 31 Aug. 1959,

file A44 Agrmt — North Marina, LARO.HQ.ADM; Sam McCue, phone interview with

Kathryn L. McKay, 11 March 2000, notes on file, LARO.HQ; Robinson to NPS Regional

Director, 22 Sept. 1959, file A44 Agrmt — North Marina, LARO.HQ.ADM; NPS Regional

Director to NPS Director, 10 Nov. 1959, file A44 Agrmt — North Marina, LARO.HQ.ADM.

108 W. E. Rawlings, USBR Project Manager, to LARO Superintendent, 20 Aug. 1968, file

A94 3rd Power Plant: Other Ramifications 1966-76, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250,

LARO.HQ.PAO; Roberta Miller, LARO Public Affairs Officer, personal communication to

Nancy F. Renk, 2 March 2000; Merv Schmidt, Grand Coulee Dam Yacht Club, phone

interview with Kathryn L. McKay, 3 March 2000, notes on file, LARO.HQ; McCue phone

interview.

109 CODA, "Briefing Statement: Concessions Operations," 1989, file A26 Briefing

Statements, LARO.HQ.CIO; CODA, "Briefing Statement: Concession Operations," May

1991, file A26 Briefing Statements, LARO.HQ.CIO; "Superintendent's Annual Report,

CODA," CY1989, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM;

"National Park Service: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area [no other title]," Nov. 1985,

file Multi-Party Mgmt. Agreement thru 1986, LARO.HQ.SUP; Kelly Cash, former LARO

Assistant Superintendent, personal communication to Kathryn L. McKay, 1 March 2001.

110 Bill Butts, Roosevelt Recreation Enterprises CEO, to Mel Tonasket, Chairman Colville

Business Council, 7 Dec. 1988, file Environment Misc. — Lake Roosevelt (2 of 2), box 71,

Morrison Coll., WSU; Mel Tonasket, Chair, Colville Business Council, to Ed Wimberly,

Breckenridge, Colorado, 14 Jan. 1988, file Colville Confed. Tribes, LARO.HQ.SUP;

"Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1987: 9, file H2621 Annual Reports,

LARO.HQ.ADM; "Lake Roosevelt Boating Adventures, Tribal Tribune, 26 Aug. 1988;

Susan English, "Houseboating in Comfort," Spokesman-Review, 20 May 1988, 9-10; Stephen

Maher, "Colville Get Grant for Work at Marinas," Wenatchee World, 7 Sept. 1988.

111 Robin Cody, Voyage of a Summer Sun: Canoeing the Columbia River (New York: Alfred

A. Knopf, 1995), 133.

112 "Briefing Statement: Concessions Operations," 1989: 1, file A26 Briefing Statements,

LARO.HQ.CIO; John Andrist, Omak-Okanogan County Chronicle, 18 May 1988; Stephen

Maher, "Roosevelt Houseboat Fleet May Grow," Wenatchee World, 30 Jan. 1989; Daniel R.

Brown, "Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, Statement for Interpretation, FY 93," 19, file

K1817 Interpretive Plan, LARO.HQ.CIO; Marty Huseman, phone interview with Kathryn L.

McKay, 29 Feb. 2000, notes on file, LARO.HQ.

113 CODA, "Environmental Assessment, Proposed Rental Boats for Lake Roosevelt, Coulee

Dam National Recreation Area" (May 1988), 2, 4; LARO, Draft General Management Plan

(1998), 15, 27.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:59 PM]

114 Taylor Engineering et al., "Lake Roosevelt Spokane Reservation Shoreline Resource

Management Plan," [ca. 1989], executive summary, 25-28, LARO.HQ.RMO; CODA,

"Briefing Statement — Proposed Concession Operation," 24 Aug. 1989, Briefing Statements

notebook, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1994-95: 3, file

A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM. Back in 1969, a consultant

had suggested that LARO explore with the STI the idea of developing a concession across

from Fort Spokane (Edward G. Roberts, "A Report on the Coulee Dam National Recreation

Area" (Sept. 1969), 22, file Archives, Drawer 2, LARO.FS.1107 ).

115 Lawrence E. Cox, DOI Regional Solicitor, to Ralph W. Tarr, DOI Solicitor, 10 July 1987,

File A44 Triparty Agreement, LARO.HQ.ADM; Gary J. Kuiper, LARO Superintendent, to

NPS Acting Regional Director, 4 April 1986, file A44 Triparty Agreement, LARO.HQ.ADM.

Reclamation had a representative at the early meetings concerning the Concession

Management Plan (Kelly Cash, former LARO Assistant Superintendent, personal

communication to Kathryn L. McKay, 1 March 2001).

116 CCT, NPS, STI, USBR, BIA, "Lake Roosevelt Concession Management Plan" (Jan.

1991), 1, 3, 6-14, file "C," CODA Concessions Management Plan, LARO.HQ.ADM; Kelly

Cash, former LARO Assistant Superintendent, personal communication to Kathryn L.

McKay, 1 June 2000.

117 Jess Walter, "Progress Threatens Old Ways," Spokesman-Review, 18 Feb. 1991; "Forum

Notes from Forum Meeting at Davenport, July 22, 1992," 3, file Lake Roos. Forum, drawer 2,

LARO.HQ.RMO; "Lake Roosevelt Forum Hears Plans for Resort," Wilbur Register, 30 July

1992; Gerald Tays, LARO Superintendent, to Lake Roosevelt Coordinating Committee,

meeting minutes, 27 July and 5 Aug. 1994, file Multiparty Agrmt April 1990,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Dan Wehat, "Colvilles Envision Grand Coulee Casino Complex,"

Wenatchee World, 6 March 1997.

118 NPS, National Parks for the 21st Century: The Vail Agenda: Report and

Recommendations to the Director of the National Park Service from the Steering Committee

of the 75th Anniversary Symposium. (Washington, D.C.: 1992), 60; "Superintendent's Annual

Report, CODA," CY1991: 5, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-,

LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1992: 9, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM.

119 Kelly K. Cash, "Statement for Management, Coulee Dam National Recreation Area,"

1992: 18, GMP, Environ. Assessment, etc. notebook, LARO.HQ.CIO; "Operations

Evaluation Executive Summary, Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, June 20-24, 1994,"

6, file A54 Operations Evaluation 1994-95, LARO.HQ.ADM; NPS, "Columbia Cascades

Cluster 1995 Workplan, Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 26 June and 30 Nov. 1995:

19, file A54 CODA Supt. Goals 1992-, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Visitor Guide: Lake Roosevelt

National Recreation Area," 1998: 8.

120 LARO, Draft General Management Plan (1998): 161; Kelly K. Cash, LARO Assistant

Superintendent, to Dianne Croal and Gordon Atkins, NPS Regional Office, 24 Aug. 1994, file

Meeting with Nethercutt, LARO.HQ.SUP; Charles Odegaard, NPS Regional Director, to

Thomas S. Foley, U.S. House of Representatives, 22 Aug. 1994, file Meeting with

Nethercutt, LARO.HQ.SUP. The rocky bottom material dredged from the Kettle Falls harbor

in 1985 and 1991 was given to the Washington Department of Transportation (Kelly Cash,

former LARO Assistant Superintendent, personal communication to Kathryn L. McKay, 1

March 2001).
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:59 PM]

121 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1994-95: 4, file A2621 Superintendent's

Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; Ed Wimberly, President Lake Roosevelt Vacations,

to Gerald Tays, LARO Superintendent, 2 Sept. 1994, file Meeting with Nethercutt,

LARO.HQ.SUP; LARO, Draft General Management Plan (1998), 15, 28.

122 W. N. Dunlop, DOI Field Solicitor Boise, to USBR Regional Director, 1 July 1985, file

715 Columbia Basin Project, Administration of Recreational Areas, Franklin D. Roosevelt

Lake, USBR Boise; Greg W. Behrens and Phillip J. Hansen, "Geology and Related

Construction Problems of the Grand Coulee Dam Project," pp. 357-69 in N. L. Joseph et al.,

eds., Geologic Guidebook for Washington and Adjacent Areas (Washington Division of

Geology and Earth Resources, Information Circular No. 86, 1989), 366 ; CODA,

"Environmental Assessment: Crescent Bay Development," Oct. 1984: 17, file Crescent Bay

EA, drawer 1, LARO.HQ.RMO; Hu Blonk, Behind the By-line Hu: A Feisty Newsman's

Memoirs (Wenatchee, Wash.: 1992), 146-47; table of contents, Gold Historian 2 (Aug. 31,

1981): I; Denver Service Center, "Special Design Study: Development Concept Plan,

Crescent Bay, Coulee Dam National Recreation Area" (NPS, April 1978), 6, file Special

Design Study 1978, box 3, LARO.HQ.USA; Herbert Maier, NPS Acting Regional Director,

to Claude E. Greider, NPS Recreation Planner, file D18 Planning Program, closed 6/3/53,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Philip Kearney, NPS Landscape Architect, to NPS Regional Director, 6

Feb. 1942, file 1, box 2, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

123 "Factors Affecting Recreational Development and Use," 4 Feb. 1948 (draft Master Plan

Development Outline), 36-37, file D18 Planning Program, closed 6/3/53, LARO.HQ.ADM;

Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 13 Dec. 1948, file 715

Columbia Basin Project, Administration of Recreational Areas, Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake,

USBR Boise; CODA, "Coulee Dam Recreational Area Master Plan Development Outline"

(1948), "Policies and Agreements" section, p. 2, file D18 Master Plan 1948, box 3 of 3,

LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

124 F. A. Banks, USBR District Manager, to USBR Regional Director, 17 Jan. 1949, file 715

Columbia Basin Project, Administration of Recreational Areas, Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake,

USBR Boise; Newton Drury, NPS Director, to USBR Commissioner, 2 March 1949, file 1,

box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

125 Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 29 Aug. 1950, file

3, box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Sanford Hill, NPS Assistant Regional Director,

Planning and Construction, 11 Sept. 1950, file 3, box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR;

Greider to USBR Acting District Manager, 26 Oct. 1950, file 3, box 6, RG 079-89-001,

NARA-PSR; Greider to NPS Regional Director, 28 Nov. 1950, file 1, box 6, RG 079-89-001,

NARA-PSR; Greider to NPS Regional Director, 31 Jan. 1951, file 1, box 7, RG 079-89-001,

NARA-PSR; Lawrence C. Merriam, NPS Regional Director, to NPS Director, 25 Sept. 1951,

file 1, box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; NPS, "Notice of Approval, Coulee Dam National

Recreation Area Prospectus," 12 April 1957, file Coulee Dam National Recreation Area,

1952 to 1969, HFC.

126 NPS Regional Director to LARO Superintendent, 7 Dec. 1961, file A44 Tri-Party Agrmt

— Crescent Bay, LARO.HQ.ADM.

127 Homer W. Robinson, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 22 Nov. 1961,

file A44 Tri-Party Agrmt — Crescent Bay, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Annual Fishery Resources

Narrative Report, 1960," 12 Jan. 1961, file Archives — Fisheries Annual Reports, drawer 2,

LARO.FS.1107; USBR Regional Director draft letter to Washington State Game Department,

n.d., file 715 Columbia Basin Project, Administration of Recreational Areas, Franklin D.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:59 PM]

Roosevelt Lake, USBR Boise; Robinson to USBR Project Manager, 10 Dec. 1964, file L14

Acquisition & Disposal of Lands 1964-1970, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250,

LARO.HQ.PAO.

128 Homer Robinson, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 27 Jan. 1965, file

L14 Acquisition & Disposal of Lands 1964-1970, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250,

LARO.HQ.PAO.

129 USBR Project Manager to USBR Regional Director, 26 May 1965, file 715 Columbia

Basin Project, Administration of Recreational Areas, Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake, USBR

Boise; David Richie, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 1 May 1968, file A55

Agrmt — North Marina, LARO.HQ.ADM; W. E. Rawlings, USBR Project Manager, to

LARO Superintendent, 20 Aug. 1968, file A94 3rd Power Plant: Other Ramifications 1966-

76, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

130 Kenneth W. Brooks, Grand Coulee Dam Environmental Plan (prepared for USBR,

1968), 61.

131 "Annual Fishery Resources Narrative Report, 1960," 12 Jan. 1961, file Archives —

Fisheries Annual Reports, drawer 2, LARO.FS.1107; CODA, "Annual Aquatic Resources

Report for 1969," file N2621 Annual Aquatic Resources Rept., LARO.HQ.ADM; USBR

Operations Manager to USBR Regional Director, 3 March 1971, file A94 3rd Power Plant:

Changes in Water Line...1960-74, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO;

CODA, "Annual Aquatic Resources Report for 1971," file N2621 Annual Aquatic Resources

Rept., LARO.HQ.ADM; Arthur C. Hathaway, Assistant Chief, Interpretation & Resource

Management, to Files, 3 Jan. 1973, file N2621 Annual Aquatic Resources Rept.,

LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1975: 11, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM.

132 William Burgen, LARO Superintendent, to Robert E. Evans, USBR Project Manager, 28

Feb. 1976, file A94 3rd Power Plant: Other Ramifications 1966-76, box 3 of 3, LARO #95,

Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

133 CODA, "Interpretive Prospectus: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area" (1975), 4;

"Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1976: 2, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual

Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; DSC, "Special Design Study: Development Concept Plan,

Crescent Bay, Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," April 1978: 9-10, file Special Design

Study 1978, box 3, LARO.HQ.USA; William W. Dunmire, LARO Superintendent, to USBR

Project Manager, 22 April 1977, file A44 Tri-Party Agrmt — Crescent Bay,

LARO.HQ.ADM.

134 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1978: 2, file A2621 Superintendent's

Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1977: 2-3,

file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; Charles V. Janda, LARO

Acting Superintendent, to Hearings Officer, Department of Ecology, 30 May 1980, file

N3615 Pollution — Air, LARO.HQ.ADM; R. E. Evans, USBR Project Manager, to LARO

Superintendent, 10 Aug. 1977, file 16, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO;

DSC, "Special Design Study: Development Concept Plan, Crescent Bay, Coulee Dam

National Recreation Area," April 1978: 23, file Special Design Study 1978, box 3,

LARO.HQ.USA; CODA, "General Management Plan" (1980): 29.

135 Gary Kuiper, LARO Superintendent, to Sen. Slade Gorton, 6 July 1984, file A38 Public
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:59 PM]

Relations, LARO.HQ.ADM; C. Richard Neely, Senior Attorney for the DOI Regional

Solicitor, to NPS Regional Director, 10 Nov. 1982, file Copy - CODA Historical Files #1,

LARO.HQ.SUP; Gary Kuiper, "Statement for Management, Coulee Dam National Recreation

Area," 1983: 8, file D18 Statements for Management, LARO.HQ.ADM.

136 Gary Kuiper, LARO Superintendent, to Sen. Slade Gorton, 6 July 1984, file A38 Public

Relations, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1984: 6, file

H2621 Annual Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM; CODA, "Environmental Assessment: Crescent

Bay Development," Oct. 1984: 1-4, 25-26, file Crescent Bay EA, drawer 1, LARO.HQ.RMO;

Dixon/Carter, "History of the Development of the Crescent Bay Project on Lake Roosevelt at

Grand Coulee Dam," July 1989: 3, file Lake Roosevelt, Grant County Commissioners' Office,

Ephrata.

137 Stanley T. Albright, NPS Associate Director for Park Operations, to NPS Regional

Director, 6 Feb. 1985, file 16, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO;

Dixon/Carter, "History of the Development of the Crescent Bay Project on Lake Roosevelt at

Grand Coulee Dam," July 1989: 3-5, file Lake Roosevelt, Grant County Commissioners'

Office, Ephrata.

138 Alan C. Stay, CCT Reservation Attorney, to William Penn Mott, Jr., NPS Director, 4

Sept. 1985, file Environment Misc. — Lake Roosevelt," (1 of 2), box 71, Morrison Coll.,

WSU.

139 Alan C. Stay, CCT Reservation Attorney, to William Penn Mott, Jr., NPS Director, 8 Oct.

1985, file A44 Tri-Party Agreement, LARO.HQ.SUP; Wendell George, Colville Planning

Committee, to Gary Kuiper, LARO Superintendent, 7 Dec. 1987, file Colville Confed. Tribes,

LARO.HQ.SUP; Dixon/Carter, "History of the Development of the Crescent Bay Project on

Lake Roosevelt at Grand Coulee Dam," July 1989: 5-7, file Lake Roosevelt, Grant County

Commissioners' Office, Ephrata; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1985: 2, file

H2621 Annual Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM; Kelly Cash, former LARO Assistant

Superintendent, personal communication to Kathryn L. McKay, 1 June 2000.

140 George M. Davis, Superintendent, Colville Agency, BIA, to USBR Project Manager, 2

Jan. 1986, file A44 Triparty Agreement, LARO.HQ.ADM.

141 Dixon/Carter, "History of the Development of the Crescent Bay Project on Lake

Roosevelt at Grand Coulee Dam," July 1989: 7-8, 11, file Lake Roosevelt, Grant County

Commissioners' Office, Ephrata; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1987: 9, file

H2621 Annual Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM; John Andrist, Omak-Okanogan County Chronicle,

18 May 1988;

142 CCT, "Summary of Activities on Lake Roosevelt," April 1988: 6-8, file Wilderness —

Lake Roosevelt Management plan (1 of 2), box 80, Foley Coll., WSU; Alan C. Stay, CCT

Reservation Attorney, to James Green, Army Corps of Engineers, 29 April 1988, file

Wilderness — Lake Roosevelt Management Plan (2 of 2), box 80, Foley Coll., WSU;

"Colville Tribes Seek Review," Chronicle (Omak), 18 May 1988: 19.

143 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1988: 13, file A2621 Superintendent's

Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Crescent Bay Contract Bounces Back to Dixon/Carter,"

The Star (Grand Coulee), 30 June 1988; CODA, "Briefing Statement: Concessions

Operations," 1989, file A26 Briefing Statements, LARO.HQ.CIO; "Superintendent's Annual

Report, CODA," CY1989: 10, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Dixon/Carter, "History of the Development of the Crescent Bay Project on
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7n.htm[2/26/2014 3:34:59 PM]

Lake Roosevelt at Grand Coulee Dam," July 1989: 8-11, file Lake Roosevelt, Grant County

Commissioners' Office, Ephrata.

144 CODA, "Briefing Statement — Crescent Bay Statement of Requirements," 10 Sept. 1991,

Briefing Statements notebook, LARO.HQ.ADM; Jude C. Stensgar, Chairman Colville

Business Council, to Gary Kuiper, 1 June 1992, file Colville Confed. Tribes, LARO.HQ.SUP;

Daniel R. Brown, "Coulee Dam National Recreation Area: Statement for Interpretation, FY

93," 19, 18 Feb. 1993, file K1817 Interpretive Plan, LARO.HQ.CIO; "Superintendent's

Annual Report, CODA," CY1994-95: 9, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-,

LARO.HQ.ADM. The nonresponsive 1994 bid was submitted by Ed Wimberly.

145 "Park Service and Colville Tribes Mutually Agree to Terminate Crescent Bay Bid," Tribal

Tribune, 31 March 1995; Gerald Tays, interview with Nancy F. Renk, 20 July 2000, Tape 1-

A, notes and index on file, LARO.HQ; unsigned letter to Phil Pearl, NPCA Regional

Director, 21 May 1996, file Crescent Bay EA, drawer 1, LARO.HQ.RMO; Scott Hunter,

"New Law Chokes Crescent Bay," [Grand Coulee] Star, 4 Nov. 1998; Vaughn Baker, LARO

Superintendent, email to Kathryn L. McKay, 16 August 2000. According to Tays, many

locals approved of the tribes' plans to develop Crescent Bay because the tribes had done such

good work with the Seven Bays and Keller Ferry concessions. Some county commissioners,

on the other hand, resented the direct negotiations, which they viewed as the government

granting preferential rights to Indians. Under the current Concessions Management Act, the

tribes could negotiate directly with the Park Service if their request were approved by the

NPS Director and the Secretary of the Interior.

146 "Facilities Inventory, Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, F. Y. 1995," 1, file L3415

NPS Campground Reserv., LARO.HQ.CIO; Daniel R. Brown, "Coulee Dam National

Recreation Area — Statement for Interpretation, FY 93," 18 Feb. 1993: 44, file K1817

Interpretive Plan, LARO.HQ.CIO; LARO, Draft General Management Plan (1998), 15, 28,

43.

147 Kelly Cash, former LARO Assistant Superintendent, personal communication to Kathryn

L. McKay, 1 June 2000.

148 Dashiell phone interview.

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

laro/adhi/adhi7n.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7a.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:02 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 7:

Building and Maintaining the Park:

Administrative and Visitor Facilities (continued)

Employee Housing

Housing for LARO employees was first provided in the town that is now known as Coulee

Dam. This community was constructed in the 1930s as Mason City, headquarters for the

Grand Coulee Dam contractors. Residences, barracks, businesses, a high school, and dining

halls were built almost immediately. Across the river was Engineers Town, a showplace

government town for Reclamation engineers that is now the western section of Coulee Dam.

From the start, Mason City was heated only by electricity. When the dam was completed and

the contractors moved out, Reclamation took over Mason City. [5]

In the 1940s, when only a handful of Park Service personnel worked out of Coulee Dam,

Reclamation used a point/drawing system to allot housing in Coulee Dam, based on seniority,

size of family, rank, years of service, and other factors. But Frank Banks of Reclamation did

manage to save a "choice" residence for Claude Greider, the Park Service Recreation Planner

assigned to live at Coulee Dam in 1941. According to the 1942 Reclamation/Park Service

agreement, however, other Park Service employees had to "take their chances" through the

point system for their living quarters. In other words, they were given no assurance of being

able to obtain government housing. By 1948, Greider was complaining that the houses

provided in Coulee Dam by Reclamation were inadequate, and he included proposals for

eight residences and five apartments for employee housing in the recreation area's 1948

Master Plan. Reclamation agreed to reserve vacant lots in Coulee Dam for Park Service

employee housing. [6]

In 1950, Congress appropriated $48,600 to construct three five-room dwellings in Coulee

Dam for Park Service housing, and they were completed that December at 606, 608, and 610

Crest Drive. The occupants paid Reclamation for utilities plus an annual charge for

amortization of Reclamation's investment in municipal improvements. Some locals strongly

criticized the construction of Park Service housing before recreation sites had been

developed. For example, the manager of the Grand Coulee Navigation Company, a LARO

concessionaire, commented in 1951, "There is a strong and growing feeling among the people

of this area that their tax money is being used to provide salaries and superior living quarters

for government employees rather than for development of a recreational area to the benefit of

the public." [7]

The town of Mason City (Coulee Dam) declined in population in the early 1950s as

Reclamation converted from dam construction to long-term operation and maintenance. In

1953, a study recommended that the 450 federally owned temporary houses and the shopping

center be sold to the residents. Congress authorized the conversion from government town to

self-governing community in 1957, and the sale was essentially completed the following

year. The Park Service, of course, was concerned that it might lose its three new houses and
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7a.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:02 PM]

the use of three Reclamation houses rented by LARO employees. In 1959, Reclamation

transferred to the Park Service the three lots with Park Service houses plus two Reclamation

houses that were already being used by Park Service employees (425 and 804 Yucca). In

addition, four permanent Park Service employees owned their own homes in Coulee Dam.

LARO acquired ten town lots for future residences in Coulee Dam in 1960, probably as a nofee transfer from Reclamation. [8]

Transa-house for seasonals at Kettle Falls, 1957. Photo courtesy of

National Park Service, Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area

(LARO.HQ.MENG).

The challenge of providing housing to employees subject to frequent transfers continued in

the 1960s. The volatile housing market in the general Lake Roosevelt region hindered

LARO's planning efforts to meet housing needs. The construction work on the third

powerhouse during this period led to the removal of nine businesses and fifty-seven

residences in Coulee Dam; housing once again grew scarce. The Park Service built three new

residences in Coulee Dam in 1966. The three Park Service houses on Crest Drive built in

1950 were located within the Reclamation "taking line" and were scheduled to be moved in

1968. LARO Superintendent Howard Chapman wrote, "I believe we should not be stampeded

into moving without a careful appraisal of the situation." In the end, however, the three older

houses and one other were moved to new locations in Mason City. LARO turned the three

houses built in 1950 plus the one at 804 Yucca over to the Bureau of Indian Affairs between

1983 and 1994. [9]

Outside of Coulee Dam, the housing situation for LARO employees was "most

unsatisfactory" in the 1950s, according to LARO's Mission 66 Prospectus. No housing in the

Fort Spokane area was available, and there was an acute shortage of housing in Kettle Falls.

In 1957, LARO installed three "transa-houses" (small, modular frame houses) at Fort

Spokane and one portable building and two transa-houses at Kettle Falls so that seasonal and

permanent employees could live close to their work sites. The nationwide trend towards

standardized Park Service residences did not affect LARO employee housing until 1962,

when two standard Mission 66 residences were built at Fort Spokane. [10]

By 1963, LARO's employee housing situation had improved somewhat to include nine

permanent and fifteen temporary quarters. The rates charged the occupants were based on
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7a.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:02 PM]

1996 Employee Housing at

LARO:

Coulee Dam — 3 permanent

houses, 1 seasonal trailer

Spring Canyon — 1 seasonal

house, 2 seasonal trailers

Keller Ferry Campground — 1

seasonal house

Fort Spokane — 3 seasonal

houses, 2 seasonal trailers, 2

permanent houses

Porcupine Bay Campground —

1 seasonal house, 1 seasonal

trailer

Hunters Campground — 1

seasonal trailer

Kettle Falls area — 2 seasonal

trailers, 2 permanent houses, 1

seasonal house

Evans Campground — 1

seasonal house [12]

rents charged in Omak, Colville, and Spokane. LARO administration continued to work on

obtaining more housing for the growing staff. In the 1970s and 1980s, the Columbia Basin

Job Corps out of Moses Lake built portable seasonal quarters for LARO employees at all the

major campgrounds, replacing some seasonal trailers and the transa-houses. A new seasonal

housing area at Fort Spokane was established in 1973. By 1979, employee housing had

increased to eight houses at Coulee Dam, five at Fort Spokane, and five at Kettle Falls, plus

fourteen trailers at seven sites. In general, maintenance staff was hired locally and did not

require housing, and seasonal employees were often unmarried and could live in shared

housing. [11]

During the 1980s, LARO formalized its planning for

employee housing by preparing a Housing

Management Plan. Quarters continued to be added and

subtracted; for example, two permanent quarters in

Coulee Dam were surplused in 1985 as part of a plan

to reduce housing at headquarters. In 1986, as the

result of an analysis showing that seasonal rents did

not even cover the cost of utilities, all rates were

recalculated and increased. In 1988, the annual rents

ranged from $4,212 for a Fort Spokane house for a

permanent employee to $460 for a trailer for a

seasonal at Hunters. A 1993 rent appeal by employees

living in government housing in the Fort Spokane

District resulted in refunds to fourteen LARO

employees. The appeal was based on the assertion that

rents should be based on those in the nearby

Davenport area rather than the Spokane metropolitan

area. [13]

Because of the short season and the difficulty in

obtaining rental housing locally, LARO felt that

providing housing was critical to recruiting seasonal

employees. From the end of the Mission 66 program in

1966 until 1988, no significant funding was available

for Park Service units to build or rehabilitate employee

housing. Starting in 1989, however, the Park Service

received funding through a Housing Initiative for

major rehabilitation and trailer replacement along with

line-item funding for construction of new or

replacement housing. LARO established partnerships

with the Park Service's Rocky Mountain System

Support Office and the Washington, D.C., Office in 1996 to obtain designs for a fourbedroom dormitory and a duplex. By the late 1990s, LARO policy emphasized providing

park housing to seasonal workers, and one of the park goals was to remove, replace, or

upgrade to good condition employee housing classified as in poor or fair condition. The last

trailer at LARO was removed in 1999. [14]

With sixteen houses and eight mobile homes in 1988, LARO staff felt no additional housing

was necessary. With the exception of certain employees who had to occupy government

housing in order to provide visitor services and to protect government property, all other

LARO employees were assigned housing under competitive bidding using a point system

based on salary, number of dependents, and years of government service. LARO staff

preferred to retain three houses in Coulee Dam while they evaluated the impact of the

anticipated rapid expansion of concession operations at Grand Coulee and Keller Ferry. In
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7a.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:02 PM]

response to Congressional concerns in the mid-1990s about the Park Service housing

program, housing built for permanent employees' use was re-designated for use by seasonal

employees as the units were vacated. The park is trying to keep a permanent employee in

residence at Fort Spokane grounds to address visitor and resource protection concerns. [15]

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

laro/adhi/adhi7a.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 8 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi8n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:03 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 8:

Endnotes

1 CODA, "Statement for Interpretation type document," Oct. 1957: 12, LARO.HQ.CIO.

2 Dan Brown phone interview with Kathryn L. McKay, 3 March 2000, notes on file,

LARO.HQ; Gerald W. Tays, interview with Nancy F. Renk, Tape 1-B, 20 July 2000, tape

and index on file, LARO.HQ.

3 "Boulder and Grand Coulee Dams Attract Tourists," Reclamation Era 29 (Nov. 1939): 294;

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Annual Project History, Columbia Basin Project, 1938: 83, 93;

"Vista Points on Columbia Basin Project," Reclamation Era (Dec. 1936): 286; USBR,

Project History 1949, 368.

4 Paul Pitzer, Grand Coulee: Harnessing a Dream (Pullman: Washington State University

Press, 1994), 166-67.

5 Howard R. Stagner, Mount Rainier National Park, Associate Park Naturalist, to Claude E.

Greider, NPS Recreation Planner, 3 Dec. 1941, file 1, box 2, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR;

"Memorandum of Agreement Between the National Park Service, the Bureau of Reclamation,

and Office of Indian Affairs Relating to the Planning, Development, and Administration of

the Grand Coulee National Recreation Area," 2 Oct. 1941, file 715 Col. Basin Project,

Admin. of Recreational Areas, FDR Lake, USBR Boise.

6 USBR, Project History 1942, 68, 73; USBR, Project History 1946, 116; F. A. Banks, USBR

District Manager, to J. L. Chambers, Chief Engineer, State Parks and Recreation

Commission, 23 Feb. 1950, file A94 U.S. Coast Guard, LARO.HQ.ADM.

7 Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to USBR District Manager, 2 Aug. 1949, file 17,

box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; USBR District Manager to Greider, 12

Aug. 1949, file 17, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; S. E. Hutton, USBR

Information Officer, to Greider, 6 Sept. 1950, file 18, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250,

LARO.HQ.PAO; Greider to NPS Regional Director, 1 Nov. 1948, file D18 Planning

Program, closed 6/3/53, LARO.HQ.ADM.

8 John E. Doerr, NPS Chief Naturalist, to NPS Regional Director, 31 Oct. 1949, RG 079-89-

001, NARA-PSR.

9 USBR, Project History 1961: 1; CODA, "Statement for Interpretation type document," Oct.

1957: 22, LARO.HQ.CIO; Homer Robinson, LARO Superintendent, to Chief, NPS Western

Museum Lab, 5 June 1959, file D6215 Coulee Dam Vista House Exhibits, box 1, RG 079-92-

004, NARA-PSR; Robinson to NPS Regional Director, 20 June 1960, file D6215 Coulee

Dam Vista House Exhibits, box 1, RG 079-92-004, NARA-PSR; Cliff Hutsell, "Remarks by

the Manager of the Grand Coulee Navigation Company," 14 Jan. 1953, file 1, box 10, RG
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 8 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi8n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:03 PM]

079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

10 USBR, Project History 1961, 1; Paul McCrary, "Interpretive Prospectus for Coulee Dam

National Recreation Area," 25 Sept. 1964: 14-15, file K1817 Interpretive Prospectus: Coulee

Dam NRA 1964, LARO.HQ.CIO; Art Hathaway, LARO Park Naturalist, to NPS Branch of

Master Planning, Western Regional Office, 30 Oct. 1967, file D18 Master Planning 1965-67,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Hathaway to CODA Superintendent, 2 Oct. 1967, file A94 3rd Power

Plant: Changes in Water Line...1960-74, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250,

LARO.HQ.PAO.

11 Otis Peterson, "Grand Destiny for Coulee Dam," Reclamation Era 55 (Nov. 1969): 1-3;

Kenneth W. Brooks, Grand Coulee Dam Environmental Plan (prepared for U.S. Bureau of

Reclamation, 1968), 3.

12 Howard Chapman, LARO Superintendent, to Harold Nelson, USBR Regional Director, 5

Oct. 1967, file A94 3rd Power Plant: Changes in Water Line...1960-74, box 3 of 3, LARO

#95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; "Grand Coulee Dam (General Information)," n.d., in

Grand Coulee Dam section, Dams box, LARO.HQ.LIB; USBR, Project History 1974, 24-25.

13 CODA, "Interpretive Prospectus: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, Washington"

1975: 3-5.

14 William Dunmire, LARO Superintendent, to USBR Project Manager, 21 July 1978, file

D62 Museum & Exhibit Activity, LARO.HQ.ADM.

15 USBR, Project History 1971, 81-82; USBR, Project History 1977, 13; USBR, "Fact Sheet

— Grand Coulee Dam Laser Lights," 28 May 1989, Grand Coulee Dam section, Dams box,

LARO.HQ.LIB ; CODA, "Laser Light Show: Grandest Show in the Grand Coulee," n.d.

[1998 handout]; USBR, "Laser Light Show Script: Grand Coulee Dam," 1989, Grand Coulee

Dam section, Dams box, LARO.HQ.LIB.

16 Brown phone interview.

17 James A. Richardson, NPS Regional Director, to NPS Deputy Regional Director, 26 June

1985, file K1817 Annual Statement for Interpretation, LARO.HQ.CIO; "Superintendent's

Annual Report, CODA," CY1990: 4, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Brown phone interview; Lynne Brougher, phone interview with Kathryn

L. McKay, 1 March 2000, notes on file, LARO.HQ; Lynne Brougher, LARO Education

Specialist, personal communication to Kathryn L. McKay, 1 June 2000; Daniel R. Brown,

"Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, Statement for Interpretation, FY93," 18 Feb. 1993:

18, file K1817 Interpretive Plan, LARO.HQ.CIO; Gerald Tays, LARO Superintendent, to

NPS Chief of Interpretation, 23 Oct. 1995, file K2621 FY95 Annual Interp. Program Report,

LARO.HQ.CIO.

18 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," FY1983: 5, file H2521 Annual Reports,

LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1989: 11, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; Brown phone interview; Darrell

Cook, LARO Acting Superintendent, to William Back, office of the DOI Regional Solicitor,

26 April 1993, file A42 PNW Nat'l Parks Assoc. 1987-, LARO.HQ.ADM; Gerald Tays,

LARO Superintendent and Chairman, to Lake Roosevelt Coordinating Committee, 8 March

1995, file Multi-party Agreement April 1990, LARO.HQ.ADM; Brougher phone interview;

Lynne Brougher, LARO Education Specialist, personal communication to Kathryn L.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 8 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi8n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:03 PM]

McKay, 1 June 2000.

19 Vaughn Baker, interview with Nancy F. Renk, Tape 2-B, 9 Dec. 1999, tape and index on

file, LARO.HQ; "Draft Long-Range Interpretive Plan: Lake Roosevelt National Recreational

Area" (1999), 16; Brougher phone interview.

20 NPS, "Mission 66 for Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 1957: 3, folder 12, box 32,

Accession 3560-3, Jackson Papers; LARO Superintendent to NPS Director 15, May 1962,

file A2621 Annual Reports Field Areas 1-1-62 to 12-31-62, box 4, RG 079-95-05, NARAPSR; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1977: 1, file A2621 Superintendent's

Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; Brown phone interview; CODA, "Annual Public Contact

Report," 1978, file K2521 FY77-84 Annual Interp Program Report, LARO.HQ.CIO.

21 CODA, "National Park Service Interpretive Operations Summary, 1977-1991," 1-2, file

K2623 Situation, LARO.HQ.ADM; Steve Castro-Shrader, LARO Fort Spokane District

Ranger, to LARO Chief of Interpretation, 8 May 1985, file K2623 Situation,

LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1989: 11, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; Dan Brown, LARO Interpretive

Specialist, to Regional Chief of Interpretation, 15 Nov. 1990, file K2621 FY90 Annual

Interp. Program Report, LARO.HQ.CIO.

22 CODA, "Operations Evaluation Executive Summary, Coulee Dam National Recreation

Area, June 20-24, 1994," 6-7, file A54 Operations Evaluation 1994-95, LARO.HQ.ADM;

LARO, "Resource Management Plan, Natural Resources" (1997), 39, LARO.HQ.RMO; Dan

Brown, LARO Interpretive Specialist, to Regional Chief of Interpretation, 15 Nov. 1990, file

K2621 FY90 Annual Interp. Program Report, LARO.HQ.CIO; Tays interview, Tape 3-A;

Gerald Tays, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Deputy Regional Director, 20 May 1994, file

A54 Operations Evaluation 1994-95, LARO.HQ.ADM; Brown phone interview; LARO,

Draft General Management Plan/Environmental Impact Statement: Lake Roosevelt National

Recreation Area (Sept. 1998), 98.

23 Brown phone interview.

24 James W. Corson, "Volunteers in the Parks," National Parks & Conservation Magazine 48

(April 1974): 23-24; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1972: 10, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report,

CODA," CY1973: 6, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM;

"Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1974: 7, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual

Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1977: 8, file H2621

Annual Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1984: 5,

file H2621 Annual Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA,"

CY1986, File H2621 Annual Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM; CODA, "Annual Interpretive

Program Report," FY1988, file K2621 FY88 Annual Interp. Program Report,

LARO.HQ.CIO; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," FY1996: 3, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; National Parks and Conservation

Association, Investing in Park Futures: The National Park System Plan: A Blueprint for

Tomorrow (Wash., D.C.: National Parks and Conservation Association, 1988), 18.

25 Emilie Martin, "Student Volunteers in the National Parks and Forests," National Parks &

Conservation Magazine 47 (Feb. 1973), 24-26; Daniel R. Brown, "Coulee Dam National

Recreation Area Statement for Interpretation, FY93," 18 Feb. 1993: 32, file K1817

Interpretive Plan, LARO.HQ.CIO; Brougher phone interview.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 8 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi8n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:03 PM]

26 "Memorandum of Agreement Between the National Park Service, the Bureau of

Reclamation and Office of Indian Affairs Relating to the Planning, Development, and

Administration of the Grand Coulee National Recreation Area," 1941: 7, file 715 Col. Basin

Project, Admin. of Recreational Areas, FDR Lake, USBR Boise; Dorr G. Yeager, NPS

Regional Naturalist, to NPS Director, 4 Oct. 1949, file 1, box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARAPSR; Howard R. Stagner, NPS, Mount Rainier National Park, Associate Park Naturalist, to

Claude E. Greider, NPS Recreation Planner, file 1, box 2, RG 079-89-001, NARA- PSR; J.

Volney Lewis, NPS Regional Geologist, to NPS Regional Director, 13 Jan. 1942, file 1, box

2, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR. The 1941 draft agreement never went into effect.

27 NPS, "Columbia River Reservoir Area, Washington: General Report and Development

Outline," June 1944: 1, LARO.HQ.100-USA.3.1; CODA, "Coulee Dam Recreational Area

Master Plan Development Outline," 1948: 3, file D18 Master Plan 1948, box 3 of 3, LARO

#95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; C. P. Russell, NPS Supervisor of Interpretation, to NPS

Regional Director, 4 Nov. 1941, file 1, box 2, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Howard R.

Stagner, Mount Rainier Associate Park Naturalist, to Claude E. Greider, NPS Recreation

Planner, 3 Dec. 1941, file 1, box 2, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Dorr G. Yeager, NPS

Regional Naturalist, "Preliminary Interpretive Development Outline: Coulee Dam National

Recreation Area," Oct. 1949: 1, 3-6, file 1, box 6, RG 07-89-001, NARA-PSR.

28 Aubrey Neasham, "Brief Historical Notes On Coulee Dam National Recreational Area,"

ca. 1949, file CODA History/Research, Cultural Resources, Office of Senior Historian,

CCSO; Aubrey Neasham, NPS Regional Historian, to LARO Superintendent, 16 Feb. 1950,

file 1, box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; "Resource Study Proposal: Archaeological Site

Survey, Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 14 April 1964, old files, LARO.KF.2004;

"Resource Study Proposal: History of Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 29 April 1964,

old files, LARO.KF.2004.

29 CODA, "Statement for Interpretation type document," Oct. 1957: 3, 3a, 6-7; NPS,

"Museum Prospectus: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 1958: 7, 21-22.

30 Art Hathaway, LARO Park Naturalist, to NPS Branch of Master Planning, Western

Regional Office, 30 Oct. 1967, file D18 Master Planning 1965-67, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Master

Plan of Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 18 Sept. 1964: ch. 2, p. 5; file D18 Master

Plan 1964-67, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Wayne R. Howe,

"Coulee Dam National Recreation Area Management Objectives," 1971: 2, file D18

Maintenance Planning Program 71-86, LARO.HQ.ADM.

31 NPS, "A Master Plan for Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, Washington: Preliminary

Working Draft," Feb. 1968: 3, file D18 Master Plan, LARO.HQ.ADM.

32 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1974: 5, file A2621 Superintendent's

Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Interpretive Prospectus: Coulee Dam National Recreation

Area," 1975: 1, 2 [quote], 3, 29, 35; Kelly K. Cash, "Statement for Management, Coulee Dam

National Recreation Area," 1992: 19, GMP, Environ. Assessment, etc. notebook,

LARO.HQ.CIO.

33 Barry Mackintosh, Interpretation in the National Park Service: A Historical Perspective

(NPS, 1989), 45, 80-81; CODA, "Annual Statement for Interpretation and Visitor Services:

Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 1981: 19-20, Statement for Interpretation notebook,

LARO.HQ.CIO; CODA, "Statement for Interpretation and Visitor Services for Fiscal Year

1983," Statement for Interpretation notebook, LARO.HQ.CIO; "Superintendent's Annual

Report, CODA," FY1983: 4, file H2621 Annual Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 8 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi8n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:03 PM]

Annual Report, CODA," CY1993: 9, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-,

LARO.HQ.ADM; "Response to Portion of 6/24/93 letter by Rick & Susie Jones," file K1817

Annual Statement for Interp., LARO.HQ.CIO; Daniel R. Brown, "Coulee Dam National

Recreation Area Statement for Interpretation, FY93," 18 Feb. 1993: 15, file K1817

Interpretive Plan, LARO.HQ.CIO.

34 Gary D. Williams and Alan S. Newell, Historic Resource Study: Coulee Dam National

Recreation Area, Washington (prepared by Historical Research Associates for the NPS,

1980), 212, 245, 251, 253, 255, 259, 272, 274, 282, 286; Brougher phone interview.

35 LARO, Draft General Management Plan/Environmental Impact Statement (NPS, 1998),

35, 167.

36 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," Jan. 1994-Sept. 1995: 10, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Draft Long-Range Interpretive

Plan: Lake Roosevelt National Recreational Area," 1999; 6-7, 10. HFC prepared a draft

Interpretive Prospectus in approximately 1992, but LARO's Chief of Interpretation felt it was

unacceptable (Brown phone interview).

37 Ralph H. Lewis, Museum Curatorship in the National Park Service, 1904-1982 (Wash.,

D.C.: NPS, 1993), 117, 146-47, 149, 153, 160.

38 Ronald F. Lee, NPS Chief, Division of Interpretation, to NPS Chief, Mission 66 Staff, 6

Nov. 1956, file Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, 1952 to 1969, HFC.

39 Ronald F. Lee, NPS Chief, Division of Interpretation, to NPS Regional Director, 27 Aug.

1958, file Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, 1952 to 1969, HFC; "Museum Prospectus"

(1958), 6, 20, 24-29; Mackintosh, Interpretation in the National Park Service, 39-40.

40 Paul F. McCrary, "Interpretive Prospectus for Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 25

Sept. 1964: 1-2, 23, file K1817 Interpretive Prospectus: Coulee Dam NRA 1964,

LARO.HQ.CIO.

41 NPS, "A Master Plan for Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, Washington: Preliminary

Working Draft," Feb. 1968: 56-57, file D18 Master Plan, LARO.HQ.ADM; CODA, "Annual

Statement for Interpretation and Visitor Services: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area,"

1981: 21, Statement for Interpretation notebook, LARO.HQ.CIO.

42 Daniel R. Brown, "Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, Statement for Interpretation,

FY93," 18 Feb. 1993: 10, file K1817 Interpretive Plan, LARO.HQ.CIO; "Superintendent's

Annual Report, CODA," Jan. 1994-Sept. 1995: 12, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual

Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM.

43 Art Hathaway, "NPS/FS ‘get it together,'" NPS newsletter article, attached to

"Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1976, file A2621 Annual Report,

LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1975: 17, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report,

CODA," CY1977: 2, file H2621 Annual Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM; Secretary of the Interior

to Thomas S. Foley, U.S. House of Representatives, 7 Oct. 1981, file 97th Cong./Dept.

Files/Dept. of Interior — Nat'l Park Service, box 252, Foley Coll., WSU; "Superintendent's

Annual Report, CODA," CY1981: 2, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report,

LARO.HQ.ADM.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 8 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi8n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:03 PM]

44 HFC, "Draft Interpretive Prospectus, Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, Washington,"

1993: 5, file K1817 Interpretive Plan, LARO.HQ.CIO.

45 NPS, "A Master Plan for Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, Washington: Preliminary

Working Draft," Feb. 1968: 55-56, file D18 Master Plan, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Fact Sheet #5,

Colville National Forest," 1971, file L34 Proposed Areas: Colville Nat'l Forest: 1972, box 3

of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA,"

CY1993: 11, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; Brown

phone interview; Daniel R. Brown, "Coulee Dam National Recreation Area Statement for

Interpretation, FY93," 18 Feb. 1993: 12, 14, file K1817 Interpretive Plan, LARO.HQ.CIO;

NPS, "Columbia Cascades Cluster 1995 Workplan, Coulee Dam National Recreation Area,"

26 June and 30 Nov. 1995: 5, file A54 CODA Supt. Goals 1992-, LARO.HQ.ADM; Lynne

Brougher, LARO Education Specialist, personal communication to Kathryn L. McKay, 1

June 2000. The sources of funding for the proposed visitor center were the Federal Highway

Administration, Bonneville Power Administration, Washington state Department of

Transportation, U.S. Forest Service, Washington State Department of Wildlife, and NPS

(Lynne Brougher, LARO Education Specialist, email to Kathryn L. McKay, 17 August

2000).

46 CODA, "Statement for Interpretation type document," Oct. 1957: 3.

47 Ibid., 23, 28, LARO.HQ.CIO; "Museum Prospectus," 1958: 33-34; "Master Plan for the

Preservation and Use of Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," Feb. 1963: ch. 4, p. 18, file

D18 Master Plan 1962, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Paul F.

McCrary, "Interpretive Prospectus for Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 25 Sept.

1964: 15, 27, 30, 31, file K1817 Interpretive Prospectus: Coulee Dam NRA 1964,

LARO.HQ.CIO.

48 "Master Plan of Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 1964: ch. 2, p. 12, file D18

Master Planning 1965-67, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA,"

CY1973: 5-6, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Interpretive

Prospectus: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 1975: 1, 20; "Superintendent's Annual

Report, CODA," CY1977: 7, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM;

"Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1975: 8, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual

Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; William Dunmire, LARO Superintendent, to all LARO employees,

3 July 1979, file S38 Fuels, LARO.HQ.ADM; Daniel R. Brown, "Coulee Dam National

Recreation Area Statement for Interpretation, FY93," 18 Feb. 1993: 51, file K1817

Interpretive Plan, LARO.HQ.CIO; CODA, "Annual Statement for Interpretation and Visitor

Services: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 1981: 10, Statement for Interpretation

notebook, LARO.HQ.CIO.

49 J. Jerry Rumburg, LARO Chief of Interpretation, to LARO Superintendent and Staff, 8

July 1980, file H14 Area & Service History, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual

Report, CODA," CY1984: 3, file H2621 Annual Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM; CODA, "Annual

Aquatic Resources Report for 1984," 4 Jan. 1985, file N2621 Annual Aquatic Resources

Rept., LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1985: 3, file H2621

Annual Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM; Daniel R. Brown, "Coulee Dam National Recreation Area

Statement for Interpretation, FY93," 18 Feb. 1993: 39, 44, file K1817 Interpretive Plan,

LARO.HQ.CIO; Janice A. Elvidge, "The Interpretive Desires of Overnight Visitors at Four

Campgrounds in Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," ca. 1990: 4 [short version].

50 CODA, "Operations Evaluation Executive Summary, Coulee Dam National Recreation

Area, June 20-24, 1994: 7, file A54 Operations Evaluation 1994-95, LARO.HQ.ADM.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 8 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi8n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:03 PM]

51 Elvidge, "Interpretive Desires," ca. 1990: 1-2 [short version], 34, 38, 54-57 [long version];

Dan Brown, LARO Interpretive Specialist, to NPS Regional Chief of Interpretation, 14 Nov.

1991, file K2621 Annual Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report,

CODA," CY1991: 7, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM;

Gerald Tays, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Associate Regional Director, Operations, 9 Nov.

1993, file K2621 Annual Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Visitor Survey Planned for July,"

Visitor Guide: Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area, 1998, p. 6.

52 "Resource Study Proposal: Archaeological Site Survey, Coulee Dam National Recreation

Area," 14 April 1964: 2, 4, old files, LARO.KF.2004; Dorr G. Yeager, NPS Regional

Naturalist, "Preliminary Interpretive Development Outline: Coulee Dam National Recreation

Area," Oct. 1949: 6, file 1, box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; CODA, "Statement for

Interpretation type document," Oct. 1957: 7, file LARO.HQ.CIO; Wayne R. Howe, LARO

Superintendent, to CCT Chairman, Housing, Education, and Welfare, 23 June 1971, file A94

Colville Confed. Tribe, LARO.HQ.ADM; Arthur C. Hathaway, LARO, to Harry Owhi, CCT

Exec. Sec., 12 April 1972, file K1815 Indian Culture Programs 1972-75, LARO.HQ.CIO;

"Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1972: 3-4, 12, file A2621 Superintendent's

Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; Arthur C. Hathaway, LARO Assistant Chief, Interpretation

& Resource Management, to NPS Regional Director, 4 Oct. 1973, file A94 Colville Confed.

Tribe, LARO.HQ.ADM; Hathaway to Glenn Galbraith, STI Executive Director, 31 May

1973, file H14 Fort Spokane History, LARO.HQ.ADM; Hathaway to Modesta Shadle, 15

July 1973, file K1815 Indian Culture Programs 1972-75, LARO.HQ.CIO; "Superintendent's

Annual Report, CODA," CY1974: 6-7, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Arthur C. Hathaway, former LARO employee, personal communication to

Kathryn L. McKay, 1 March 2001.

53 Mackintosh, Interpretation in the National Park Service, 79; CODA, "General

Management Plan: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," July 1980: 28, notebook GMP,

Envir. Assessment, LARO.HQ.CIO; CODA, "Annual Statement for Interpretation and Visitor

Services: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 1981: 13, Statement for Interpretation

notebook, LARO.HQ.CIO; Susan Cadwallader to Virgil Marchand of Omak, 31 Oct. 1980,

file D62 Museum & Exhibit Activity, LARO.HQ.ADM; Michael F. Turek, "American Indian

Tribes and the U.S. National Park Service" [ca. early 1990s], 17, LARO.HQ.LIB.

54 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1990: 4, file A2621 Superintendent's

Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; Daniel R. Brown, "Coulee Dam National

Recreation Area Statement for Interpretation, FY93," 18 Feb. 1993, file K1817 Interpretive

Plan, LARO.HQ.CIO; LARO, Draft General Management Plan (1998); Rob Kauder, "Flutist

to Play Spring Canyon Concert Straight from the Heart," [Grand Coulee] Star, 26 Aug. 1998;

Brougher phone interview.

55 George M. Davis, Superintendent, Colville Agency, BIA, to USBR Project Manager, 2

Jan. 1986, file A44 Triparty Agreement, LARO.HQ.ADM.

56 USBR Project Manager to NPS Regional Director, 9 Nov. 1984, file A44 Multi-Party

Agrmt, LARO.HQ.ADM; "CCT Museum, Gift Shop," Wilbur Register, 18 April 1991;

Interpretive Specialist, NPS Spokane Field Office, to Gene Fink, Intermediate School District

#101, Spokane, 15 April 1975, file H14 Area and Service History, LARO.HQ.ADM. It is not

known how long the museum in Wellpinit was open or why it closed.

57 CODA, "Mission 66 Prospectus: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 24 April 1956

(revised 1956-62): 5, 12, file A5419 Mission 66, LARO.HQ.ADM; McClelland, Building the
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 8 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi8n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:03 PM]

National Parks, 468; "Museum Prospectus," 1958: 23-24, 31; Paul McCrary, "Interpretive

Prospectus for Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 25 Sept. 1964: 15, 1728-29;

"Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1990: 4, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual

Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1991: 7-8,

file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; Daniel R. Brown,

"Coulee Dam National Recreation Area Statement for Interpretation, FY93," 18 Feb. 1993:

13, file K1817 Interpretive Plan, LARO.HQ.CIO.

58 "Interpretive Prospectus: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 1975: 18;

"Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1977: 9, file H2621 Annual Reports,

LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1977: 7, file H2621 Annual

Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM; William J. Schieber, LARO, to NPS Regional Chief,

Interpretation and Visitor Services, 18 Nov. 1985, file D6215 Museum Exhibit Repair &

Rehab., LARO.HQ.ADM; Gordon Boyd, LARO Acting Superintendent, to Phil Myerly,

HFC, 14 July 1987, file K18 Launch Ramp Exhibits, LARO.HQ.CIO.

59 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1990: 4, file A2621 Superintendent's

Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; Daniel R. Brown, "Coulee Dam National

Recreation Area Statement for Interpretation, FY93," 18 Feb. 1993: 13, file K1817

Interpretive Plan, LARO.HQ.CIO; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1998: 8,

file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM.

60 CODA, "Statement for Interpretation type document," Oct. 1957: 14-16, LARO.HQ.CIO;

"Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1974: 6, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual

Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1979: 6, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM.

61 "National Park Service 1980 Trail Study Questionnaire," 4, file D30 Roads & Trails,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Brougher phone interview; Lynne Brougher, LARO Education Specialist,

personal communication to Kathryn L. McKay, 6 July 2000.

62 CODA, "Statement for Interpretation type document," Oct. 1957: 22, LARO.HQ.CIO;

"Museum Prospectus," 1958: 21; McCrary, "Interpretive Prospectus," 1964: 2, 31;

"Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1975: 7, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual

Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1972: 12, file

A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report,

CODA," CY1973; 6, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; CODA,

"A Boater's Guide to Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake," 1973: 1, 6, 8, 14, file K3814 Lake Roos

Boater's Guide, LARO.HQ.CIO; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1990: 4, file

A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual

Report, CODA," CY1974: 5, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM;

Graeme Casseday, "A Big Dam's Big Lake," Trailer Boats 24 (Dec. 1980): 24-25; "Draft

Long-Range Interpretive Plan, Lake Roosevelt National Recreational Area," 1999: 26,

LARO.HQ.CIO.

63 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1975: 7, file A2621 Superintendent's

Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1992: 14,

file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; Elizabeth R. Smith,

"Effects of User Characteristics, Visit Characteristics and Concerns on Management

Preference: Lake Roosevelt, Washington" (M.S. thesis, Washington State University, 1997),

52.

64 "What Has Become of the Newspaper ‘The Mirror'?", file A3615 Service & Personnel
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 8 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi8n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:03 PM]

1987, LARO.HQ.ADM; Daniel R. Brown, "Coulee Dam National Recreation Area Statement

for Interpretation, FY93," 18 Feb. 1993, file K1817 Interpretive Plan, LARO.HQ.CIO.

65 John A. Hussey, "Fort Spokane, Washington: A History of the United States Army Post of

the Forest Spokane Military Reservation," April 1958, file CODA History/Research, Office

of Senior Historian, CCSO; John A. Hussey, NPS Regional Historian, to NPS Regional

Director, 4 May 1960, file H14 Fort Spokane Research, Rehab., LARO.HQ.ADM; Paul F.

McCrary, "Fort Spokane, Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, Historic Structures Report,

Part I," 1962, Historic Structures Report — Fort Spokane notebook, LARO.HQ.CIO; C. E.

Persons, NPS Acting Assistant Regional Director, to NPS Director, 9 June 1960, file H14

Fort Spokane Research, Rehab., LARO.HQ.ADM; "Interpretive Prospectus: Coulee Dam

National Recreation Area," 1975: 11; Hussey to LARO Superintendent, 26 March 1964, old

files, LARO.KF.2004. LARO again hired a researcher in 1972 to search newspaper and

photograph files and conduct interviews concerning Fort Spokane ("Superintendent's Annual

Report, CODA," CY1972: 8, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM).

66 Paul F. McCrary, "Fort Spokane, Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, Historic

Structures Report, Part I," 1962: 7, 9, Historic Structures Report — Fort Spokane notebook,

LARO.HQ.CIO;.CODA, "Mission 66 Prospectus: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 24

April 1956 (revised 1956-62): Park Development Schedule, Fort Spokane, 1962, file A5419

Mission 66, LARO.HQ.ADM.

67 John A. Hussey, NPS Regional Historian, to NPS Regional Director, 4 May 1960, file H14

Fort Spokane Research, Rehab., LARO.HQ.ADM; NPS, "A Master Plan for Coulee Dam

National Recreation Area, Washington: Preliminary Working Draft," Feb. 1968: 32, file D18

Master Plan, LARO.HQ.ADM; David Richie, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Chief, Eastern

Museum Laboratory, 3 Dec. 1968, file Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, 1952 to 1969,

HFC.

68 Mrs. Homer (Sis) Robinson and Don Everts, interview with Nancy F. Renk, 6 Dec. 1999,

Tape 1-B, tape and index on file, LARO.HQ.

69 CCSO, "Museum Management Plan," 1997: 25-26; "Fort Spokane," Spokesman-Review, 6

July 1999; Lynne Brougher, LARO Education Specialist, personal communication to Kathryn

L. McKay, 1 June 2000.

70 Brown phone interview.

71 Brougher phone interview.

72 LARO Superintendent to NPS Director, 11 Sept. 1964, file A2615 M. Narrative Reports

CODA CY1964, box 2, RG 079-95-05, NARA-PSR; Howard Chapman, LARO

Superintendent, to Chief, NPS Western Museum Laboratory, 22 March 1967, file H14 Fort

Spokane History, LARO.HQ.ADM; LARO Superintendent to NPS Director, 14 Sept. 1965,

file A2615 M. Narrative Reports CODA CY1965, box 1, RG 079-95-05, NARA-PSR; A.

Clark Stratton, NPS Associate Director, to all NPS field offices, 7 Sept. 1965, old files,

LARO.KF.2004; Wayne W. Bryant, NPS Acting Chief, Division of Interpretation and Visitor

Services, to NPS Regional Director, 13 Jan. 1965, file Coulee Dam National Recreation

Area, 1952 to 1969, HFC; Edward A. Hummel, NPS Regional Director, to LARO

Superintendent, 2 Feb. 1965, file Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, 1952 to 1969, HFC;

Wayne W. Bryant, NPS Acting Chief, Division of Interpretation and Visitor Services, to

NPS Regional Director, 13 Jan. 1965, file Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, 1952 to

1969, HFC.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 8 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi8n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:03 PM]

73 David Richie, LARO Superintendent, to Chief, NPS Eastern Museum Laboratory, 3 Dec.

1968, file Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, 1952 to 1969, HFC; Lewis, Museum

Curatorship, 164; Mackintosh, Interpretation in the National Park Service, 51-52; Raymond

Mulvany, NPS Acting Regional Director, to NPS Director, 16 Dec. 1968, file Coulee Dam

National Recreation Area, 1952 to 1969, HFC; Arthur C. Hathaway, LARO Park Naturalist,

to NPS Regional Historian, 1 Sept. 10967, file H14 Fort Spokane History, LARO.HQ.ADM;

David Richie, LARO Superintendent, to Chief, NPS Eastern Museum Laboratory, 3 Dec.

1968, file Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, 1952 to 1969, HFC; Wayne W. Bryant,

NPS Regional Chief, Interp and Visitor Services, to LARO Superintendent, 10 Feb. 1969, file

Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, 1952 to 1969, HFC; Esther Rice, "Fort Readied for

Season," [1969-72], newspaper clipping, file H14 Area and Service History,

LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1975: 7, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Report; Thomas J. Bredow, LARO Fort Spokane District Ranger, to

unknown recipient, 1 Feb. 1980, file H3019 Ft. Spokane Comprehensive Design Plan,

LARO.HQ.CIO.

74 Homer Robinson, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 3 Nov. 1961, file H14

Fort Spokane Research, Rehab., LARO.HQ.ADM; Robinson to NPS Regional Director, 24

Jan. 1963, file H14 Fort Spokane Research, Rehab., LARO.HQ.ADM; LARO Superintendent

to NPS Director, 13 Sept. 1966, file A2615 M. Narrative Reports CODA Cy 1966, box 1, RG

079-95-05, NARA-PSR; Arthur C. Hathaway, LARO Park Naturalist, to Leonard Ekman,

East Wenatchee, 17 Sept. 1969, file H14 Area and Service History, LARO.HQ.ADM;

"Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1974: 6, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual

Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; Daniel R. Brown, "Coulee Dam National Recreation Area

Statement for Interpretation, FY93," 18 Feb. 1993, file K1817 Interpretive Plan,

LARO.HQ.CIO.

75 Thomas F. Flynn, NPS Deputy Director, to Thomas S. Foley, U.S. House of

Representatives, 10 Dec. 1971, file H32 Nat'l Register of Historic Places, LARO.HQ.ADM;

William Burgen, LARO Superintendent, to Lou Delle McIntosh, Curator Kentucky

Department of Parks, 15 Feb. 1973, file H14 Fort Spokane Research, Rehab.,

LARO.HQ.ADM; "The Fort Spokane Story," 1968, file K18 Fort Spokane Slide Show,

LARO.HQ.CIO; "Fort Spokane," 1981, file K18 Fort Spokane Slide Show, LARO.HQ.CIO;

"Interpretive Prospectus: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 1975: 6, 8.

76 David Richie, LARO Superintendent, to Chief, NPS Eastern Museum Laboratory, 3 Dec.

1968, file Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, 1952 to 1969, HFC; "Interpretive

Prospectus: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 1975: 6; David M. Schnute, NPS

Regional AV Specialist, to Rocky Richardson, 10 April 1984, file K30 Regional AV

Specialist Field Reports, LARO.HQ.CIO; Schnute to NPS Regional Director, 15 April 1980,

file K30 Regional AV Specialist Field Reports, LARO.HQ.CIO; Thomas Teaford, phone

interview with Kathryn L. McKay, 3 August 2000, notes on file, LARO.HQ; Lynne

Brougher, LARO Education Specialist, email to Kathryn L. McKay, 17 August 2000.

77 Teaford phone interview.

78 Homer Robinson, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Director, 27 May 1963, file A2621

Annual Reports Field Areas 1-1-63 to 12-31-63, box 4, RG 079-95-05, NARA-PSR.

79 "Master Plan for the Preservation and Use of Coulee Dam National Recreation Area,

Washington," Dec. 1960: "Fort Site Development" section, p. 3, file D18 Master Planning

1965-67, LARO.HQ.ADM; Robert G. Hall, NPS Supervisory Landscape Architect, to NPS
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 8 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi8n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:03 PM]

Regional Director, 28 Dec. 1960, file D18 Master Plan 1960, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat.

#3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Charles E. Krueger, NPS Chief Landscape Architect, to NPS

Superintendent, 29 April 1964, file H30 Historical Structures and Sites, LARO.HQ.ADM;

Homer Robinson, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Chief, Western Office of Design and

Construction, 6 May 1964, file H30 Historical Structures and Sites, LARO.HQ.ADM.

80 "Interpretive Prospectus: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 1975: 10; Gordon D.

Boyd, LARO Chief, Interpretation & Resource Management, to Files, 17 April 1985, file

Coulee Dam NRA, Office of Senior Archeologist, CCSO; Thomas J. Bredow, LARO Fort

Spokane District Ranger, to LARO Superintendent, 7 Nov. 1978, file H3019 Ft. Spokane

Comprehensive Design Plan, LARO.HQ.CIO.; Thomas J. Bredow, LARO Fort Spokane

District Ranger, 1 Feb. 1980, file H3019 Ft. Spokane Comprehensive Design Plan,

LARO.HQ.CIO; Jerald M. Lorenz, NPS Landscape Architect, DSC, to NPS Assistant

Manager, Alaska/Pacific Northwest/Western Team, DSC, 6 July 1984, file D30 Dev't &

Maint. (Fed Hwy Admin) 1983-89, LARO.HQ.ADM; Gary Kuiper, LARO Superintendent,

to Files, 20 June 1986, file H30 Historical Structures and Sites, LARO.HQ.ADM; Kuiper to

NPS Regional Director, 10 Dec. 1984, file L7617 Environmental Assessments Memos/Corr.,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Cathy A. Gilbert et al., "Comprehensive Design Plan for Fort Spokane"

(Seattle: Cultural Resources Division, NPS, 1991), 10.

81 CODA, PCP Index No. M-152, 1966, file D46 [?] (file is not numbered), Project

Construction Proposals, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Master Plan for Preservation and Use of Coulee

Dam National Recreation Area," March 1963: vol. III, sec. E, p. 8, file D18 Master Plan

1962, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; "Interpretive Prospectus: Coulee

Dam National Recreation Area," 1975: 12-13; Tom J. Bredow, LARO Fort Spokane District

Ranger, to LARO Superintendent, 11 Jan. 1976, file H3019 Ft. Spokane Comprehensive

Design Plan, LARO.HQ.CIO; Bredow to Jerry Rumburg, LARO, 11 Nov. 1978, file H3019

Ft. Spokane Comprehensive Design Plan, LARO.HQ.CIO; William Dunmire, LARO

Superintendent, "Statement for Management: Bredow to unknown recipient, 1 Jan. 1980, file

H3019, Ft. Spokane Comprehensive Design Plan, LARO.HQ.CIO; Coulee Dam National

Recreation Area," 15 Dec. 1978: 9, file D18 Statements for Management, LARO.HQ.ADM.

The descriptive word "clobbered" is from Bredow's 11 Jan. 1976 letter.

82 CODA, "Resource Management Plan and Environmental Assessment: Coulee Dam

National Recreation Area" (1982), 5, 15, 21-23; CODA, "Statement for Interpretation and

Visitor Services for Fiscal Year 1984," 17 Jan. 1984: Part 1.6, Statement for Interpretation

notebook, LARO.HQ.CIO; Craig Gehrke, Rob Kinucan, R. Gerald Wright, "A VegetationRehabilitation Program for the Parade Grounds at Fort Spokane, Coulee Dam National

Recreation Area," University of Idaho, 1980: 1, 13-15, LARO.HQ.LIB; Jim Romo,

"Evaluation and Recommendations for Reseeding Projects at Fort Spokane National Historic

Site," Oregon State University, 1985: 1-2, 5-6, file L3015 Revegetation Ft. Spokane, drawer

5, LARO.HQ.RMO; Gary Kuiper, LARO Superintendent, to Files, 20 June 1986, file H30

Historical Structures and Sites, LARO.HQ.ADM.

83 Cathy A. Gilbert and Renata Niedzwiecka, "The Historic Landscape of Fort Spokane: A

Design Proposal" (Seattle: NPS, summer 1985), 1, 30-31, 40, 42, 44; LARO, "Resource

Management Plan, Natural Resources," 1997: Appendix F, 42-43, LARO.HQ.RMO;

Brougher phone interview.

84 James A. Richardson, NPS Regional Chief, Interpretation and Visitor Services, to NPS

Deputy Regional Director, 26 June 1985, file K1817 Annual Statement for Interp,

LARO.HQ.CIO; LARO Maintenance Mechanic Foreman, Fort Spokane, to LARO Facility

Manager, 25 Feb. 1992, file H3019 Ft. Spokane Comprehensive Design Plan,
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 8 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi8n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:03 PM]

LARO.HQ.CIO; Vaughn Baker, LARO Superintendent, to David Hansen, Washington

SHPO, 20 March 1997, file H30 Archaeology NPS/Tribes/BPA 1996-97, LARO.HQ.ADM;

CODA, "A Special Gathering at Fort Spokane," 15 Aug. 1997, file K3415 Press Releases —

CODA, LARO.HQ.ADM; Brougher phone interview; Lynne Brougher, LARO Education

Specialist, personal communication to Kathryn L. McKay, 6 July 2000.

85 Charles E. Krueger, NPS Chief Landscape Architect, to LARO Superintendent, 29 April

1964, file H30 Historical Structures and Sites, LARO.HQ.ADM.

86 Homer W. Robinson, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 27 March 1962,

file H14 Fort Spokane Research, Rehab., LARO.HQ.ADM; John B. Wosky, NPS Acting

Regional Director, to LARO Superintendent, 12 April 1962, file H14 Fort Spokane Research,

Rehab., LARO.HQ.ADM; Robinson to NPS Regional Director, 18 April 1962, file H14 Fort

Spokane Research, Rehab., LARO.HQ.ADM; Robinson to NPS Chief, 6 May 1964, file H30

Historical Structures and Sites, LARO.HQ.ADM.

87 William Burgen, LARO Superintendent, to Lou Delle McIntosh, Curator, Kentucky

Department of Parks, 15 Feb. 1973, file H14 Fort Spokane Research, Rehab.,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Lennon W. Hooper, "National Park Trails: Analytical Report on Trails in

Areas of the National Park System," March 1973: 22, sheet on LARO, LARO.HQ.LIB;

"Interpretive Prospectus: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 1975: 8-9; "Wayside

Exhibit Data Sheet," 1977: 1, file K18 Sentinel Trail Wayside Exhibits, LARO.HQ.CIO;

"Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1978, 7 March 1979: 9, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; J. Jerry Rumburg, LARO Park Naturalist,

to LARO Superintendent, 25 April 1979, file D30 Roads & Trails, LARO.HQ.ADM;

"National Park Service 1980 Trail Study Questionnaire," 4, file D30 Roads & Trails,

LARO.HQ.ADM.

88 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1980: 4, file A2621 Superintendent's

Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; Gary Kuiper, LARO Superintendent, to Files, 7 June 1982,

file D3415 Buildings, Construction, & Maint., etc., LARO.HQ.ADM; Gordon D. Boyd,

LARO Chief, Interpretation & Resource Management, to Files, 17 April 1985, file H3019 Ft.

Spokane Comprehensive Design Plan, LARO.HQ.CIO; Steve Castro-Shrader, LARO Fort

Spokane District Ranger, to LARO Chief of Interpretation, 8 May 1985, file K2623 Situation,

LARO.HQ.ADM; James A. Richardson, NPS Regional Chief, Interpretation and Visitor

Services, to NPS Deputy Regional Director, 26 June 1985, file K1817 Annual Statement for

Interp, LARO.HQ.CIO; William J. Schieber, LARO, to NPS Regional Chief, Interpretation

and Visitor Services, 18 Nov. 1985, file D6215 Museum Exhibit Repair & Rehab.,

LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1985: 4, file H2621 Annual

Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM; Richardson to LARO Superintendent, 6 March 1986, file D6215

Museum Exhibit Repair & Rehab., LARO.HQ.ADM; Kuiper to NPS Regional Director, 2

April 1987, file H3019 Ft. Spokane Comprehensive Design Plan, LARO.HQ.CIO; Daniel R.

Brown, "Coulee Dam National Recreation Area Statement for Interpretation, FY93," 18 Feb.

1993: 16, file K1817 Interpretive Plan, LARO.HQ.CIO; Dan Brown, LARO Chief of

Interpretation to NPS Regional Chief of Interpretation and Visitor Services, 1 March 1994,

file K1817 Interpretive Plan, LARO.HQ.CIO.

89 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1974: 5, file A2621 Superintendent's

Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Wayside Exhibit Data Sheet," 1977: 6-7, 14, file K18

Sentinel Trail Wayside Exhibits, LARO.HQ.CIO.

90 Mackintosh, Interpretation in the National Park Service, 54-55, 61; "Superintendent's

Annual Report, CODA," CY1973: 6; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1974: 6,
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 8 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi8n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:03 PM]

file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual

Report, CODA," CY1976: 16, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM;

"Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1977: 7, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual

Report, LARO.HQ.ADM.

91 CODA, "Annual Statement for Interpretation and Visitor Services: Coulee Dam National

Recreation Area," 1981: 13, 28, Statement for Interpretation notebook, LARO.HQ.CIO;

William Dunmire, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 15 April 1980, file

K1819 Curatorial Services, LARO.HQ.ADM. The firing of weaponry came under question

Servicewide in the early 1980s, but LARO continued with its black-powder weapons firing

and in 1992 added the firing of a mountain howitzer as part of the program (Gary Kuiper,

LARO Superintendent, to Bill Schaber, Spokane, 16 Aug. 1982, file H32 Nat'l Register of

Historic Places, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1992: 14,

file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; Teaford phone

interview).

92 Daniel R. Brown, "Coulee Dam National Recreation Area Statement for Interpretation,

FY93," 18 Feb. 1993, file K1817 Interpretive Plan, LARO.HQ.CIO; Gerald Tays, LARO

Superintendent, to Michael A. Johnston, 14 Sept. 1994, file K1815 Interpretive Services

1992, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," FY1996: 6, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; Brougher phone interview.

93 David H. Chance, archaeologist, to Jim Harvey, President of Washington Water Power, 16

Dec. 1992, Kettle Falls Area section of History box 3, LARO.HQ.LIB.

94 Fred C. Bohm and Craig C. Holstine, The People's History of Stevens County (Colville:

Stevens County Historical Society, 1983), 11; "Old Mission at Kettle Falls," SpokesmanReview, 13 May 1901; Williams and Newell, Historic Resource Study, 231; "Old K. F.

Mission May Be Restored," Colville Examiner, 19 Nov. 1938; "Kiwanis Mission Restoration

Drive," Colville Examiner, 9 Dec. 1939; Washington State Planning Council, A Study of

Parks, Parkways and Recreational Areas, State of Washington (Olympia, Wash.: 1941),

1941: 50; USBR, Recreational Development of Roosevelt Lake: Columbia Basin Joint

Investigations, Problem 26 (Wash., D.C.: GPO, 1945), 8.

95 Charles H. Odegaard, NPS Regional Director, to Washington State Parks and Recreation

Commission, 15 Oct. 1973, St. Paul's Mission section, History box 3, LARO.HQ.LIB.

96 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1974: 6, 20, file A2621 Superintendent's

Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; Kettle Falls Archaeological District National Register

nomination, 1973, in Williams and Newell, Historic Resources Study, preface, 220-230;

CODA, "Resource Management Plan and Environmental Assessment," 1982: 24-25; William

Dunmire, LARO Superintendent, to Dr. Roderick Sprague, University of Idaho, 28 June

1978, file H22 Archeologic & Historical Information General, LARO.HQ.ADM; David H.

Chance to William Dunmire, LARO Superintendent, 14 Aug. 1979 (appendix), St. Paul's

Mission section, History box 3, LARO.HQ.LIB.

97 "Interpretive Prospectus: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 1975: 16, 29;

"Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1976: 16, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual

Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; J. Jerry Rumburg, LARO Chief of Interpretation, to LARO

Superintendent and staff, 8 July 1980, file H14 Area and Service History, LARO.HQ.ADM;

Arthur C. Hathaway, former LARO employee, personal communication to Kathryn L.

McKay, 1 March 2001; J. Jerry Rumburg, "Saint Paul's Mission Wayside," 1983, file D6215

Museum Exhibit Repair & Rehab., LARO.HQ.ADM; CODA, "Annual Statement for
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 8 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi8n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:03 PM]

Interpretation and Visitor Services: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 1981: 14,

Statement for Interpretation notebook, LARO.HQ.CIO; Gary Kuiper, LARO Superintendent,

to Glen Hinsdale, NPS Regional Chief of Interpretation and Visitor Information, 5 Jan. 1983,

file D6215 Museum Exhibit Repair & Rehab., LARO.HQ.ADM; Kuiper to NPS Regional

Chief, Interpretation and Visitor Services, 17 May 1985, file D6215 Museum Exhibit Repair

& Rehab., LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1974: 11, file

A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM. CCSO, "Museum Management

Plan," 1997: 28. Two 1930s films about Kettle Falls have been put onto video and are

currently shown to visitors on an informal basis.

98 James A. Richardson, NPS Regional Chief, Interpretation and Visitor Services, to NPS

Deputy Regional Director, 26 June 1985, file K1817 Annual Statement for Interp,

LARO.HQ.CIO; CCSO, "Museum Management Plan," 1997: 28.

99 Paul [Larson], LARO Chief of Interpretation & Resource Management, to LARO

Superintendent, 25 January 1974, file H14 Kettle Falls Historical Center, LARO.HQ.CIO;

Kenneth D. Weber to Darrell [Shute], 13 May 1974, file H14 Kettle Falls Historical Center,

LARO.HQ.CIO; Marian F. Garvey, President Stevens County Historical Society, to William

Dunmire, LARO Superintendent, 16 March 1979, file H14 Kettle Falls Historical Center,

LARO.HQ.CIO; [Don Carney], Kettle Falls District Ranger, to LARO files, 22 June 1979,

file H14 Kettle Falls Historical Center, LARO.HQ.CIO.

100 CODA, "Resources Management Plan and Environmental Assessment," 1982: 25; NPS

Special Assistant to NPS Regional Director, to Regional Director, 26 April 1983, file D22

Construction and Pres. Programs, 1982-1984, LARO.HQ.ADM.

101 "St. Paul's Mission Development Concept Planning," 8 Feb. 1985 draft, file H3019

Mission Point Development Concept Plan, LARO.HQ.CIO; James A. Richardson, NPS

Regional Chief, Interpretation and Visitor Services, to NPS Deputy Regional Director, 26

June 1985, file K1817 Annual Statement for Interp, LARO.HQ.CIO; Kent Bush, NPS

Regional Curator, to LARO Superintendent, 6 Feb. 1986, file D6215 Museum Exhibit Repair

& Rehab., LARO.HQ.ADM.

102 Kettle Falls Historical Center, Minutes of Special Meeting, 23 January 1986, file H14

Kettle Falls Historical Center, LARO.HQ.CIO; Kent Bush, NPS Regional Curator, to LARO

Superintendent, 6 February 1986, file H14 Kettle Falls Historical Center, LARO.HQ.CIO;

Kettle Falls Historical Center, Minutes of Special Meeting, 28 January 1986, file H14 Kettle

Falls Historical Center, LARO.HQ.CIO.

103 "Kettle Falls," (draft of Master Plan Development Outline), 26 Feb. 1948: 9, file D18

Planning Program, closed 6/3/53, LARO.HQ.ADM; Robert H. Coombs, LARO Acting

Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 13 July 1953, file D18 Master Plan 1953 — June

'54, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; NPS, "Environmental Assessment

for the General Management Plan, CODA," 1979: 54.

104 "Interpretive Prospectus: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 1975: 21;

"Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1979: 6, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual

Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; Williams and Newell, Historic Resource Study, 240; CODA,

"Development/Study Package Proposal, Package No. 208," 1983, file D30 Dev't & Maint.

(Fed Hwy Admin) 1983-1989, LARO.HQ.ADM; CODA, "Management Assumptions and

Site Suitability Analysis for Kettle Falls Developed Area," Aug. 1989: ii, iii; "Draft LongRange Interpretive Plan, Lake Roosevelt National Recreational Area," 1999: 25,

LARO.HQ.CIO.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 8 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi8n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:03 PM]

105 Gary J. Kuiper, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 3 Feb. 1992, file A44

Dry Falls St. Park Interp. Center, LARO.HQ.CIO.

106 J Harlen Bretz, "The Lake Missoula Floods and the Channeled Scabland," Journal of

Geology 77 (1969): 507, 509, 522; Marge and Ted Mueller, Fire, Faults & Floods: A Road &

Trail Guide Exploring the Origins of the Columbia River Basin (Moscow, Idaho: University

of Idaho Press, 1997), 27; LARO, "Resource Management Plan, Natural Resources," 1997:

31.

107 Mueller, Fire, Faults & Floods, 22-24. Note that J Harlen Bretz did not use a period after

the initial "J."

108 Grant D. Ross, "Grand Coulee National Park, Washington," 1935: 1, 2, 4, file H14

Historical Records — Grand Coulee, LARO.HQ.ADM; USBR, Rural Recreation Areas:

Columbia Basin Joint Investigations: Problem 25 (Wash., D.C., 1945), 5; Earl A. Trager,

NPS Chief of Naturalist Division, "Grand Coulee, General Considerations," August 1938: 6,

file H14 Historical Records — Grand Coulee, LARO.HQ.ADM.

109 Conrad Wirth, NPS, to Hubert H. Walter, Columbia Basin Commission, 4 Dec. 1952, file

Recreation (1 of 3), box 34, Columbia Basin Commission, WSA.

110 J. Volney Lewis, NPS Regional Geologist, to NPS Regional Director, 13 Jan. 1942, file

1, box 2, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Fred O. Jones, "Geological Aspects of Developing

the Grand Coulee as a Part of the Coulee Dam Recreational Area, Washington," 1950: 1, 7,

file 10, box 8, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR: 1, 7.

111 NPS Director to NPS Regional Directors, 1 Feb. 1965, file N44 Natural Landmarks,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Paul F. McCrary, "Evaluation of the Grand Coulee, Washington for

Natural History Landmark Designation," Jan. 1965: 19-20, file L58 Nat. Natural Landmarks,

LARO.HQ.CIO.

112 David A. Richie, LARO Superintendent, to Dr. Stanley A. Cain, Central Washington

State College, 27 Jan. 1969, old files, LARO.KF.2004.

113 "Interpretive Prospectus: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 1975: 1; Gary Kuiper,

LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 25 Aug. 1987, file N44 Natural

Landmarks, LARO.HQ.ADM; Kuiper interview, Tape 2-B.

114 Dan Brown, LARO Chief of Interpretation, to Ice Age Floods Institute Board of

Directors, 5 Oct. 1994, file L58 IAF — Institute, LARO.HQ.CIO.

115 Brown phone interview; ; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1989: 11, file

A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM.

116 Brown phone interview; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1991: 8, file

A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual

Report, CODA," CY1992: 15, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-,

LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1993: 10, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; Gerald Tays, LARO

Superintendent, to Executive Director, Northwest Interpretive Association, 5 Oct. 1994, file

A42 PNW Nat'l Parks Assoc. 1987-, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report,

CODA," Jan. 1994-Sept. 1995, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-,
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 8 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi8n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:03 PM]

LARO.HQ.ADM.

117 Charles H. Odegaard, NPS Regional Director, to NPS Assistant Director, Legislative and

Congressional Affairs, 27 Sept. 1990, file L58 Planning Strategies & Briefing Statements;

CODA, "Special Resource Study Priority Data Sheet: Ice-Age Floods National Reserve or

Monument," 1990, file Ice Age Floods Task Force, LARO.HQ.CIO; Charles H. Odegaard,

NPS Regional Director, to Dale Crane, National Parks & Conservation Association, 27

March 1992, file L48 Planning Strategies & Briefing Statements, LARO.HQ.CIO; "Planning

Strategy for Ice Age Floods Preserve," [1990], file L58 Planning Strategies and Briefing

Statements, LARO.HQ.CIO; "Ice Age Floods Heritage Partnership Project," [ca. 1990], file

Ice Age Floods Task Force, LARO.HQ.CIO. Although the Park Service emphasized a

cooperative approach with most land ownership and management not changing, the National

Parks & Conservation Association preferred a land acquisition program ("Strategy Paper, Ice

Age Floods National Reserve," May 1992: 5, file L58 Planning Strategies & Briefing

Statements, LARO.HQ.CIO).

118 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1993: 4, 11, file A2621 Superintendent's

Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Ice Age Floods Task Force," 23 March 1993, file

L58 Ice Age Flood Initiative — Misc., LARO.HQ.CIO; "Minutes: IAFs Task Force Meeting

No. 5, September 8, 1993, Spokane, Washington," 2-4, file L48 IAF Task Force Mtg.

Minutes, LARO.HQ.CIO; "Executive Summary, IAFS Resource Management Plan, Natural

Resources," 1997: Appendix F: 27, LARO.HQ.RMO.

119 "Executive Summary, IAFS Resource Management Plan, Natural Resources," 1997:

Appendix F: 27; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," Jan. 1994-Sept. 1995: 1-2, file

A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; Gerald Tays, LARO

Superintendent, to Mikki Kison, 30 Nov. 1994, file L58 IAF — Institute, LARO.HQ.CIO;

"The Issue of Feasibility/Suitability for the Ice Age Floods Area," [April 1994], file IAFs

Task Force, LARO.HQ.CIO; Dan Brown, LARO Chief of Interpretation, to Kim [?], n.d.,

file L58 IAF — Institute, LARO.HQ.CIO; NPS, "Columbia Cascades Cluster 1995

Workplan, Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 26 June 1995 and 30 Nov. 1995, file A54

CODA Supt. Goals 1992-, LARO.HQ.ADM; Tays interview, Tape 1-B; Richard B. Waitt,

Geologist, U.S. Geological Survey Cascades Volcano Observatory, to Gerald Tays, LARO

Superintendent, 4 March 1995, file IAFs Task Force, LARO.HQ.CIO; Tays to Waitt, 23

March 1995, file L58 Ice Age Flood Initiative — Misc., LARO.HQ.CIO.

120 Brown phone interview; Gary J. Kuiper, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional

Director, 3 Feb. 1992, file A44 Dry Falls St. Park Interp. Center, LARO.HQ.CIO; Daniel R.

Brown, LARO Chief of Interpretation, to Wayne McLaughlin, Washington State Parks and

Recreation Commission, 29 April 1992, file A42 PNW Nat'l Park Assoc., LARO.HQ.ADM;

Brougher phone interview; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1992: 14, file

A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Challenge Cost-Share

Program Application: Dry Falls Interpretive Center," file A44 WA State Parks (Dry Falls),

LARO.HQ.ADM; Bradford Frye, LARO Lead Seasonal, Dry Falls, to Lynne Dubiel, LARO

South District Interpreter, 17 Sept. 1993, file A44 Dry Falls St. Park Interp. Center,

LARO.HQ.CIO.

121 Brown phone interview.

122 "Operations Evaluation Executive Summary, Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, June

20-24, 1994," 7, file A54 Operations Evaluation 1994-95, LARO.HQ.ADM; CCSO,

"Museum Management Plan," 1997: 28; "Update on FY97 Park Operations: Lake Roosevelt,"

file F34 FY97 Park Operations Survey, LARO.HQ.ADM; Brougher phone interview.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 8 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi8n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:03 PM]

123 Tays interview, Tape 1-B; Baker interview, Tape 2-A.

124 "Master Plan of Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 1964: ch. 2, p. 13, file D18

Master Planning 1965-67, LARO.HQ.ADM; Mackintosh, Interpretation in the National Park

Service, 67-71.

125 Wayne R. Howe, "Coulee Dam National Recreation Area Management Objectives," 23

Feb. 1971: "Management Objectives" section, p. 2, file D18 Maintenance Planning Program,

LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1972: 4, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report,

CODA," CY1974: 7, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM;

"Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1975: 8, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual

Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1977: 7, file H2621

Annual Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM; CODA, "Annual Statement for Interpretation and Visitor

Services: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 1981: 12, Statement for Interpretation

notebook, LARO.HQ.CIO.

126 Dan Brown, LARO Interpretive Specialist, to NPS Regional Chief of Interpretation, 8

Nov. 1991, file K2621 Annual Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM; Gerald Tays, LARO

Superintendent, to NPS Associate Regional Director, Operations, 9 Nov. 1993, file K2621

Annual Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM; Daniel R. Brown, "Coulee Dam National Recreation Area

Statement for Interpretation, FY93," 18 Feb. 1993, file K1817 Interpretive Plan,

LARO.HQ.CIO. Today the field seminars are led by Reclamation geologists (Lynne

Brougher, LARO Education Specialist, email to Kathryn L. McKay, 10 April 2001).

127 "Quarterly Congressional Report, January-March 1995, Parks, Washington," 1, file A38

Congressional Reports 1991-, LARO.HQ.ADM. The "wildly successful" evaluation is from

NPS, "Columbia Cascades Cluster 1995 Workplan, Coulee Dam National Recreation Area,"

26 June and 30 Nov. 1995: 5, file A54 CODA Supt. Goals 1992-, LARO.HQ.ADM; CODA,

"Floating Classroom on Lake Roosevelt," press release, 7 Feb. 1995, file K18 Floating

Classroom, LARO.HQ.CIO; Brown phone interview. LARO's Education Specialist Lynne

Brougher notes that LARO staff really should have gone to the teachers first and then

decided that the Floating Classroom was appropriate, rather than the other way around

(personal communication to Kathryn L. McKay, 6 July 2000).

128 Bradford J. Frye, LARO Education Specialist, to Gary Kaatz, Curlew High School, 14

Sept. 1995, file K18 Interpretive Activities 1994-, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's

Annual Report, CODA," FY1996: 4, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-,

LARO.HQ.ADM; "Millennium Activity Form: Lake Roosevelt Education Outreach

Program," 9 Feb. 1998, file K2623 Situation, LARO.HQ.ADM.

129 Terry D. Knapton, Executive Director, Lake Roosevelt Forum, to National Park

Foundation, [June 1995], file K18 Floating Classroom, LARO.HQ.CIO.

130 LARO Superintendent to NPS Director, 27 May 1963, file A2621 Annual Reports Field

Areas 1-1-63 to 12-31-63, box 4, RG 079-95-05, NARA-PSR.

131 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1973: 2, 6-7, file A2621 Superintendent's

Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1977: 8, file

H2621 Annual Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA,"

Calendar Year 1978: 9, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM;

"Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1979: 7, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 8 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi8n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:03 PM]

Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1980: 5, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report,

CODA," FY1981: 8, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM;

"Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1984: 4, file H2621 Annual Reports,

LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1985: 4, file H2621 Annual

Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1990: 4, file

A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual

Report, CODA," CY1991: 8, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-,

LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1992: 14, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; Daniel R. Brown, "Coulee Dam

National Recreation Area Statement for Interpretation, FY93," 18 Feb. 1993, file K1817

Interpretive Plan, LARO.HQ.CIO; Gerald Tays, LARO Superintendent, to Executive

Director, Northwest Interpretive Association, 5 Oct. 1994, file A42 PNW Nat'l Parks Assoc.

1987-, LARO.HQ.ADM.

132 Brougher phone interview.

133 "Draft Long-Range Interpretive Plan, Lake Roosevelt National Recreational Area," 1999:

32-33, LARO.HQ.CIO; Brougher phone interview.

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

laro/adhi/adhi8n.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi8a.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:06 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 8:

Changing Stories: Interpretation (continued)

Interpretive Staffing at LARO

LARO did not have any personnel who specialized in interpretation until the early 1960s.

Although LARO and Regional Office staff did some interpretive planning during the 1940s

and 1950s, no interpretive services were provided at all until 1962. The Mission 66 program

provided the funding to create interpretive facilities and hire small staff. In 1962, two ranger

naturalists were hired, and soon the program moved from planning and development into

administration of services. In November 1977, the Interpretation & Resource Management

structure was converted into two new operating divisions: Visitor Protection and Resource

Management, and Interpretation and Visitor Services. In 1978, the first year LARO had a

separate Division of Interpretation, District Rangers and Technicians worked 25 percent of

their time in interpretation. Seasonals worked in interpretation most of the time but also had

other duties. [20]

LARO's interpretive program through the 1980s accounted for less than 10 percent of the

park's staff time and only 5 to 7 percent of the park's base funding. Between 1977 and 1991,

LARO interpretive staffing ranged from one to nearly three permanent positions and up to

nearly three seasonals. This fell well below the minimum level of interpretive services, which

was considered to be two permanent staff and almost four seasonals. Seasonal interpreters

were brought on late and were not ready to present programs until early July, well after the

visitor season had begun. In some years, interpretive programs had to be cancelled at

particular campgrounds, and the Fort Spokane Visitor Center could not be kept open seven

days a week. [21]

Dan Brown was hired in 1988 as LARO's Interpretive Specialist. In approximately 1990, a

separate Division of Interpretation was again created (evidently the earlier division had been

merged back with visitor protection and resource management in the 1980s). This gave the

Interpretive Specialist direct-line authority to manage the NRA's interpretive program and a

seat at the park's management table. Cultural resource management responsibilities were

removed from the Interpretive Specialist position in 1992. The interpretive division at that

time had little funding; of the park's seventy-two full-time equivalents in 1989, interpretation

accounted for only three positions. When Gerry Tays was hired as LARO Superintendent in

1993, Park Service Regional Director Charles Odegaard asked him to elevate the role of

interpretation in the park. Meanwhile, Brown continued to emphasize the inadequacy of

staffing and funding for the program in the early 1990s. The division oversaw visitor centers

(separated by some ninety miles), five cooperating association sales outlets, six

amphitheaters, a living history program, community outreach, wayside exhibits at nine

locations, a park publications program, and the museum collection. Funding for a South

District interpreter was provided in 1991. Brown deliberately closed down the interpretive

programming at Kettle Falls in an effort to force park management to provide funds for a

North District interpreter. This position was, in fact, funded in 1995. Brown also took money
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi8a.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:06 PM]

out of the interpretive program budget that was needed for seasonals in order to hire an

education technician, knowing the park would eventually provide the money to bring on

seasonals for interpretation. [22]

Brown recognized that managers of particular programs within the park had an interest in

protecting their own programs:

We had some extremely sharp individuals for division chiefs while I was there.

They were very, very aggressive and were very good at building their own

programs. They saw interpretation's growth as challenging resources that could

come to their programs. They didn't mind if interpretation grew, as long as it

didn't take money away from their program. [23]

Through the 1990s, the interpretive program continued to rely heavily on volunteers and

interns. Congress established the Volunteers-in-Parks program in 1970 to augment the visitor

experience. At LARO, as at other parks, the volunteers have mostly been involved with the

interpretive program. The jobs of these volunteers, some of them experts in particular fields,

have included staffing information desks, administering children's programs, assisting with

archaeological excavations, working in resource management, working on museum-related

projects, performing living history, and serving as Interpretive Hosts at campgrounds. An

employee of the National Air and Space Museum started an innovative nationwide program

known as "sky talks." He arranged for volunteer astronomers to give talks in national parks,

and in 1974 he began a program to train Park Service personnel to give these programs. Sky

talks were given at LARO in 1973 and 1974 and perhaps other years as part of this initiative.

The number of volunteers each season ranged from less than five to fifty (the latter was in

1985), and their cost per hour to the park was quite low. [24]

Another program that has provided volunteers to the interpretive division of LARO is the

Student Conservation Association, founded in 1957. The program funds college or high

school students who work in national parks in various capacities. For a number of years,

LARO has had one or several Student Conservation Association volunteers who provide

interpretive services during the visitor season. [25]

Significance of LARO — What to Interpret?

The 1941 draft agreement between Reclamation, National Park Service, and Office of Indian

Affairs assigned the Park Service the responsibility of establishing a museum at LARO. The

question of the primary interpretive themes for the recreation area has been debated and

refined by the Park Service ever since. In 1941, Mount Rainier Park Naturalist Howard

Stagner and Senior Archeologist Jesse Nusbaum spent a couple of days at Lake Roosevelt

surveying the "values" of the area. The Park Service Supervisor of Interpretation felt that the

main story was geology and that archaeology or history would play a minor role. Stagner

suggested that all the interpretive work be administered by one agency (Park Service or

Reclamation), including the engineering and reclamation story and natural history, to ensure

fair emphasis and effective coordination. Park Service Regional Geologist J. Volney Lewis

also emphasized the geology of the area as a primary theme and recommended that the Park

Service and Washington state cooperate in a roadside exhibit at Dry Falls State Park. [26]

The 1944 Development Outline and the 1948 Master Plan for LARO also emphasized the

geology and natural history of the area and downplayed the historical values. In 1949,

Regional Naturalist Dorr Yeager prepared a Preliminary Interpretive Development Outline

for LARO. His report focused on the geological and biological values and mentioned as

secondary the need for historical exhibits on the "romantic history of the Columbia River as a
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi8a.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:06 PM]

Interpretive theme for LARO: 

"To interpret the recreational

resources and related activities

as a means of increasing visitor

enjoyment. Secondary themes

including history (particularly

at Fort Spokane), archeology,

and natural history are

appropriate and desirable for

those visitors wishing mental

stimulation as well as physical

recreation." 

route for early day travel." He felt that visitors to Kettle Falls would be the most receptive to

interpretation and recommended focusing efforts there, with a small museum and conducted

nature walks. [27]

During the 1940s and 1950s, Regional Office personnel and the LARO Superintendent

researched the history of the upper Columbia River. Aubrey Neasham, Regional Historian,

prepared a brief history of LARO in the late 1940s that covered its pre-dam history. In the

early 1960s, LARO began preparing resource study proposals for archaeological site surveys

and for a more detailed and site-specific history of the Lake Roosevelt area that would help

in interpreting the recreation area to visitors. [28]

Two late 1950s documents, the 1957 Statement for Interpretation and the 1958 Museum

Prospectus for LARO, addressed the question of interpretive themes once again. The first

report emphasized the Grand Coulee as the foremost natural feature to interpret; historical

features included Fort Colvile, Fort Spokane, American Indian leaders, pictographs, and

Kettle Falls. The second report made specific recommendations about which visitor centers

would address which topics: Fort Spokane — history, geology, ethnology, and biology;

Kettle Falls — history, ethnology, and biology; and North Marina — geology and desert

flora. [29]

By the early 1960s, when LARO had its own interpretive staff, the emphasis of interpretation

was on water recreation, with history and natural history as secondary. The 1964 Master Plan

for LARO included the goal of providing "informational and interpretive programs primarily

oriented to enjoyment of available recreational resources." By 1971, however, water

recreation was being given equal weight with human history and natural history in the

recreation area's interpretive program. [30]

LARO staff prepared an Interpretive Prospectus for the NRA in 1975. This document

mentioned several interpretive themes: establishing National Park Service identity as separate

from Reclamation; water recreation; story of the Columbia River; and story of the formation

of the reservoir and its effect on the people around it. The prospectus contained some new

ideas, including restoring buildings at Bossburg and interpreting the mining history of the

area. The geologic story of the Grand Coulee would not be told because it was already being

covered at Dry Falls. Interpreters would focus on subjects in the area where the program was

being held. Interpretation would show "how the hand of man in modern times has shaped and

controlled this region's landscape and how recreation opportunities were made possible by

creation of the lake impoundment." By the early 1990s, LARO had added a new, broad

theme to those of recreation and human and natural history: the Ice Age Floods and how the

recreation area's geologic features relate to that far-reaching series of events. [32]

The nation's bicentennial in 1976 led the Park Service

to direct LARO and all other Park Service units to

incorporate special Bicentennial activities into their

interpretive programs. LARO did so. Other new, rather

specialized themes being emphasized nationwide at

this time that also affected LARO's programming

included energy conservation, resource preservation,

cultural minorities, and environmental education.

Many of LARO's programs were aimed at increasing

recreational visitor safety, often through hands-on

instruction in boating, water skiing, sailing, canoeing,

and snorkeling. These skills-oriented programs, along

with arts and crafts and games, were replaced by 1993

with guided canoe trips and additional environmental
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi8a.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:06 PM]

-- National Park Service, A

Master Plan for Coulee Dam

National Recreation Area, 1968

[31]

education activities. At the same time, campfire

programs changed from showing Walt Disney and

Marx Brothers films and cartoons to ranger-developed

programs on various park resources. One new

interpretive effort focused on the park's peregrine

falcon reintroduction program. [33]

Contractors completed LARO's Historic Resource Study in 1980. This report suggested quite

a few historic sites within the NRA, both above and below the water, that could be

interpreted to the public. These sites included Chinese placer mining sites, Hunters Landing,

the John Rickey homestead, Klaxta townsite, Seaton ferry, Old Detillion Bridge, Bossburg,

flooded communities, and the Hawk Creek orchards and railway grade. Some, but not many,

of these sites and topics have been interpreted over the years. For example, North District

staff have given gold-panning demonstrations and talked about the history of mining in the

area. [34]

The 1998 Draft General Management Plan for LARO outlined several primary and secondary

interpretive themes for the NRA: the transition zone between the desert-like Columbia Basin

to the south and the slightly wetter Okanogan highlands to the north; river economies,

traditional land use, archaeological research, and geo-archaeology studies; the continuing

cultural heritage of today's tribes; the fur trade; Fort Spokane; and the dam and reservoir. It

also established an "historic and interpretive management area" for LARO that encompassed

Fort Spokane and designated sites in the Kettle Falls area. [35]

In the early 1990s, the Park Service changed its interpretive planning process. The

Interpretive Prospectus, which dealt with the media portion of interpretation, was combined

with the Statement for Interpretation, which covered personal services, to form a document

known as the Interpretive Plan, which is currently being prepared. The draft document notes

that fewer than 5 percent of LARO's visitors attended interpretive programs. In the recent

General Management Plan, the interpretive themes revolve around the NRA's geology,

natural history, cultural history, and recreation opportunities. [36]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi8a.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:06 PM]

Ranger-led nature walk at Kettle Falls, 1963. Photo courtesy of

National Park Service, Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area

(LARO.FS).

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

laro/adhi/adhi8a.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 9 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi9n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:07 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 2:

Endnotes

1 William C. Ackermann et al., Man-Made Lakes: Their Problems and Environmental Effects

(Washington, DC: American Geophysical Union, 1973), 827; Wm. Joe Simonds, "The

Bureau of Reclamation and its Archeology: A Brief History," CRM 23 (2000, no. 1): 8.

2 "1000 Indian Graves to Be Moved From Columbia Banks Above Grand Coulee," Spokane

Chronicle, 5 Oct. 1938, p. 1; Jerry R. Galm, ed., A Design for Management of Cultural

Resources in the Lake Roosevelt Basin of Northeastern Washington, EWU Reports in

Archaeology and History 100-83 (Cheney: Archaeological and Historical Services, 1994),

3.2; 76th Congress, Public Law No. 690, An act for the Acquisition of Indian lands for the

Grand Coulee Dam and Reservoir, and for other purposes, 29 June 1940. Galm provides an

excellent overview of all the archaeological work conducted at Lake Roosevelt over the years.

3 Galm, Design for Management, 3.2; Lon Gibby and Donald Ball, "Echoes of Yesterday —

Moving 1388 Indian Graves," Pacific Northwesterner 41 (1997, no. 4); "Historic Data In Old

Graves," Spokesman-Review, 19 Nov. 1939; Donald Collier, Alfred E. Hudson, and Arlo

Ford, Archaeology of the Upper Columbia Region, UW Publications in Anthropology 9

(Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1942), 12.

4 U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, Annual Project History, Columbia

Basin Project, 1939: 65, on file at Grand Coulee Project Office, Grand Coulee, Washington;

Galm, Design for Management, 3.2; Gibby and Ball, "Echoes of Yesterday;" Paul C. Pitzer,

Grand Coulee: Harnessing a Dream (Pullman: Washington State University Press, 1994),

221.

5 USBR, Project History 1939, 65; Galm, Design for Management, 3.4-3.6, 3.28-3.31;

Collier et al., Archaeology of the Upper Columbia Region, 3, 10-11.

6 Collier et al., Archaeology of the Upper Columbia Region, 11-13, 113-114; Galm, Design

for Management, 3.4-3.5, 3.31; Thomas M. Iverson, "Lake Roosevelt Burials: A Computer

Analysis" (M.A. thesis, University of Idaho, 1984), 8.

7 USBR, Project History 1941, 59-60; USBR, Project History 1949, 87; USBR, Project

History 1950, 58; USBR, "Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, Including Franklin D.

Roosevelt Lake, Annual Safety and Management Review, August 22 through 24, 1978," file

715 Columbia Basin Project, Administration of Recreational Areas, Franklin D. Roosevelt

Lake, Boise USBR; USBR, Project History 1972, 7; Alex Sherwood, Spokane Tribal

Business Council Chairman, to Ed Sullivan, USBR Regional Director, 10 April 1972, old

files, LARO.KF.2004; Paula L. Hartzell-Scott, LARO Archeologist, to LARO

Superintendent, 2 June 1994, file H30 Historic Sites 1997-, LARO.HQ.ADM; Karen TaylorGoodrich, LARO Resource Management Specialist, to LARO Chief of Operations, 30 Aug.

1994, file Bonneville Agreement, office of NPS Senior Archeologist, CCSO.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 9 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi9n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:07 PM]

8 Joel E. Ferris to Herbert Maier, NPS Acting Regional Director, 23 Oct. 1941, file 1, box 2,

RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

9 Ackermann et al., Man-Made Lakes, 827-829; Claude E. Greider, LARO Supervisor, to

NPS Regional Director, 22 July 1947, file H2415 Archaeological Research Contract,

LARO.HQ.ADM; NPS press release, 1 Aug. 1947, file H2415 Archaeological Research

Contract, LARO.HQ.ADM; Greider to NPS Director, 11 Aug. 1947: 2-3, file 16, box 136,

RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

10 Newton B. Drury, NPS Director, to Director's Office and all Field Offices, 13 June 1947,

file H2415 Archaeological Research Contract, LARO.HQ.ADM; Herbert Maier, NPS Acting

Regional Director, to NPS Region IV Superintendents, 28 Nov. 1960, old files,

LARO.KF.2004.

11 Resource Study Proposal, Archeological Site Survey, CODA, WRO-A-21, 14 April 1965,

old files, LARO.KF.2004.

12 LARO, "Master Plan," March 1963: 3, 6, file D18 Master Plan 1962, box 3 of 3, LARO

#95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; John B. Wosky, NPS Regional Chief of Operations and

Maintenance, Western Region, to LARO Superintendent, 25 April 1963, file D18 Master Plan

April 25, 1963 — October 1963, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Homer

Robinson, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 29 April 1963, file D18 Master

Plan April 25, 1963 — October 1963, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO;

NPS Regional Chief of Operations and Maintenance to LARO Superintendent, 20 May 1963,

file D18 Master Plan April 25, 1963 — October 1963, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250,

LARO.HQ.PAO; Robinson to NPS Regional Director, 24 July 1963, old files,

LARO.KF.2004.

13 Paul J. F. Schumacher, NPS Regional Archeologist, to LARO Superintendent, 5 Jan. 1966,

old files, LARO.KF.2004; Homer Robinson, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional

Director, 18 Jan. 1966, old files, LARO.HQ.2004.

14 Mary B. Davis, ed., Native America in the Twentieth Century: An Encyclopedia (New

York: Garland Publishing, Inc., 1994), 53.

15 Ibid.

16 Ibid.

17 Ibid., 43, 53; Ray DePuydt, LARO Archeologist, phone interview with Nancy F. Renk, 7

July 2000, notes on file, LARO.HQ.

18 "Superintendent's Narrative Report," 13 Sept. 1966, file A2615 M. Narrative Reports

CODA CY1966, box 1, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Galm, Design for Management, 3.6,

3.31-3.32; CODA, "Environmental Assessment for the General Management Plan," Aug.

1979: 30.

19 Paul J. F. Schumacher, Chief of Archeological Research, San Francisco Service Center, to

Harold T. Nelson, USBR Regional Director, 3 Nov. 1967, old files, LARO.KF.2004.

20 Norman H. Moore, for USBR Regional Director H. T. Nelson, to Paul J. F. Schumacher,

NPS Regional Archeologist, 28 Nov. 1967, old files, LARO.KF.2004; Schumacher to Nelson,
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 9 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi9n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:07 PM]

7 Dec. 1967, old files, LARO.KF.2004; Nelson to Schumacher, 15 Jan. 1968, old files,

LARO.KF.2004; Schumacher to Nelson, 22 Jan. 1968, old files, LARO.KF.2004.

21 Galm, Design for Management, 3.31-3.33, 3.53-3.55; David H. Chance, People of the

Falls, (Colville: Don's Printery for Kettle Falls Historical Center, Inc., 1986), 10-31.

22 Paul J. F. Schumacher, NPS Regional Archeologist, to J. W. Watts, UI Business Manager

and Bursar, 26 March 1971, old files, LARO.KF.2004; David. H. Chance and Jennifer V.

Chance, "Kettle Falls: 1976. Salvage Archaeology in Lake Roosevelt," UI Anthropological

Research Manuscript Series, No. 39 (Moscow: UI, Laboratory of Anthropology, 1977), 3.

23 Edward McM. Larrabee and Susan Kardas, "Archaeological Survey of Grand Coulee Dam

National Recreation Area. Part 1: Lincoln County above Normal Pool," Report of

Investigations No. 38 (Pullman: WSU, Laboratory of Anthropology, 1966), 5; Edward McM.

Larrabee to Roderick Sprague, 6 Sept. 1966, old files, LARO.KF.2004.

24 Carl [Anderson], Kettle Falls District Ranger, to LARO Superintendent, 10 Feb. 1968, old

files, LARO.KF.2004.

25 Howard Chapman, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 2 May 1967, file

H22 Archaeological and Historical Information General, LARO.HQ.ADM; Arthur C.

Hathaway, LARO Park Naturalist, to Roderick Sprague, 19 Feb. 1968, old files,

LARO.KF.2004; Hathaway to LARO Superintendent, 14 May 1970, old files,

LARO.KF.2004; David H. Chance to Wayne R. Howe, LARO Superintendent, 29 June 1970,

old files, LARO.KF.2004; Chance to William N. Burgen, LARO Superintendent, 27 May

1976, old files, LARO.KF.2004.

26 Lester A. Ross, "Archaeological Investigation in the Coulee Dam National Recreation

Area, spring 1969 (Pullman: WSU, Laboratory of Anthropology, 1969), 5; David Richie,

LARO Superintendent, to Lester Ross, 21 May 1969, old files, LARO.KF.2004; Ross to

Richie, 26 May 1969, old files, LARO.KF.2004; Richie to Frank Leonhardy, 3 June 1969, old

files, LARO.KF.2004.

27 Charles F. Bohannon, NPS Regional Archeologist, to NPS Associate Regional Director, 4

Dec. 1978, file CODA 90 (Early File), LARO.KF.2004; NPS Regional Director to LARO

Superintendent, 30 April 1979, file CODA 90 (Early File), LARO.KF.2004.

28 William L. Bowen, NPS Regional Director, to NPS Superintendents, 22 Aug. 1969, file

H32 National Register of Historic Places, LARO.HQ.ADM; Raymond L. Freeman, NPS

Acting Director, to NPS Directorate and all Field Directors, 6 Aug. 1971, file H32 National

Register of Historic Places, LARO.HQ.ADM.

29 Art Hathaway, LARO Park Naturalist, to Roderick Sprague, UI, 21 Sept. 1972, file H32

National Register of Historic Places, LARO.HQ.ADM; Kettle Falls District National Register

Nomination, prepared by Thomas E. Herbeck, Washington Archaeological Research Center, 8

Oct. 1973, LARO.KF.2004; Wayne R. Howe, NPS Acting Regional Director, to NPS

Professional Services Associate Director, 20 Dec. 1974, file H32 National Register of

Historic Places, LARO.HQ.ADM; Hathaway and Laurin C. Huffman, II, NPS Regional

Historical Architect, National Register Nomination for Fort Spokane, 1 June 1972, file

Nomination to Nat. Register, Fort Spokane, office of NPS Senior Historian, CCSO;

"Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1973: 8, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual

Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; LARO, "Draft General Management Plan/Environmental Impact

Statement," Sept. 1998: 94.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 9 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi9n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:07 PM]

30 John W. Weeks, Secretary of War, to Secretary of Interior, 8 Dec. 1921, file W30

Jurisdiction, LARO.HQ.ADM; Gary D. Williams and Alan S. Newell, Historic Resource

Study: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, Washington (Historical Research Associates,

1980), 128-29; Cathy A. Gilbert and Renata Niedzwiecka, "The Historic Landscape of Fort

Spokane: A Design Proposal" (Seattle: NPS, summer 1985), 22; "Urges Old Fort for State

Park," Spokesman-Review, 4 Nov. 1923; "Want Old Fort to be Townsite," Spokane

Chronicle, 29 April 1939.

31 Philip A. Kearney, NPS Landscape Architect, to NPS Regional Director, 6 Feb. 1942, file

1, box 2, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

32 "Urges Old Fort for State Park," Spokesman-Review, 4 Nov. 1923; Pitzer, Grand Coulee,

219; "Monument to be Urged for Old Fort Spokane," Spokane Chronicle, 30 July 1957;

Philip A. Kearney, NPS Landscape Architect, to Claude E. Greider, NPS Recreation Planner,

17 April 1941, file 5, box 1, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Philip A. Kearney to NPS

Regional Director, 6 Feb. 1942, file 1, box 2, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; CODA, "Mission

66 Prospectus: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 24 April 1956 (revised 1956-62): 48,

file A5419 Mission 66, LARO.HQ.ADM; D. Myer, BIA Commissioner, to Walt Horan, U.S.

House of Representatives, 15 March 1951, file Coulee Rec. Area 1948-52, box 216, Horan

Coll., WSU.

33 Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 21 Nov. 1950, file 1,

box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; USBR, Recreational Development of Roosevelt Lake:

Columbia Basin Joint Investigations, Problem 26 (Wash., D.C.: GPO, 1945), 31-32; Herbert

Maier, NPS Associate Regional Director, to Richard L. B. Castle, Spokane, 21 Oct. 1949, file

H2415 Archaeological Research Contract, LARO.HQ.ADM; Greider to NPS Regional

Director, telegram, 12 Aug. 1949, file 1, box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

34 Sanford Hill, NPS Assistant Regional Director, to NPS Director, 13 Feb. 1952, file D18

Planning Program, closed 6/3/53, LARO.HQ.ADM; Ronald F. Lee, NPS Acting Director, to

NPS Regional Director, 17 Aug. 1951, file 1, box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Alfred C.

Kuehl, NPS Regional Landscape Architect, to NPS Assistant Regional Director, 25 April

1952, file 1, box 1, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Paul F. McCrary, Park Naturalist, "Fort

Spokane, Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, Historic Structures Report, Part I," 1962,

Historic Structures Report — Fort Spokane notebook, LARO.HQ.CIO; correspondence from

Herbert Maier, NPS Assistant Regional Director, attached to John A. Hussey, "Fort Spokane,

Washington: A History of the United States Army Post of the Fort Spokane Military

Reservation," April 1958, file CODA History/Research, Cultural Resources, CCSO; Homer

W. Robinson, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 17 May 1960, file H14 Fort

Spokane Research, Rehab., LARO.HQ.ADM; Lawrence Merriam, NPS Regional Director, to

LARO Superintendent, 2 June 1960, file H14 Fort Spokane Research, Rehab.,

LARO.HQ.ADM.

35 Public Land Order 2087, 9 May 1960, file 2, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250,

LARO.HQ.PAO; John A. Hussey, NPS Regional Historian, to NPS Regional Director, 4 May

1960, file H14 Fort Spokane Research, Rehab., LARO.HQ.ADM; NPS, "A Master Plan for

Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, Washington: Preliminary Working Draft," Feb. 1968:

33, file D18 Master Plan, LARO.HQ.ADM; LARO Superintendent to NPS Director, 29 May

1961, file A2621 Annual Reports Field Areas 1-1-61 to 12-31-61, box 4, RG 079-95-05,

NARA-PSR; Paul F. McCrary, "Fort Spokane, Coulee Dam National Recreation Area,

Historic Structures Report, Part I," 1962: 7, 9, Historic Structures Report — Fort Spokane

notebook, LARO.HQ.CIO.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 9 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi9n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:07 PM]

36 Warren F. Hamilton, NPS Assistant Regional Director, Operations, to LARO

Superintendent, 23 Feb. 1965, file H14 Fort Spokane History, LARO.HQ.ADM; Don Everts,

interview with Nancy F. Renk, 7 Dec. 1999, Tape 1-A, tape and index on file, LARO.HQ;

U.S. Department of the Interior, "Resources Management Plan and Environmental

Assessment: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 1982: 30, file D18 General

Management Plan, box 1 of 3, LARO.HQ.PAO; William V. Dunmire, LARO Superintendent,

to NPS Regional Director, 26 Feb. 1980, file H32 Nat'l Register of Historic Places,

LARO.HQ.ADM. The owner of the former post sutler's house was Lee Randall, LARO's

maintenance foreman at Fort Spokane (Arthur C. Hathaway, former LARO employee,

personal communication to Kathryn L. McKay, 1 March 2001).

37 Homer Robinson, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Chief, 4 Dec. 1963, file H30 Corres. &

Research for Historical Report, 1962-65, LARO.HQ.CIO; Paul F. McCrary, "Guardhouse H22, Fort Spokane, Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, Historic Structure Report, Part II,"

[1963], 3-6, file H30 Corres. & Research for Historical Report 1962-65, LARO.HQ.CIO;

Edward A. Hummel, NPS Regional Director, to NPS Chief, 16 April 1964, file H30

Historical Structures and Sites, LARO.HQ.ADM; LARO Superintendent to NPS Director, 10

Feb. 1966, file A2615 M. Narrative Reports CODA CY1966, box 1, RG 079-95-06, NARAPSR; Paul F. McCrary and A. Lewis Koue, "Part II Historic Structures Report, Restoration of

Guardhouse — Building H-22, Fort Spokane, Coulee Dam National Recreation Area,

Lincoln County, Washington," 1965: 10, Historic Structures Report — Fort Spokane

notebook, LARO.HQ.CIO; David Richie, LARO Superintendent, to Chief, NPS Eastern

Museum Laboratory, 3 Dec. 1968, file Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, 1952 to 1969,

HFC.

38 Thomas Teaford, phone interview with Kathryn L. McKay, 3 August 2000, notes on file,

LARO.HQ.

39 J. Jerry Rumburg, LARO Chief Park Interpreter, to Files, 5 April 1984, file H3019 Ft.

Spokane Comprehensive Design Plan, LARO.HQ.CIO; Thomas J. Bredow, LARO Fort

Spokane District Ranger, 1 Feb. 1980, file H3019 Ft. Spokane Comprehensive Design Plan,

LARO.HQ.CIO; James A. Richardson, NPS Regional Chief, Interpretation and Visitor

Services, to NPS Deputy Regional Director, 26 June 1985, file K1817 Annual Statement for

Interp, LARO.HQ.CIO; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," FY1996: 3, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; Dan Brown, phone interview with

Kathryn L. McKay, 3 March 2000, notes on file, LARO.HQ; Gerald Tays, LARO

Superintendent, to NPS Regional Historical Architect, 17 Oct. 1994, file H30 Fort Spokane

Historic Structures, LARO.HQ.ADM.

40 Everts interview, Tape 1-A.

41 CODA, "Statement for Interpretation type document," Oct. 1957: 20, LARO.HQ.CIO; Paul

F. McCrary, "Fort Spokane, Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, Historic Structures

Report, Part I," 1962: 24, Historic Structures Report — Fort Spokane notebook,

LARO.HQ.CIO; "Park Service Workers Begin Renewing of Old Fort Spokane Stable,"

Davenport Times, 12 Nov 1964: 5; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1973: 8,

file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual

Report, CODA," CY1974: 7, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM;

Thomas J. Bredow, LARO Fort Spokane District Ranger, to unknown recipient, 1 Feb. 1980,

file H3019 Ft. Spokane Comprehensive Design Plan, LARO.HQ.CIO; "Superintendent's

Annual Report, CODA," CY1976: 16, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Superintendent's Annual Report for CY1985: 8, file H2621 Annual
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 9 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi9n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:07 PM]

Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM.

42 CODA, "Part II Historic Structures Report for the Powder Magazine, Fort Spokane,

Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, Washington," [ca. 1963], 2, 8-9, Historic Structures

Report — Fort Spokane notebook, LARO.HQ.CIO; Project Construction Proposal, 1967, PC

Index No. B-157, file D46 [?] (file is not numbered) Project Construction Proposals,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Thomas J. Bredow, LARO Fort Spokane District Ranger, to unknown

recipient, 2 Feb. 1980, file H3019 Ft. Spokane Comprehensive Design Plan, LARO.HQ.CIO;

NPS, Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area Museum Management Plan (1997), 24,

LARO.HQ.RMO.

43 LARO Superintendent to NPS Director, 27 May 1963, file A2621 Annual Reports Field

Areas 1-1-63 to 12-31-63, box 4, RG 079-95-05, NARA-PSR; "Master Plan for Preservation

and Use of Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," Sept. 1963: vol. III, sec. I, p. 11, file

D18 Master Plan Nov. —Dec. 1963, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO;

Gordon D. Boyd, LARO Chief, Interpretation & Resource Management, to Files, 17 April

1985, file Coulee Dam NRA, office of NPS Senior Archeologist, CCSO.

44"Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1989: 12, file A2621 Superintendent's

Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA,"

CY1976: 26, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM.

45 Gilbert and Niedzwiecka, "Design Proposal," 31; Gary Kuiper, LARO Superintendent, to

NPS Regional Chief, Cultural Resources Division, 18 March 1985, file Coulee Dam NRA,

office of NPS Senior Archeologist, CCSO.

46 "Master Plan for Preservation and Use of Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," March

1963: vol. III, sec. E, p. 5, file D18 Master Plan 1962, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250,

LARO.HQ.PAO; "Resources Management Plan," 1982: 26-27.

47 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1972: 6, file A2621 Superintendent's

Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; Karen Taylor-Goodrich, LARO Natural Resources

Specialist, email to Kathy Jope, CCSO, 26 Oct. 1994, file WASO/SSO

Reports/Correspondence, LARO.HQ.RMO; CODA, "FY98 Historic Structure Stabilization

Project Request: Old Guard House," file FY98 Funding..., drawer 2, LARO.HQ.RMO; Karen

Taylor-Goodrich, LARO Natural Resources Specialist, to LARO Chief Ranger, 6 Aug. 1990,

file Marmot Control Program, drawer 2, LARO.HQ.RMO; CODA, "Draft Press Release: Fort

Spokane Marmot Control Program," Jan. 1991, file Marmot Control Program, drawer 2,

LARO.HQ.RMO.

48 Paul F. McCrary, "Fort Spokane, Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, Historic

Structures Report, Part I, 1962: 11, Historic Structures Report — Fort Spokane notebook,

LARO.HQ.CIO; Homer Robinson, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 24 Jan.

1963, file H14 Fort Spokane Research, Rehab., LARO.HQ.ADM; Everts interview, Tape 2-

A; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," 27 May 1963: 3, file A262 Annual Reports

Field Areas 1-1-63 to 12-31-63, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; John D. Combes, "A

Preliminary Investigation at Old Military Fort Spokane, Washington" (Pullman: Report of

Investigations No. 30, Laboratory of Anthropology, WSU, 1965), 1, 7, 9-12, 14; "Resource

Study Proposal: An Archeological Investigation of the Historic Foundations, Fort Spokane,"

13 April 1964, old files, LARO.KF.2004.

49 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1972: 9, file A2621 Superintendent's

Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1974: 9, file
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 9 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi9n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:07 PM]

A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Interpretive Prospectus: Coulee

Dam National Recreation Area," 1975: 12; Tom J. Bredow, LARO Fort Spokane District

Ranger, to LARO Superintendent, 5 Feb. 1975, file H3019 Ft. Spokane Comprehensive

Design Plan, LARO.HQ.CIO; CODA, "Resources Management Plan," 1982: 6, 28;

"Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1985: 4, file H2621 Annual Reports,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Gordon D. Boyd, LARO Chief of Interpretation & Resource Management,

to LARO files, 17 April 1985, file Coulee Dam NRA, office of NPS Senior Archeologist,

CCSO; David H. Chance and Jennifer V. Chance, "The Excavation of the ‘Root Cellar' at

Fort Spokane," Letter Report 85-16, University of Idaho, June 1985, file H2415

Archaeological Research Contract, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report,

CODA," Jan. 1994-Sept. 1995: 15, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-,

LARO.HQ.ADM.

50 Cathy A. Gilbert et al., "Comprehensive Design Plan for Fort Spokane" (Seattle: Cultural

Resources Division, NPS, 1991), 14, 16, 22, appendix (Jim Thomson, NPS Regional

Archeologist, to NPS Staff Landscape Architect, 30 Aug. 1991); NPS, "A Master Plan for

Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, Washington: Preliminary Working Draft," Feb. 1968:

61, file D18 Master Plan, LARO.HQ.ADM.

51 Robert A. Burns, LARO District Ranger, to LARO Chief Park Naturalist, 6 Aug. 1967, file

H3019 Ft. Spokane Comprehensive Design Plan, LARO.HQ.CIO; Arthur C. Hathaway,

former LARO employee, personal communication to Nancy F. Renk, 1 March 2001; Paul A.

Larson, LARO Chief of Interpretation & Resource Management, to NPS Regional Director,

16 April 1973, old files, LARO.KF.2004; J. Jerry Rumburg, LARO Chief of Interpretation, to

LARO files and Fort Spokane District, 10 Sept. 1979, file H32 Nat'l. Register of Historic

Places, LARO.HQ.ADM; Paula L. Hartzell-Scott, LARO Archeologist, "Damage Assessment

Report, Fort Spokane Sewer and Dump (Site 45LI10), Fort Spokane Historic Zone, Fort

Spokane, Lincoln County, Washington," 1994, file Fort Spokane Historic Dump Site Damage

— Jan. 1994, drawer 2, LARO.HQ.RMO; Douglas C. Wilson, "Refuse Concentrations and

Disposal at Military Fort Spokane (45LI2H/45LI10H): A Survey and Preliminary

Evaluation," Archaeology Consulting Report No. 9, Dec. 1998, file Wilson, drawer 1,

LARO.KF.2004; DePuydt phone interview.

52 Galm, Design for Management, 6.18-6.19; "Old K.F. Mission May Be Restored," Colville

Examiner, 19 Nov. 1938; "St. Paul's Mission, 100 Years Old," Spokesman-Review, 15 Jan.

1939; "Kiwanis Mission Restoration Drive Adds $250 Toward Necessary $2,500," Colville

Examiner, 9 Dec. 1939; "Historic Mission Ready for Shakes," Colville Examiner, 24 Aug.

1940; "Old Mission Site at Kettle Falls To Become Park," Spokane Daily Chronicle, 21 July

1950; Charles H. Odegaard, NPS Regional Director, to Washington State Parks and

Recreation Commission, 15 Oct. 1973, St. Paul's Mission section, box 3 History,

LARO.HQ.LIB; CODA, "Resources Management Plan and Environmental Assessment,"

1982: 24.

53 Melody Webb, "Cultural Landscapes in the National Park Service," Public Historian 9

(Spring 1987): 81-84; Gilbert and Niedzwiecka, "The Historic Landscape of Fort Spokane,"

1985; Cathy Gilbert, personal communication to Nancy F. Renk, 1 March 2001.

54 NPS, "Cultural Landscape Inventory to be Conducted at Coulee Dam National Recreation

Area," press release, 10 May 1994, file Cultural Landscapes Projects/Info., drawer 1,

LARO.HQ.RMO; Terri Taylor, NPS Regional Landscape Architect, to Jim Thomson, NPS

Regional Archeologist, 1 June 1994, file Cultural Landscapes Projects/Info., drawer 1,

LARO.HQ.RMO; Stephanie Toothman, NPS Regional Chief of Cultural Resources, personal

communication to Nancy F. Renk, 29 Sept. 2000; Cathy Gilbert, personal communication to
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 9 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi9n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:07 PM]

Nancy F. Renk, 1 March 2001.

55 NPS, "Museum Prospectus: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 1958: 22, 34-36.

56 Howard Chapman, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 16 Aug. 1967, file

D6231 Exhibits for Other Agencies, LARO.HQ.ADM; Chapman to NPS Chief, Western

Museum Laboratory, 22 March 1967, file H14 Fort Spokane History, LARO.HQ.ADM;

Arthur Hathaway, LARO Park Naturalist, to NPS Chief, Archeological Research, 2 Dec.

1969, file H14 Fort Colville, LARO.HQ.ADM.

57 Peter K. Marvardsen, LARO Acting Superintendent, to NPS Director, 27 Oct. 1967, file

H14 Area and Service History, LARO.HQ.ADM; Thomas J. Bredow, LARO Fort Spokane

District Ranger, 1 Feb. 1980, file H3019 Ft. Spokane Comprehensive Design Plan,

LARO.HQ.CIO; CODA, "Interpretive Prospectus: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area,"

1975: 25; Roberta Seibel, "Scope of Collections Statement," 1976: 1-2, file D6215 Museum

Exhibit Repair & Rehab., LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA,"

CY1977: 7, file H2621 Annual Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM; Charles V. Janda, LARO Acting

Superintendent, to NPS Regional Curator, 18 Feb. 1981, file D6215 Museum Exhibit Repair

& Rehab., LARO.HQ.ADM; LARO, "Development/Study Package Proposal: Prepare

Collection Preservation Guide," 15 April 1983, file D6215 Museum Exhibit Repair & Rehab.,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Ralph H. Lewis, Museum Curatorship in the National Park Service, 1904-

1982 (Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, 1993), 202. The NPS did not have a Chief

Curator until 1980 (National Parks and Conservation Association, To Preserve Unimpaired:

The Challenge of Protecting Park Resources [Washington, D.C.: National Parks and

Conservation Association, 1988]: 102).

58 William J. Schieber, LARO Acting Superintendent, to NPS Regional Curator, 17 Aug.

1984, file H20 Collection Management, LARO.HQ.CIO; "Action Plan for Coulee Dam

National Recreation Area Collection Management Program," 15 April 1985, file D6215

Museum Exhibit Repair & Rehab., LARO.HQ.ADM; "Inspection Checklist of Museum

Storage and Exhibit Spaces: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 23 Aug. 1986, file

D6215 Museum Exhibit Repair & Rehab., LARO.HQ.ADM; Kelly K. Cash, LARO Acting

Superintendent, to NPS Regional Curator, 10 Nov. 1986, file H20 Collection Management

Plan, LARO.HQ.CIO; Steve Castro-Shrader, LARO Fort Spokane District Ranger, to LARO

Chief of Interpretation, 8 May 1985, file K2623 Situation, LARO.HQ.ADM; Ervin D. Hand,

LARO Chief of Interpretation, to NPS Director, 29 Jan. 1986, file D6215 Museum Exhibit

Repair & Rehab., LARO.HQ.ADM; Kent Bush, NPS Regional Curator, to Deanna D.

Tellvik, Kettle Falls Historical Society, 30 March 1992, file D6215 Museum Exhibits 1991,

LARO.HQ.ADM.

59 Laura Beaty, "How Well Is the National Park Service Managing Its Cultural Resources:

The NPCA Point of View," Public Historian 9 (spring 1987): 127; Gordon D. Boyd, LARO

Acting Superintendent, to NPS Regional Curator, 4 Nov. 1987, file D6215 Museum Exhibit

Repair & Rehab., LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1988: 15,

file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; Kent Bush, NPS Regional

Curator, to NPS Associate Regional Director, Recreation Resources and Professional

Services, 30 Nov. 1988, file H20 Collection Management, LARO.HQ.CIO.

60 David H. Chance, Archaeologist, to L. W. Lloyd, USBR Regional Director, 14 Sept. 1984,

file A44 Multi-Party Agrmt, LARO.HQ.ADM; Gary Kuiper, LARO Superintendent, to NPS

Acting Regional Director, 4 April 1986, file A44 Triparty Agreement, LARO.HQ.ADM.;

Adeline Fredin, CCT, to Peter Nan, USBR Regional Director, 1 August 1984, old files,

LARO.KF.2004; George Davis, Colville Agency Superintendent, to Rudy Etheridge, USBR
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 9 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi9n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:07 PM]

Project Manager, 29 Oct. 1984, old files, LARO.KF.2004; USBR Project Manager to USBR

Regional Director, 9 Nov. 1984, file A44 Multi-Party Agreement, LARO.HQ.ADM; Davis to

Kuiper, 25 March 1986, file Colville Archaeological Storage, office of NPS Regional

Curator, CCSO.

61 John W. Keys, III, USBR Assistant Regional Director, to Colville Agency Superintendent,

26 March 1986, file Colville Archaeological Storage, office of NPS Regional Curator, CCSO;

NPS Regional Archeologist to DOI Regional Solicitor, [early 1990], file Multiparty

Agreement April 1990, LARO.HQ.ADM; Keys to NPS Regional Director, 4 March 1992, file

H2415 Bureau of Reclamation Projects, LARO.HQ.ADM; Kent Bush, NPS Regional

Curator, to NPS Regional Director, n.d., file Coulee Dam NRA, office of NPS Senior

Archeologist, CCSO; Richard L. Winters, NPS Regional Director, to NPS Associate Regional

Director, Recreation Resources and Professional Services, 1 April 1992, file H20 Collection

Management, LARO.HQ.CIO; DePuydt phone interview; Bush, personal communication to

Nancy F. Renk, 21 March 2000; Bush, email to Nancy F. Renk, 23 Oct. 2000; DePuydt, email

to Nancy F. Renk, 24 Oct. 2000.

62 "Collections Management Report: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," FY1993: 1-2,

file H20 Collections Management, LARO.HQ.CIO; "Superintendent's Annual Report,

CODA," Jan. 1994-Sept. 1995: 12, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Don Cumberland, "Collection Storage Plan: Coulee Dam National

Recreation Area," HFC, 1994: 17-18, file H20 Collection Management, LARO.HQ.CIO; Dan

Brown, LARO Chief of Interpretation, to Don Cumberland, HFC, 23 Nov. 1993, file H20

Collection Management, LARO.HQ.CIO; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA,"

CY1993: 11-12, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM.

63 NPS, Museum Management Plan, 1-4, 6, 12-14, 20-21; Lynne Brougher, personal

communication to Kathryn L. McKay, 1 March 2000.

64 Peter K. Marvardsen, LARO Acting Superintendent, to NPS Director, 27 Oct. 1967, file

H14 Area and Service History, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Interpretive Prospectus: Coulee Dam

National Recreation Area," 1975: 25; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1989:

12, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; NPS, Museum

Management Plan, 1997: 7-9.

65 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1989: 12, file A2621 Superintendent's

Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA,"

CY1991: 8, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM;

"Collections Management Report: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," FY1993: 2, file

H20 Collections Management, LARO.HQ.CIO.

66 David M. Schnute, NPS Regional Audiovisual Specialist, to NPS Regional Director, 6

Aug. 1977, file K30 Regional AV specialist Field Reports, LARO.HQ.CIO; National Parks

and Conservation Association, To Preserve Unimpaired, 236; Gary Kuiper, LARO

Superintendent, to NPS Regional Curator, 6 Oct. 1989, file D6215 Museum Exhibit Repair &

Rehab., LARO.HQ.ADM; Ken D. Biery, Jr., "National Park Service Security & Fire

Protection Survey: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, Fort Spokane District, Park

Headquarters," 1991, 3-4, 6, 8-12, 21-23; Gary Kuiper, LARO Superintendent, to NPS

Regional Curator, 16 Dec. 1992, file H20 Collection Management, LARO.HQ.CIO; Lynne

Brougher, personal communication to Kathryn L. McKay, 1 March 2000.

67 Lynne Brougher, personal communication to Kathryn L. McKay, 1 March 2000.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 9 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi9n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:07 PM]

68 NPS, "Cultural Resources Management Guideline, NPS-28," Release No. 3, Aug. 1985: 1,

notebook NPS-28 Cultural Resources Management, LARO.HQ.CIO.

69 Daniel J. Tobin, Jr., NPS Regional Director, to all NPS Superintendents, 7 April 1983, file

H4217 106/XXX Compliance 1996-, LARO.HQ.ADM; LARO, "OE Self Evaluation

Worksheet," n.d., file L7619 EISs and Studies Concerning BLM and Others,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Stephanie Toothman, NPS Regional Chief of Cultural Resources, personal

communication to Nancy F. Renk, 29 Sept. 2000.

70 Ray DePuydt, LARO Archeologist, email to Karen Taylor-Goodrich, LARO Natural

Resources Specialist, 11 July 1996, file CODA Compliance Issues, drawer 1,

LARO.HQ.RMO; Stephanie Toothman, NPS Regional Chief of Cultural Resources, personal

communication to Nancy F. Renk, 29 Sept. 2000.

71 Edward McM. Larrabee, Archaeologist, to Roderick Sprague, Archaeologist, 6 Sept. 1966,

old files, LARO.KF.2004; John L. Bishop, DOI Regional Solicitor, Portland, to DOI

Regional Solicitor, Sacramento, 30 Nov. 1966, old files, LARO.KF.2004; Robert D. Dellwo,

STI attorney, to David Richie, LARO Superintendent, 8 March 1968, old files,

LARO.KF.2004; Richie to Dellwo, 19 March 1968, old files, LARO.KF.2004.

72 Glen Galbraith, STI Executive Secretary, to Dave Ritchie [sic], LARO Superintendent, 13

Aug. 1968, old files, LARO.KF.2004.

73 David Richie, LARO Superintendent, to Glenn F. Galbraith, STI Executive Secretary, 16

Aug. 1968, old files, LARO.KF.2004; Lester A. Ross, Archaeologist, to Galbraith, 21 Jan.

1969, old files, LARO.KF.2004.

74 Davis, Native America, 50; David C. Wynecoop, Spokane Agency Acting Superintendent,

to John A. Rutter, NPS Regional Director, 12 Sept. 1972, old files, LARO.KF.2004; Robert

B. Moore, NPS Acting Director, to David C. Wynecoop, 18 Sept. 1972, old files,

LARO.KF.2004.

75 Roderick Sprague, "American Indians and American Archaeology," American Antiquity 39

(Jan. 1974): 1-2 (reprint).

76 Michael F. Turek, "American Indian Tribes and the U.S. National Park Service," [ca. early

1990s], 2, 5, 10, 15-17, LARO.HQ.LIB.

77 Charles G. Patterson, "Conservation Study, Pictographs, Grand Coulee Dam, Washington,"

n.d., file NPS-NWR Grand Coulee Dam Pictographs, office of NPS Senior Archeologist,

CCSO; Terry D. Knapton, CCT Acting Executive Director, to Gary Kuiper, LARO

Superintendent, 11 June 1986, file NPS-NWR Grand Coulee Dam Pictographs, office of NPS

Senior Archeologist, CCSO; Kuiper to Knapton, 2 July 1986, file NPS-NWR Grand Coulee

Dam Pictographs, office of NPS Senior Archeologist, CCSO; Kuiper to Mike Murray, Grant

County Public Works, 3 Dec. 1984, file Coulee Dam NRA, office of NPS Senior

Archeologist, CCSO; Charles H. Odegaard, NPS Regional Director, to LARO

Superintendent, 17 Jan. 1990, file 06215 Museum Exhibit Repair and Rehab.,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Carl Patterson, "Pictographs, Grand Coulee Dam, Washington," 13 Sept.

1989, file 06215 Museum Exhibit Repair and Rehab., LARO.HQ.ADM.

78 Jacob E. Thomas, SHPO, to Paul D. Rachetto, USBR Acting Regional Director, 29 Sept.

1986, file Coulee Dam NRA, office of NPS Senior Archeologist, CCSO; Donald E. Tracy,
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 9 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi9n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:07 PM]

USBR Project Manager, to Andy Joseph, Chairman, CCT Archaeological Resources

Protection Committee, 7 Oct. 1986, file Coulee Dam NRA, office of NPS Senior

Archeologist, CCSO.

79 Don Tracy, USBR Project Manager, to Andy Joseph, Chairman, CCT Archaeological

Resources Protection Committee, 7 Oct. 1986, file Coulee Dam NRA, office of NPS Senior

Archeologist, CCSO.

80 Andy Joseph, Chairman, CCT Archaeological Resources Protection Committee, to Don

Tracy, USBR Project Manager, 3 Sept. 1986, file Colville Archaeological Storage, office of

NPS Regional Curator, CCSO; USBR Acting Regional Director, to Melvin Tonasket,

Colville Business Council Chairman, 25 March 1988, file Coulee Dam NRA, office of NPS

Senior Archeologist, CCSO; USBR Acting Regional Director, to Joe Flett, STI, 28 March

1988, file Coulee Dam NRA, office of NPS Senior Archeologist, CCSO; Draft Statement of

Work, Emergency Recovery of Human Burial Sites at Lake Roosevelt on Lands Bordering

the Colville Indian Reservation or on Former Reservation Lands, 13 Feb. 1996, file

Bonneville Agreement, office of NPS Senior Archeologist, CCSO.

81 Lake Roosevelt Cooperative Management Agreement, 5 April 1990, IV.C, IV.J, file

Multiparty Agrmt April 1990, LARO.HQ.ADM.

82 Management of Cultural Resource [sic] Under the Lake Roosevelt Cooperative

Management Agreement, meeting notes, 16 Aug. 1990, file unlabeled orange folder, drawer

3, LARO.KF.2004; draft letter from USBR to Lake Roosevelt Coordinating Committee, n.d.,

file unlabeled orange folder, drawer 3, LARO.KF.2004; Gary Kuiper, LARO Superintendent,

to Lake Roosevelt Coordinating Committee, 31 Oct. 1990, file unlabeled orange folder,

drawer 3, LARO.KF.2004; Lake Roosevelt Coordinating Committee to Lynne MacDonald,

USBR Regional Archeologist, 25 June 1991, file unlabeled orange folder, drawer 3,

LARO.KF.2004.

83 Lynne MacDonald, USBR Regional Archeologist, phone interview with Nancy F. Renk, 20

Oct. 2000, notes on file, LARO.HQ.

84 Programmatic Agreement for Compliance with the National Historic Preservation Act

Among Bonneville Power Administration; Bureau of Reclamation, Pacific Northwest Region;

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, North Pacific Division; National Park Service, Pacific

Northwest Region; U.S. Forest Service, Region 1; Confederated Tribes of the Colville

Reservation; Spokane Tribe of Indians; Idaho, Montana, and Washington State Historic

Preservation Officers, Advisory Council on Historic Preservation Regarding Federal

Columbia River Power System Hydroelectric Operations, May 1991: 3, file Cooperative

Interagency Agreements, drawer 1, LARO.HQ.RMO; MacDonald phone interview.

85 Stephanie Toothman, Regional Chief of Cultural Resources, personal communication to

Nancy F. Renk, 29 Sept. 2000.

86 Jim Thomson, NPS Regional Archeologist, to Joyce Bolin, Advisory Council on Historic

Preservation, 17 Dec. 1991, file unlabeled orange folder, drawer 3, LARO.KF.2004;

Thomson to LARO Superintendent, 18 Dec. 1991, file unlabeled orange folder, drawer 3,

LARO.KF.2004; Stephanie Toothman, Regional Chief of Cultural Resources, personal

communication to Nancy F. Renk, 29 Sept. 2000; MacDonald phone interview.

87 Stephanie Toothman, NPS Regional Chief of Cultural Resources, to NPS Regional

Director, [late Oct. 1992], file Bonneville Agreement, office of NPS Senior Archeologist,
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 9 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi9n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:07 PM]

CCSO; Gerald W. Tays, LARO Superintendent, to Alan C. Stay, CCT Tribal Attorney, 10

Nov. 1994, file Cult. Res. Survey (BPA), drawer 5, LARO.HQ.RMO.

88 Stephanie Toothman, Regional Chief of Cultural Resources, personal communication to

Nancy F. Renk, 29 Sept. 2000.

89 Ibid.

90 A. Wayne Prokopetz, NPS Project Archeologist, to LARO Superintendent, 7 Nov. 1994,

file LR CLTR. Res. Comm., LARO.HQ.SUP; Alan C. Stay, CCT Tribal Attorney, to Jerry

[sic] Tays, LARO Superintendent, 26 Oct. 1994, file Cult. Res. Survey (BPA), drawer 5,

LARO.HQ.RMO.

91 Gerald W. Tays, LARO Superintendent, to Alan C. Stay, CCT Tribal Attorney, 10 Nov.

1994, file Cult. Res. Survey (BPA), drawer 5, LARO.HQ.RMO; Stephanie Toothman, NPS

Regional Chief of Cultural Resources, personal communication to Nancy F. Renk, 29 Sept.

2000; LARO Chief of Resources Management to LARO Superintendent, "Briefing Statement

— BPA-Funded Cultural Resources Projects," 23 Aug. 1996: 1, file BPA Agreement,

LARO.HQ.SUP.

92 Stephanie Toothman, NPS Regional Chief of Cultural Resources, personal communication

to Nancy F. Renk, 29 Sept. 2000.

93 Karen Taylor-Goodrich, LARO Chief of Resources Management, to LARO

Superintendent, 2 May 1995, file Spokane Tribe Arch. Proposal, LARO.HQ.SUP; Stephanie

Toothman, NPS Regional Chief of Cultural Resources, personal communication to Nancy F.

Renk, 29 Sept. 2000; Steven Clark, USBR Project Manager, and Gerald W. Tays, LARO

Superintendent, to Eddie Palmanteer, Colville Business Council Chairman, 8 May 1995, file

Cultural Resource Survey (BPA), drawer 5, LARO.HQ.RMO.

94 John W. Keys, III, USBR Regional Director, to Joseph Pakootas, Colville Business

Council Chairman, 29 April 1997, File H30 Archaeology, NPS/Tribes 1996-97,

LARO.HQ.ADM.

95 A recent discussion of the responsibilities of federal land managers is found in a letter

from Steven R. Clark, USBR Acting Regional Director, to Joseph A. Pakootas, Colville

Business Council Chairman, 19 Feb. 1999, file H30 Historic Sites 1999, LARO.HQ.ADM;

Stephanie Toothman, NPS Regional Chief of Cultural Resources, personal communication to

Nancy F. Renk, 29 Sept. 2000.

96 Warren Seyler, Spokane Business Council Chairman, to Randy Hardy, BPA, 24 July 1995,

file LR CLTR Res. Comm., LARO.HQ.SUP; Harvey S. Rice, CCT Archaeologist, to A.

Wayne Prokopetz, NPS Project Archeologist, 10 Aug. 1995, file Bonneville Agreement,

office of NPS Senior Archeologist, CCSO; Stephanie Toothman, NPS Regional Chief of

Cultural Resources, personal communication to Nancy F. Renk, 29 Sept. 2000; Seyler to

Hardy, 24 July 1995, file LR CLTR Res. Comm., LARO.HQ.SUP; Stanley T. Albright, NPS

Field Director, to Seyler, 21 Aug. 1995, file H30 Historical Structures and Sites 1990-,

LARO.HQ.ADM.

97 Gary Kuiper, LARO Superintendent, to USBR Project Manager, 12 Jan. 1990, file H30

Historical Structures and Sites 1990, LARO.HQ.ADM; Donald E. Tracy, USBR Project

Manager, to LARO Superintendent, 19 Jan. 1990, file H30 Historical Structures and Sites

1990, LARO.HQ.ADM; Darrell Cook, LARO Chief of Operations, to Jim Thomson, NPS
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 9 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi9n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:07 PM]

Regional Archeologist, 26 Oct. 1992, file H22 Archeologic and Historical Information

General, LARO.HQ.ADM.

98 Robert M. Thorne and John E. Ehrenhard, "Archaeological Site Stabilization

Recommendations for Resources Located In Olympic and North Cascades National Parks,

San Juan Island National Historical Park, and Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, State

of Washington," Oct. 1991: 1, 13, 15, 17-19, 24, LARO.KF.2004; USBR Regional Resource

and Technical Services Design Group, "Appraisal Report for Reservoir Rim Stabilization

Near Colville Confederated Tribal Burial Ground on Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake, Kettle

Falls, Washington," July 1996, LARO.HQ.RMO; LARO Chief of Resources Management to

LARO Superintendent, 23 Aug. 1996, file Cultural Resource Work File, LARO.HQ.SUP.

99 John Keys, USBR Regional Director, email to S. Clark et al., USBR, 26 July 1995, file LR

CLTR Res. Comm., LARO.HQ.SUP; MacDonald phone interview; Randall W. Hardy, BPA

Administrator, to Warren Seyler, Spokane Business Council Chairman, 10 Aug. 1995, file

H24 Archaeological and Historical Data 1994, LARO.HQ.ADM; Hardy to Matthew Dick, Jr.,

Colville Business Council Chairman, 18 Aug. 1995, file Bonneville Agreement, office of

NPS Senior Archeologist, CCSO.

100 Karen Taylor-Goodrich, LARO Chief of Resources Management, to LARO

Superintendent, 12 April 1995, file Spokane Tribe — Mill Creek ARPA, LARO.HQ.SUP;

Ray DePuydt, LARO Archeologist, to Gerald W. Tays, LARO Superintendent, 12 April

1995, file Spokane Tribe — Mill Creek ARPA, LARO.HQ.SUP.

101 Gerald W. Tays, LARO Superintendent, to Warren Seyler, STI Chairman, 12 April 1995,

file Spokane Tribe Arch. Proposal, LARO.HQ.SUP; Stephanie Toothman, NPS Regional

Chief of Cultural Resources, personal communication to Nancy F. Renk, 29 Sept. 2000.

102 James Sijohn, STI, to William Walters, NPS Acting Regional Director, 21 April 1995, file

Spokane Tribe Arch. Proposal, LARO.HQ.SUP.

103 William C. Walters, NPS Acting Regional Director, to Warren Seyler, Spokane Business

Council Chairman, 12 May 1995, file Spokane Tribe Arch. Proposal, LARO.HQ.SUP;

Stephanie Toothman, NPS Regional Chief of Cultural Resources, personal communication to

Nancy F. Renk, 29 Sept. 2000.

104 STI, "Proposal for a Cultural Resources Survey of the Drawdown Zone of Lake

Roosevelt, Spokane Reservation, Washington," May 1995, file Spokane Survey Proposal,

office of NPS Senior Archeologist, CCSO; James F. Sijohn, Spokane Tribal Business

Council, to Wayne Procopetz [sic], NPS Project Archeologist, 19 May 1995, file Spokane

Survey Proposal, office of NPS Senior Archeologist, CCSO; Robert Sherwood and James

Sijohn to Wayne Prokopetz, NPS Project Archeologist, 2 June 1995, file Spokane Survey

Proposal, office of NPS Senior Archeologist, CCSO; Briefing on the BPA-Spokane Tribe

negotiations, n.d., file BPA Agreement, LARO.HQ.SUP.

105 Gerald W. Tays, LARO Superintendent, to Warren Seyler, Spokane Business Council

Chairman, 7 Aug. 1995, file LR CLTR Res. Comm., LARO.HQ.SUP; Stephanie Toothman,

NPS Regional Chief of Cultural Resources, personal communication to Nancy F. Renk, 29

Sept. 2000.

106 Warren Seyler, Spokane Business Council Chairman, to Roger Kennedy, NPS Director, 9

Jan. 1996, file N16 Resource Management-Programmatic Agreement 1995-,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Briefing on the BPA-Spokane Tribe negotiations, n.d., file BPA
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 9 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi9n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:07 PM]

Agreement, LARO.HQ.SUP; William C. Walters, NPS Deputy Field Area Director, to

Seyler, 1 Feb. 1996, file Cult. Res. Work File, LARO.HQ.SUP.

107 Gerald W. Tays, LARO Superintendent, to Matthew Dick, Lake Roosevelt Coordinating

Committee Chairman, 15 Sept. 1995, file Bonneville Agreement, office of NPS Senior

Archeologist, CCSO.

108 NPS, Columbia Cascades Cluster, 1995 Workplan, Coulee Dam National Recreation

Area, June 26 and Nov. 30, 1995: 15, file A54 CODA Supt. Goals 1992-, LARO.HQ.ADM;

Delbert S. Olenslager, BPA Contracting Officer, to Beth A. Faudree, NPS Regional

Contracting Officer, 22 May 1996, file A44 PA, BPA, etc., LARO.HQ.ADM.

109 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," Jan. 1994-Sept. 1995: 15 [quote], file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; Matthew Dick, Jr., Colville

Business Council Chairman, to Randall W. Hardy, BPA Administrator, 12 Dec. 1995, file

Bonneville Agreement, office of NPS Senior Archeologist, CCSO; Delbert S. Olenslager,

BPA Contracting Officer, to Beth A. Faudree, NPS Regional Contracting Officer, 22 May

1996, file A44 PA, BPA, etc., LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA,"

CY1996: 10, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM.

110 Gerald W. Tays, LARO Superintendent, to Robert Beraud, BPA, 28 Dec. 1995, file

Bonneville Agreement, office of NPS Senior Archeologist, CCSO.

111 Gerald W. Tays, LARO Superintendent, Briefing Paper, "Cultural Resources Survey for

Lake Roosevelt," 16 Jan. 1996, file Cult. Res. Survey (BPA), drawer 5, LARO.HQ.RMO;

DePuydt phone interview; DePuydt, email to Renk, 24 Oct. 2000; Programmatic Agreement

for Compliance with the National Historic Preservation Act, 1991: 3-4, file Cooperative

Interagency Agreements, drawer 1, LARO.HQ.RMO

112 Briefing on BPA-Spokane Tribe negotiations, n.d., file BPA Agreement,

LARO.HQ.SUP; Stephanie Toothman, NPS Regional Chief of Cultural Resources, personal

communication to Nancy F. Renk, 29 Sept. 2000.

113 de Teel Patterson Tiller, NPS Acting Chief, Heritage Preservation Services Program, to

Warren Seyler, Spokane Business Council Chairman, 14 Feb. 1996, file Tribal Coordination,

drawer 3, LARO.HQ.RMO; James Sijohn, Spokane Tribal Business Council Cultural

Representative, to Tiller, 21 Feb. 1996, file Tribal Coordination, drawer 3, LARO.HQ.RMO;

Tiller to Matthew Dick, STI, 3 April 1996, file Tribal Coordination, drawer 3,

LARO.HQ.RMO; Harvey S. Rice, CCT Archaeologist, to Tiller, 29 April 1996, file Tribal

Coordination, drawer 3, LARO.HQ.RMO; Agreement Between the National Park Service,

U.S. Department of the Interior and the Spokane Tribe of Indians for the Assumption by the

Tribe of Certain Responsibilities Pursuant to the National Historic Preservation Act (16

U.S.C. 470), 29 Sept. 1996, file Tribal Coordination, drawer 3, LARO.HQ.RMO.

114 Steven R. Clark, USBR Power Manager, to Bruce E. Didesch, Assistant U.S. Attorney, 5

Aug. 1996, file N16 Resource Mgmt — Programmatic Agreement 1995-, LARO.HQ.ADM;

Draft Spokane Burial Policy for 1996 Archaeological and Historic Survey, 31 Jan. 1996, file

Cultural Resources, Indian Burials, etc., drawer 1, LARO.HQ.RMO.

115 James Sijohn, Spokane Tribal Business Council Cultural Representative and Robert

Sherwood, Spokane Tribal Culture Advisor, to Richard Winters, LARO Acting

Superintendent, 29 April 1996, file Spokane Tribe — Mill Creek ARPA, LARO.HQ.SUP.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 9 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi9n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:07 PM]

116 Ray DePuydt, LARO Archeologist, to Karen Taylor-Goodrich, LARO Chief of Resources

Management, 26 April 1996, file Spokane Tribe — Mill Creek ARPA, LARO.HQ.SUP;

James Sijohn, Spokane Tribal Business Council Cultural Representative, to Richard L.

Winters, LARO Acting Superintendent, 28 May 1996, file A44 Misc. Corr. STI 1993-,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Winters to Robert Sherwood, Spokane Tribal Culture Advisor, 9 May

1996, file A44 Misc. Corr. STI 1993-, LARO.HQ.ADM; DePuydt phone interview.

117 James Sijohn, Spokane Tribal Business Council Cultural Representative, to Richard L.

Winters, LARO Acting Superintendent, 28 May 1996, file A44 Misc. Corr. STI 1993-,

LARO.HQ.ADM.

118 Ray DePuydt, LARO Archeologist, to Robert Sherwood, Spokane Tribal Culture Advisor,

1 May 1996, file A44 Misc. Corr. STI 1993-, LARO.HQ.ADM; Richard L. Winters, LARO

Acting Superintendent, to Jim Sijohn, Spokane Tribal Business Council, 5 June 1996, file

Burial Management Plan, LARO.HQ.SUP.

119 Gil Goodrich, LARO Chief Ranger, to WASO Law Enforcement Program Manager, 25

Nov. 1996, file Cultural Resource Work File, LARO.HQ.SUP; Vaughn Baker, LARO

Superintendent, to Lake Roosevelt Coordinating Council, 3 Feb. 1997, file H30 Archaeology

NPS/Tribes/BPA 1996-97, LARO.HQ.ADM; Baker to Adeline Fredin, CCT Director of

History/Archaeology Department, 13 Feb. 1997, file H24 Archaeological and Historical Data

1994, LARO.HQ.ADM; Fredin to Ray DePuydt, LARO Archeologist, 20 Feb. 1997, file

Arch. Resources Protection Act, drawer 1, LARO.HQ.RMO; Baker to Fredin, 24 March

1997, file Cultural Resource Work File, LARO.HQ.SUP; Goodrich to WASO Law

Enforcement Program Manager, 12 Nov. 1997, file W34 Law Enforcement 1997-,

LARO.HQ.ADM.

120 Gerald W. Tays, former LARO Superintendent, interview with Nancy F. Renk, 20 July

2000, Tapes 2-A and 2-B, tape and index on file, LARO.HQ.

121 Vaughn Baker, LARO Superintendent, email to Ray DePuydt, LARO Archeologist, 12

Aug. 1996, file Spokane Survey Proposal, office of NPS Senior Archeologist, CCSO.

122 Stephanie Toothman, NPS Regional Chief of Cultural Resources, personal

communication to Nancy F. Renk, 29 Sept. 2000; Vaughn Baker, LARO Superintendent,

email to Bill Walters, NPS Deputy Field Area Director, 9 Aug. 1996, file Spokane Survey

Proposal, office of NPS Senior Archeologist, CCSO.

123 Karen Taylor-Goodrich, LARO Chief of Resources Management, email to Vaughn

Baker, LARO Superintendent, et al., 27 Sept. 1996, file Spokane Survey Proposal, office of

NPS Senior Archeologist, CCSO.

124 Vaughn Baker, LARO Superintendent, to Tom McKinney, BPA, 18 Feb. 1998, file H3

Historic Sites 1997-, LARO.HQ.ADM; John W. Keys, III, USBR Regional Director, to

Joseph Pakootas, Colville Business Council Chairman, 29 April 1997, file H30 Archaeology,

NPS/Tribes 1996-97, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Memorandum of Agreement Among National Park

Service, Bureau of Reclamation, and Bonneville Power Administration, Cultural Resources

Investigations Within the Lake Roosevelt Recreation Zone Pursuant to Programmatic

Agreement, finalized November 27, 1991, and Implementation of System Operation Review

Environmental Impact Statement Commitments," signed by BPA on 20 April 1998,

LARO.HQ.ADM; DePuydt phone interview.

126
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 9 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi9n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:07 PM]

 Vaughn Baker, LARO Superintendent, draft memo to Park Staff, 3 March 1997, file

Cultural Resources, Indian Burials, etc., drawer 1, LARO.HQ.RMO; James Sijohn, STI

Tribal Historic Preservation Officer, to Baker, 10 March 1997, file Burial Management Plan,

LARO.HQ.SUP; Adeline Fredin, CCT Director of History/Archaeology Department, to

Baker, 27 March 1997, file Burial Management Plan, LARO.HQ.SUP.

126 Review Draft, "Memorandum of Understanding Between National Park Service and

Spokane Tribe of Indians, Emergency Recovery Procedures for the Inadvertent Discovery of

Human Burials on Federal Lands Bordering the Spokane Indian Reservation at Lake

Roosevelt," 2 April 1997, file H30 Archaeology NPS/Tribes/BPA 1996-97, LARO.HQ.ADM;

Marty Huseman, LARO South District Ranger, email to Vaughn Baker, LARO

Superintendent, et al., 6 April 1998, file Burial Management Plan, LARO.HQ.SUP.

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

laro/adhi/adhi9n.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 9)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi9a.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:08 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 9:

From Simple to Complex: Cultural Resource

Management (continued)

Archaeology, 1940-1960

When the Park Service began studying the Columbia River Reservoir, the agency was

interested primarily in the area's recreation potential. Nonetheless, Regional Director Herbert

Maier wrote to Joel Ferris in 1941 to ask if the Coulee Dam area had any archaeological or

historical values. Ferris, vice president of the Eastern Washington State Historical Society,

had been the key figure in funding the work of the CBAS. He believed that the reservoir area

contained many sites with both historical and archaeological value, but his own interests lay

with sites outside the reservoir. His believed that Fort Spokane was worth restoring but of

lesser historical interest than Spokane House or sites in the Colville area. [8]

Following World War II, federal agencies began to pay more attention to archaeological

resources that were scheduled for destruction as a result of a federal action. Consequently,

salvage archaeology projects increased in connection with highway, pipeline, and canal

construction. In August 1947, Reclamation, the Park Service, the Smithsonian Institution, and

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers cooperated with the universities of Oregon, Washington, and

California on a survey and salvage project in the Grand Coulee, prior to the dam and flooding

that turned it into the Equalizing Reservoir, now known as Banks Lake. The project was led

by Philip Drucker from the Smithsonian, who had worked nearly a decade earlier on the

CBAS. Within two weeks, crews had located approximately twenty-five sites with burials,

artifacts, and pictographs. Their primary work included sampling at some sites and sketches

of rock art. [9]

The Park Service employed few archaeologists during the 1940s. Jesse L. Nusbaum worked

out of the regional office in Santa Fe in 1947, but he covered a vast area including much of

the western United States and Alaska. Along with the established parks, he had to survey

areas that were potential additions to the National Park System, such as the Equalizing

Reservoir, as well as all Department of the Interior lands in eleven western states and Alaska.

With responsibility for such a large territory, there was little time to concentrate in any one

area. By 1960, the regional office in San Francisco had its own archaeologist available to

either do the work himself or help parks contract with qualified outside personnel. The

Regional Director reminded superintendents to watch for archaeological resources during

construction projects. He suggested inspecting any proposed construction areas prior to work

and, if archaeological evidence was seen, the staff should stop the project until the site could

be investigated. If this were not possible, they should salvage the site. LARO depended on

both Park Service and private archaeologists until 1993 when the park hired its first full-time

archaeologist. [10]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 9)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi9a.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:08 PM]

Archaeology, Early 1960s

Following the conclusion of the CBAS in 1940, there was no further archaeological work at

LARO until the 1960s. Initial emphasis was at Fort Spokane, acquired by the Park Service in

1960 and scheduled for extensive development under the Mission 66 program. The Western

Regional Office funded preliminary excavations at Fort Spokane in August and September

1963. John Combes and his students from Washington State University (WSU) located

footings and artifacts associated with the 1880-1882 Camp Spokane and then turned their

attention to foundations of the main fort. The results were so satisfying that the Park Service

proposed continuing the work of uncovering and stabilizing foundations to help interpret the

site. [11]

Work on a new Master Plan in 1963 indicated deficiencies in the archaeological knowledge

of the park. Regional personnel proposed to remedy this with an archaeological survey

conducted by WSU in FY1965-1967 for $15,000. Superintendent Homer Robinson

questioned the need for this survey because of the archaeological work done by the CBAS in

1939-1940, but others assured him that the survey was definitely warranted. Robinson

followed up with three research project proposals to cover the archaeological survey, historic

structures studies at Fort Spokane, and a study of building furnishings at the fort. [12]

Funds were not immediately available for any work, however. Although the Regional

Archeologist had requested money for surveys at LARO each year, his budgets were "cut to a

bare minimum" for research funds. He asked Superintendent Robinson if there were any

chance that the park's Natural History Association had any funds to help with an important

salvage project at Kettle Falls. If so, he believed the regional office could "scrape up some

funds at the end of the year" to match money from the Association. Robinson's reply was far

from encouraging: "The Coulee Dam Nature and History Association has a balance of $15.43

in the bank and we doubt that much could be done with this amount. Are there any other

possibilities?" [13]

Federal Legislation Governing Cultural Resource Management

Prior to 1966, two major laws affected archaeological and historical sites. The Antiquities

Act of 1906 established a system of permits for any archaeological work on federal lands.

This was followed by the Historic Sites Act of 1935 that mandated the National Park Service

to identify important cultural resources and provide for their protection and preservation. [14]

The landmark National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA) greatly expanded

protections by requiring the federal government to implement a nationwide program to

identify, protect, and preserve historic places. This process was mandatory for all federal

agencies as well as any project involving federal dollars. Compliance oversight rested with a

newly created national Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. [15]

Other legislation expanded the mandate to identify and protect cultural resources. The

Archaeological Recovery Act (also known as the Reservoir Salvage Act) of 1960 provided

for salvage of archaeological sites prior to dam construction. The National Environmental

Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) required federal agencies to consider the impact of their actions

on environmental, historical, and cultural resources, whether on federal land or on private

lands using federal monies. This ushered in the era of environmental impact statements. Ten

years later, the Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979 (ARPA) and subsequent

amendments tightened protection for archaeological sites on federal lands and provided for

criminal penalties. [16]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 9)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi9a.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:08 PM]

The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 1990 (NAGPRA) directed

museums, universities, and all federal agencies to inventory their collections of human

remains and associated grave goods, determine cultural affiliation where possible, and notify

appropriate tribes. If they wished, tribes could ask for skeletal remains and artifacts to be

returned to them. The sections of NAGPRA governing inadvertent discoveries of burials

strengthened the tribal role in cultural resource management of reservoir lands such as LARO

where the actions of reservoir operators caused slumping of banks and exposure of burials.

When cultural affiliation is clear, the law gives tribes custody of such human remains. At the

same time, federal land managers still have responsibilities under Sections 106 and 110 of

NHPA and under ARPA. [17]

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

laro/adhi/adhi9a.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 10 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi10n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:23 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 10:

Endnotes

1 Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to Kendall W. Smith of Redmond, Washington,

30 July 1946, file 5, box 9, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

2 "Master Plan of Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 1965: ch. 3, "The Land," p. 1, file

D18 Master Planning 1965-67, LARO.HQ.ADM.

3 Richard West Sellars, Preserving Nature in the National Parks: A History (New Haven,

Conn.: Yale University Press, 1997), 4; R. Gerald Wright, Wildlife Research and

Management in the National Parks (Urbana, Ill.: University of Illinois Press, 1992), 24, 36.

4 Wright, Wildlife Research and Management, 25, 36; Gordon Cooper Olson, "A History of

Natural Resources Management Within the National Park Service," (M.A. thesis, Slippery

Rock University, 1986), 158-59.

5 "Awash," Tribal Tribune, 31 May 1988.

6 "Memorandum of Agreement Between the National Park Service, the Bureau of

Reclamation and Office of Indian Affairs Relating to the Planning, Development, and

Administration of the Grand Coulee National Recreation Area," 2 Oct. 1941, file 715 Col.

Basin Project, Admin. of Recreational Areas, FDR Lake, USBR Boise; "Memorandum of

Agreement among the Bureau of Reclamation, National Park Service, and Office of Indian

Affairs Relating to the Planning, Development, and Administration of the Coulee Dam

Recreational Area," 19 Dec. 1946, file 2 A44 Tri-Party: Mat'ls Relating to Tri-Bureau

Agreement, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Vaughn L. Baker, LARO

Superintendent, to Adeline Fredin, CCT History/Archaeology Department, 22 Aug. 1996, file

H30 Archaeology NPS/Tribes/BPA 1996-97.

7 Gerry Tays, LARO Superintendent, to Ken Casavant, Northwest Power Planning Council

member, 15 July 1994, file N16 Mgmt. of Nat. Res., LARO.HQ.ADM.

8 Sellars, Preserving Nature in the National Parks, 262-64; "Superintendent's Annual Report,

CODA," CY1973: 10, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; CODA,

"Annual Statement for Interpretation and Visitor Services: Coulee Dam National Recreation

Area," 1981, Statement for Interpretation notebook, LARO.HQ.CIO.

9 Gordon Boyd, "Pacific Northwest Region Science Program Review Questionnaire," [1986],

file WASO/SSO Reports/Correspondence, drawer 1, LARO.HQ.RMO; Gordon D. Boyd,

LARO Acting Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 22 Dec. 1987, file N16 Mgmt. of

Nat. Res. & Areas 1988-90, LARO.HQ.ADM.

10 CCSO, "Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area Museum Management Plan," 1997: 17;
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 10 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi10n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:23 PM]

LARO, "Resource Management Plan, Natural Resources," 1997: 39-40, LARO.HQ.RMO;

Dan Brown, phone interview with Kathryn L. McKay, 3 March 2000, notes on file,

LARO.HQ; "R-MAP Park Profile Input," 25 April 1994, file L76 Environmental Impact,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Vaughn Baker, interview with Nancy F. Renk, 9 Dec. 1999, Tape 2-A,

notes and index on file, LARO.HQ; Karen Taylor-Goodrich, phone interview with Kathryn

L. McKay, 3 August 2000, notes on file, LARO.HQ. In a good example of the importance of

personal connections, Cook and Gil Goodrich had worked together at Grand Canyon National

Park. After transferring to LARO, Cook hired Gil and Karen and saw Karen as the right

person to be in charge of the resource management program he envisioned (Brown

interview).

11 NPS, National Parks for the 21st Century: The Vail Agenda: Report and Recommendations

to the Director of the National Park Service from the Steering Committee of the 75th

Anniversary Symposium (Washington, D.C.: 1992), 15; LARO, "Resource Management Plan,

Natural Resources," 1997: 3-5.

12 Scott Hebner, phone interview with Kathryn L. McKay, 3 March 2000, notes on file,

LARO.HQ.

13 Sellars, Preserving Nature in the National Parks, 235; CODA, "Natural Resources

Management Update — May 1992," Briefing Statements notebook, LARO.HQ.ADM;

LARO, "Resource Management Plan, Natural Resources," 1997: 32, Appendix F, pp. 136-37;

Scott Hebner, LARO Natural Resources Specialist, personal communication to Kathryn L.

McKay, 4 August 2000.

14 Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 6 Feb. 1952, file 9,

box 8, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; LARO, Draft General Management

Plan/Environmental Impact Statement: Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area (Sept.

1998): 117.

15 "The Columbia River and Its Salmon Problem," n.d., Grand Coulee Dam section, Dams

box, LARO.HQ.LIB.

16 USBR, Annual Project History, Grand Coulee Dam Project, 1946, 339.

17 USBR, Project History 1947, 292; USBR, Project History 1946, 339; Frederic F. Fish and

Mitchell G. Hanavan, "A Report Upon the Grand Coulee Fish-Maintenance Project, 1939-

1947" (U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Special Scientific Report No. 55, ca. 1948), 46-48;

Richard L. Newberger, "The Great Salmon Mystery," Saturday Evening Post 214 (Sept. 13,

1941): 20.

18 Richard White, The Organic Machine: The Remaking of the Columbia River (N.Y.: Hill &

Wang, 1995), 90.

19 Fish and Hanavan, "Grand Coulee Fish-Maintenance Project, 41-42; Michael C. Blumm

and F. Lorrain Bodi, "Commentary," in Joseph Cone and Sandy Ridlington, The Northwest

Salmon Crisis: A Documentary History (Corvallis, Ore.: Oregon State University Press,

1996), 105; U.S. Department of Energy, BPA, "Environmental Assessment: Colville Resident

Trout Hatchery" (Portland, Wash.: BPA, 1986), 3; Lloyd A. Phinney, "Implementation of

Critical Programs for Columbia and Snake River Salmon and Steelhead Runs," July 1976, in

R. Allen et al., "Investigative Reports of Columbia River Fisheries Project" (Vancouver,

Wash.: Pacific Northwest Regional Commission, 1976), D-17-18; Paul Pitzer, Grand Coulee:
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 10 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi10n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:23 PM]

Harnessing a Dream (Pullman: WSU Press, 1994), 228.

20 A. T. Scholz et al., "Feasibility Report on Restoration of Lake Roosevelt Fisheries"

(Cheney, Wash.: Eastern Washington University, ca. 1986), 17; Claude E. Greider, LARO

Superintendent, to NPS Director, 11 March 1948, file 17, box 136, RG 079-89-004, NARAPSR; Greider to James M. Berkey, USBR, 4 Dec. 1947, file 1, box 6, RG 079-89-001,

NARA-PSR; Lisa K. Bucy and William H. Funk, Lake Roosevelt Management Plan

(Pullman, Wash.: WRC Report No. 93, State of Washington Water Research Center, 1996),

79; Rosemary H. Alowe-McConnell, "Summary: Reservoirs in Relation to Man —

Fisheries," 642, in William C. Ackermann, Man-made Lakes: Their Problems and

Environmental Effects (American Geophysical Union, 1973).

21 Harold A. Gangmark and Leonard A. Fulton, "Preliminary Surveys of Roosevelt Lake in

Relation to Game Fishes" (Wash., D.C.: U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Special Scientific

Report: Fisheries No. 5, 1949), 1; "Minutes of Meeting To Consider a Study of the Potential

Game Fish Resources of Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake, Coulee Dam, May 26, 1947," 1-3, 6, 8,

file 6, box 8, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Lance G. Beckman, et al., "Assessment of the

Fisheries and Limnology in Lake F. D. Roosevelt, 1980-83: Final Report 1985" (Seattle: U.S.

Fish & Wildlife Service, 1985), 7; Victor H. Cahalane, NPS Chief, Biology Branch, to NPS

Regional Director, 1 Feb. 1950, file 6, box 8, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

22 Gangmark and Fulton, "Game Fishes," 20, 23, 26-28; LARO, "Resource Management

Plan, Natural Resources," 1997: Appendix F, 119; NPS, "A Master Plan for Coulee Dam

National Recreation Area, Washington: Preliminary Working Draft," Feb. 1968: 26, file D18

Master Plan, LARO.HQ.ADM.

2323 David H. Bennett and Robert G. White, "A Survey of Existing Literature on Franklin D.

Roosevelt Lake" (University of Idaho, Forest, Wildlife and Range Experiment Station,

Contribution No. 61, Jan. 1977), 18; CODA, "Annual Fishery Resources Narrative Report,

1960," 12 Jan. 1961, file Archives — Fisheries Annual Reports, drawer 2, LARO.FS.1107.

24 James A. Todd, LARO Acting District Ranger, Fort Spokane, to LARO Chief Ranger, 27

Dec. 1961, file N1423 Animal Life — Fish, LARO.HQ.ADM.

25 "Resident Fish Populations," [1963?], 4-5, Fisheries section, Fisheries box,

LARO.HQ.LIB; "Kamloops Planted In Plastic Cages," The Star, 30 Jan. 1958.

26 "Master Plan of Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 1964: ch. 1, p. 23; ch. 2, p. 10,

file D18 Master Planning 1965-67, LARO.HQ.ADM. The quote is from CODA, "Annual

Fishing Resources Narrative Report — 1962, Kettle Falls District," file N1423 Animal Life

— Fish, LARO.HQ.ADM.

27 CODA, "Annual Fishery Resources Narrative Report, 1961 Fish," 19 Dec. 1961, file

Archives — Fisheries Annual Reports, drawer 2, LARO.FS.1107; Albert F. Drysdale, LARO

District Ranger, to LARO Chief Ranger, 10 Dec. 1965, file N1423 Animal Life —,

LARO.HQ.ADM.

28 Bennett and White, "Survey of Existing Literature," 16-17, 27-29; "Resident Fish

Populations," [1963?], 8-10, Fisheries section, Fisheries box, LARO.HQ.LIB; untitled

typescript, 10 April 1967, file N1423 Animal Life — Fish, LARO.HQ.ADM; Scholz, "Lake

Roosevelt Fisheries," 6.

29 LARO Superintendent to NPS Director, 14 Sept. 1965, file A2615 M. Narrative Reports
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 10 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi10n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:23 PM]

CODA CY 1965, box 1, RG 079-95-05, NARA-PSR; untitled typescript, 10 April 1967, file

N1423 Animal Life — Fish, LARO.HQ.ADM; CODA, "Annual Aquatic Resources Report

for 1966," file N2621 Annual Aquatic Resources Rept., LARO.HQ.ADM; LARO District

Ranger to Files, 14 April 1976, Fisheries section, Fisheries box, LARO.HQ.LIB; William G.

Aubertin, "Walleye Fishing on Lake Roosevelt," n.d., LARO.HQ.LIB; Chris Cowbrough,

"Lake Could Yield Record Walleye," [Colville] Statesman-Examiner, May 1977; Scholz,

"Lake Roosevelt Fisheries," 12-16; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1974: 8,

file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual

Report, CODA," CY1973: 9, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM;

J. R. Nielsen, "Investigation of the Walleye Fishery in Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake," pp. 28-

50 in, "A Survey and Evaluation of Sport Fisheries in Region One with Special Emphasis on

the Walleye Fishery" (Washington Department of Game, Project No. F-64-R, Job No. 2,

1974), 37, 47-48. The most common game fish in the lake in the mid-1970s was yellow

perch, not walleye, and by this time the population of kokanee had declined substantially

(Nielsen, "Walleye Fishery," 36-37).

30 Beckman, "Fisheries and Limnology," 7; William W. Dunmire, LARO Superintendent, to

NPS Associate Regional Director, 13 July 1979, file A44 — Coop Agreement — Fisheries,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Fenton Roskelley, "Level of Lake Key to Angling," Spokane Daily

Chronicle, 19 May 1976; CODA, "General Management Plan: Coulee Dam National

Recreation Area," July 1980: 14, GMP, Envir. Assessments notebook, LARO.HQ.CIO.

31 CODA, "Annual Aquatic Resources Report for 1977," 10 Jan. 1977, file N2621 Annual

Aquatic Resources Rept., LARO.HQ.ADM; Maureen H. McDonough and Donald R. Field,

"Coulee Dam National Recreation Area: Visitor Use Patterns and Preferences" (Seattle: NPS,

College of Forest Resources, UW, 1979), 94; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA,"

CY1976: 27, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM.

32 Beckman, "Fisheries and Limnology," 70, 76; Steve Castro-Shrader, LARO Fort Spokane

District Ranger, to LARO Chief of Interpretation, 8 May 1985, file K2623 Situation,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Jon L. Riedel, "Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area, Washington,

Water Resources Scoping Report" (NPS, 1997), 36; Graeme Casseday, "A Big Dam's Big

Lake," Trailer Boats 24 (Dec. 1980): 24-25; J. Jerry Rumburg, LARO Chief of

Interpretation, to Richard E. Ecklund, 26 Feb. 1981, file K14 Information Requests,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Tim L. Peone, et al., "Lake Roosevelt Fisheries Monitoring Program,

Annual Report, August 1988-December 1989" (Portland: BPA, 1989), 175, 180; Sally L.

Bruesewitz et al., "Hooking Mortality of Walleye Caught from Deep Water" (Olympia:

Washington Dept. of Fish & Wildlife, 1996), 1.

33 William W. Dunmire, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 10 July 1979, file

D22 Park Multi-year Program, LARO.HQ.ADM; USBR, "Draft News Release Regarding

Crescent Bay Lake Pumping," 1 Oct. 1979, file 715 Columbia Basin Project, Administration

of Recreational Areas, Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake, USBR Boise; Charles V. Janda, LARO

Acting Superintendent, to Hearings Officer, Washington Department of Ecology, 30 May

1980, file N3615 Pollution — Air, LARO.HQ.ADM; Gary Kuiper, LARO Superintendent, to

NPS Regional Director, 22 Oct. 1982, file D18 Maintenance Planning Program 71-86,

LARO.HQ.ADM; "Statement for Interpretation and Visitor Services for Fiscal Year, 1984,"

17 Jan. 1984: Part 1.6, p. 4, Statement for Interpretation notebook, LARO.HQ.CIO; Kelly K.

Cash, "Statement for Management, Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 1992: 9, GMP,

Environ. Assessment, etc. notebook, LARO.HQ.CIO; Kelly K. Cash, "Statement for

Management, Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 1992: 10, GMP, Environ. Assessment,

etc. notebook, LARO.HQ.CIO; CODA, "Resource Management Plan and Environmental

Assessment," 1988: 8; Scott Hebner, LARO Natural Resources Specialist, personal
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 10 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi10n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:23 PM]

communication to Kathryn L. McKay, 3 Aug. 2000; Gary Kuiper, LARO Superintendent, and

USBR Representative, draft letter to City of Grand Coulee, 13 Aug. 1982 [quote], file N30

Geological Features & Studies, LARO.HQ.ADM

34 USBR, Project History, 16-17; Colville Business Council, Resolution 1975-595, file

A5431 Fish, Wildlife and Rec. Study of FDR Lake, LARO.HQ.ADM.

35 "Report on Fish, Wildlife, and Recreation Study and Management Implementation on

Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake," 2, appendix in USBR, Project History 1977; "Statement of the

Colville Confederated Tribes Before the Sub-committee on Public Works Appropriations,

Senate," 30 March 1976, file A5431 Fish, Wildlife & Rec. Study of FDR Lake,

LARO.HQ.ADM; CCT & STI, "Proposal for Fishery and Wildlife Evaluation and

Development of Management Alternatives for Franklin D. Roosevelt Reservoir and Its

Tributary Streams" [ca. 1975], 1-2; LARO, "Resource Management Plan, Natural

Resources," 1997: Appendix F, "Project Statements," 119; "Superintendent's Annual Report,

CODA," CY1976: 3, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; William

W. Dunmire, LARO Superintendent, to Glenn Galbraith, STI Chairman, 3 July 1980, file 7,

box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; CODA, "Resource Management Plan

and Environmental Assessment," 1988: 37, file Coulee Dam NRA, Nat. Resource Mgmt.

Plan 1988, LARO.HQ.CIO.

36 Beckman, "Fisheries and Limnology," iv, 103.

37 Beckman, "Fisheries and Limnology," 115, 116; Peone, "Lake Roosevelt Fisheries

Monitoring Program," 5; McDowell and Griffith, "Retrospective Analysis: Fisheries," 3;

"Northwest Power Planning Council, Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program

Application for Amendment: Resident Fish Substitutions," n.d., file Fisheries — Lake

Roosevelt, drawer 2, LARO.FS.1107; Scholz, "Lake Roosevelt Fisheries," 26-28.

38 Kelly K. Cash, LARO Assistant Superintendent, to LARO Superintendent, 29 July 1985,

Fisheries — Lake Roosevelt, drawer 2, LARO.FS.1107; Alan C. Stay, CCT Reservation

Attorney, to William Byler, Gerard, Byler & Associates, 29 March 1984, file N14 Animal

and Plant Life, LARO.HQ.ADM. In 1978, the Indian Claims Commission awarded the CCT

$3.257 million as compensation for the destruction of their fishery; the STI did not file a

claim by the 1951 deadline (Task Force on Colville and Spokane Tribes, "Final Report,

Colville/Spokane Task Force," Sept. 1980: 3, 5, unlabeled file, LARO.HQ.SUP).

39 "Lake Roosevelt Multi-Party Management Agreement, Chronology of Events and

Historical Background," ca. 1987, file Environment Misc. — Lake Roosevelt (1 of 2), box 71,

Morrison Collection, WSU. The BPA also funded the construction of a trout hatchery just

below Chief Joseph Dam, managed by the CCT, that stocks trout in Colville Indian

Reservation lakes and streams (U.S. Department of Energy, BPA, "Colville Resident Trout

Hatchery," 2-3; Northwest Power Planning Council, Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife

Program, 1986 Draft Amendment Document, 82, file Environment Misc. — Lake Roosevelt

(1 of 2), box 71, Morrison Collection, WSU).

40 Bucy and Funk, Lake Roosevelt Management Plan, 4-5, 79-80; Scholz, "Lake Roosevelt

Fisheries," 220-21; Peone, "Fisheries Monitoring Program," 179-80, 183.

41 Bill M. Bakke and Joseph Cone, "Commentary," in Joseph Cone and Sandy Ridlington,

The Northwest Salmon Crisis: A Documentary History (Corvallis, Ore.: Oregon State

University Press, 1996), 50.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 10 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi10n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:23 PM]

42 Allan T. Scholz, Upper Columbia United Tribes Fisheries Research Center Director, and

William T. Towey, Kalispel Tribe, Department of Natural Resources Director, to Steve Crow,

Northwest Power Planning Council, 8 Aug. 1993, file N16 Management of Nat. Res. 7-12,

93, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1991: 3, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM.

43 Peone, "Fisheries Monitoring Program," 1; Scott Hebner, LARO Natural Resources

Specialist, personal communication to Kathryn L. McKay, 4 August 2000.

44 Quoted in Robin Cody, Voyage of a Summer Sun: Canoeing the Columbia River (Seattle:

Sasquatch Books, 1995), 125.

45 "Lake Roosevelt Rainbow Trout Habitat/Passage Improvement Project, Abstract," n.d., file

Lake Roos. Fish Monitoring Program, file in bottom right desk drawer, LARO.FS.1107.

46 Gary J. Kuiper, LARO Superintendent, to Janie Pearcy, Northwest Power Planning

Council, 27 Aug. 1985, file N14 Animal & Plant Life, LARO.HQ.ADM.

47 McDowell and Griffith, "Retrospective Analysis: Fisheries," 7; Riedel, "Water Resources

Scoping Report," 27; Bucy and Funk, Lake Roosevelt Management Plan, 3; "Natural

Resources Committee Meeting Report, Oct. 28, 1992," 4, file Lake Roos. Forum, drawer 2,

LARO.HQ.RMO; LARO, Draft General Management Plan, (1998), 17; "Presentation

Summaries," in "Forum Notes from Forum Meting at Wellpinit, April 22 1992," file Lake

Roos. Forum, drawer 2, LARO.HQ.RMO; LARO, "Resource Management Plan, Natural

Resources," 1997: 17, 19.

48 Gerald W. Tays, LARO Superintendent, to Northwest Power Planning Council, 15 June

1995, file N1619 Water Life, LARO.HQ.ADM; Taylor-Goodrich phone interview.

49 Allan T. Scholz, Upper Columbia United Tribes Fisheries Research Center Director, and

William T. Towey, Kalispel Tribe, Dept. of Natural Resources Director, to Steve Crow,

Northwest Power Planning Council, 8 Aug. 1993, file N16 Management of Nat. Res. 7-12,

93, LARO.HQ.ADM; Keith Underwood and John Shields, "Lake Roosevelt Fisheries

Monitoring Program, 1993 Annual Report" (Wellpinit, Wash.: Spokane Tribe of Indians,

prepared for BPA, 1996), ii; Rich Landers, "Kokanee Rules Confound Anglers," SpokesmanReview, 11 July 1999, p. H1; Scott Hebner, LARO Natural Resources Specialist, personal

communication to Kathryn L. McKay, 1 June 2000.

50 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," FY1983: 1, file H2621 Annual Reports,

LARO.HQ.ADM; CODA, "Annual Aquatic Resources Report for 1984," 4 Jan. 1985, file

N2621 Annual Aquatic Resources Rept., LARO.HQ.ADM; "Self Sings Praises of Lake

Roosevelt," Spokesman-Review, 19 Oct. 1986; Peone, "Fisheries Monitoring Program," 5-6.

It is interesting to note that the draft proposal to the NCCP recommended against artificial

production of trout for Lake Roosevelt because of the potential for competition between

rainbow trout and other species and because of the threat the trout would pose to the genetic

integrity of existing tributary stocks (Scholz, "Lake Roosevelt Fisheries," 32).

51 Mel Tonasket, Colville Business Council chairman, to Andy Rustemeyer, Upper Columbia

River Counties Chairman, 16 Dec. 1988, file Environment Misc. — Lake Roosevelt (2 of 3),

box 71, Morrison Coll., WSU; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," 1988: 14, file

A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; Bucy and Funk, Lake Roosevelt

Management Plan, 80.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 10 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi10n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:23 PM]

52 "Lake Roosevelt Rainbow Trout Net Pen Assistance Project," typescript, ca. 1994, file

Wildlife Mitigation Working File, drawer 4, LARO.HQ.RMO; Bucy and Funk, Lake

Roosevelt Management Plan, 80; "Net Pen Operation," Wilbur Register 12 Dec. 1991; Rich

Landers, "Casting Wider Net," Spokesman-Review, 19 Oct. 1997; "Superintendent's Annual

Report, CODA," Jan. 1994-Sept. 1995: 17, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports,

1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Natural Resources Committee Meeting, Notes January 24, 1996,"

file Lake Roos. Forum, drawer 2, LARO.HQ.RMO; Rich Landers, "Casting Over the

Rainbow," Spokesman-Review, 31 Oct. 1999, pp. H1-H2.

53 Rose Chilcoat, LARO Ranger, "1986 Sturgeon Fisheries Report," 2-5, file N14 Animal &

Plant Life, LARO.HQ.ADM; Gary Kuiper, LARO Superintendent, to Ann Setter, University

of Washington School of Fisheries, 22 Dec. 1987, file N14 Animal & Plant Life,

LARO.HQ.ADM; "Columbia River Sturgeon & Lake Roosevelt Fishery, December 10,

1988," file Salmon Summit Info., drawer 3, LARO.FS.1107; Scott Hebner, LARO Natural

Resources Specialist, personal communication to Kathryn L. McKay, 4 August 2000.

54 Gary J. Kuiper, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, Administration, 23 May

1985, file N14 Animal & Plant Life, LARO.HQ.ADM; Brad James, Washington Department

of Fish & Wildlife, to Karen Taylor-Goodrich, LARO, 20 April 1998, file Sturgeon, drawer

3, LARO.FS.1107; Al Scholz, Eastern Washington University, personal communication to

Kathryn L. McKay, 15 Sept. 2000.

55 Hebner phone interview.

56 Taylor-Goodrich phone interview.

57 USBR, Recreational Development of Roosevelt Lake: Columbia Basin Joint Investigations,

Problem 26 (Washington, D.C.: GPO, 1945), 6; "Master Plan of Coulee Dam National

Recreation Area," 1964: ch. 1, p. 21, file D18 Master Planning 1965-67, LARO.HQ.ADM;

Jack Howerton, Jennifer Creveling, and Brent Renfrow, "Wildlife Protection, Mitigation and

Enhancement Planning for Grand Coulee Dam, Final Report" (Portland: BPA, 1986), 13, 17,

19; "Lake Wildlife Payback Plan," [article in unidentified newspaper], file Lake Roosevelt,

Grant County Commissioners, Ephrata, Washington; LARO, "Resource Management Plan,

Natural Resources," 1997: 13.

58 "Minutes of Task Force Meeting, Sept. 19, 1972," transcript, file 9, box 3 of 3, LARO #95,

Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

59 Arthur G. Holmes, "Report on Forest Protection Requirements: Coulee Dam National

Recreation Area," 30 May 1961, file D18 Master Plan 1961, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat.

#3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

60 Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to F. A. Banks, USBR Supervising Engineer, 5

June 1943, file 7, box 8, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Al W. Moore, "Beaver Cropping Plan

for Spokane Indian Reservation," 15 May 1947, file 1, box 4, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR;

Greider to NPS Director, 5 Dec. 1947, file 16, box 136, RG 079-89-004, NARA-PSR;

Greider to NPS Regional Director, 6 Feb. 1952, file 9, box 8, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR;

Karen F. Taylor-Goodrich, LARO Natural Resources Specialist, to LARO Superintendent, 1

April 1991, file N50 Pest & Weed Control, LARO.HQ.ADM; LARO, "Resource

Management Plan, Natural Resources," 1997: Appendix F, 52; Steven T. Gibbons, Regional

Natural Resource Specialist, to NPS Associate Regional Director, Operations, 13 July 1990,

file WASO/SSO Reports/Correspondence, drawer 1, LARO.HQ.RMO; Karen Taylor-
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 10 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi10n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:23 PM]

Goodrich, LARO Resource Management Specialist, to LARO South District Interpreter, 7

June 1994, file N16 Mgmt of Natl. Resources 1994, LARO.HQ.ADM; Scott Hebner, LARO

Natural Resources Specialist, email to Ed Stakey, Research Biologist, 11 April 1997, file

Wildlife, General, drawer 4, LARO.HQ.RMO.

61 LARO, "Resource Management Plan, Natural Resources," 1997: 6; Ronald D. Kortlever,

"Goose Pasture Project, Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 14 Nov. 1969, file Goose

Pasture Project, drawer 2, LARO.HQ.RMO; Vaughn Baker, LARO Superintendent, personal

communication to Kathryn L. McKay, 1 June 2000; "Superintendent's Annual Report,

CODA," CY1974: 11, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM.

62 "Report on Fish, Wildlife, and Recreation Study and Management Implementation on

Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake," appendix in USBR, Project History 1977, 2; USBR Regional

Director to USBR Commissioner, 21 Jan. 1977, appendix in USBR, Project History 1977;

William Burgen, LARO Superintendent, to USBR Project Manager, 12 Nov. 1976, file

A5431 Fish, Wildlife & Rec Study of FDR Lake, LARO.HQ.ADM.

63 Howerton et al., "Wildlife Protection," 1. "Wildlife mitigation" refers to attempts to reverse

or lessen damage that humans have caused to wildlife and wildlife habitats.

64 Howerton et al., "Wildlife Protection," 1, 8, 32, 42, 50; "Summary of Process Used to

Develop Grand Coulee Wildlife Mitigation Goals," Attachment No. 4, n.d., file Wildlife

Mitigation Bkgd, drawer 4, LARO.HQ.RMO.

65 "Summary of Process Used to Develop Grand Coulee Wildlife Mitigation Goals,"

Attachment No. 4, 1990: 2, file Wildlife Mitigation Bkgd, drawer 4, LARO.HQ.RMO;

Washington Department of Wildlife, "DRAFT Grand Coulee Wildlife Mitigation Goals and

Objectives," 28 Nov. 1989, file Grand Coulee/Chief Joseph, drawer 4, LARO.HQ.RMO;

CODA, "Wildlife Mitigation Briefing Statement — July 1993," Briefing Statements

notebook, LARO.HQ.ADM.

66 Kelly Cash, LARO Assistant Superintendent, handwritten note on letter from Bruce Smith,

Washington Department of Wildlife Regional Manager, to members of Grand Coulee

Wildlife Mitigation Advisory Group, 23 April 1990, file Grand Coulee/Chief Joseph, drawer

4, LARO.HQ.RMO.

67 John Volkman, Northwest Power Planning Council Senior Counsel, to Council Members,

31 March 1993, file N16 Mgmt of Nat. Res. 1993, LARO.HQ.ADM; Charles H. Odegaard,

NPS Regional Director, to Stan Grace, Northwest Power Planning Council Chairman, 27 July

1993, file Wildlife Mitigation Working File, drawer 4, LARO.HQ.RMO; CODA, "Project

Statement Sheet: Wildlife Mitigation Project/Study Proposals," 1990, file N16 Resources

Management Plan, LARO.HQ.ADM; LARO, "Resource Management Plan, Natural

Resources," 1997: 17; CODA, "Briefing Statement, Wildlife Mitigation," 1 April 1990, file

Environment — Misc. — Lake Roosevelt, box 72, Morrison Collection, WSU. The Wildlife

Working Group was established to facilitate interagency/tribal participation in the planning

and implementation of the Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program.

68 LARO, "Resource Management Plan, Natural Resources," 1997: Appendix F, 102, 104;

LARO, Draft General Management Plan (1998), 87.

69 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1991: 3, file A2621 Superintendent's

Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; Kelly K. Cash, LARO Assistant Superintendent, to

Files, 7 March 1991, file Grand Coulee/Chief Joseph, drawer 4, LARO.HQ.RMO; Gary
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 10 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi10n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:23 PM]

Kuiper, LARO Superintendent, to Thomas S. Foley, U.S. House of Representatives, 10 Feb.

1992, file N16 Mgmt. of Natural Resources and Areas 1991-, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Lake

Roosevelt Forum Natural Resource Committee Notes, April 28, 1993," 2, file Lake Roos.

Forum, drawer 2, LARO.HQ.RMO; LARO, "Peregrine Falcon Reintroduction Project, Field

Season 1997, Project Summary and Recommendations for 1998," file Peregrine Program —

Monthly Progress Reports, drawer 3, LARO.FS.1107; Daniel R. Brown, "Coulee Dam

National Recreation Area Statement for Interpretation, FY93," 18 Feb. 1993, file K1817

Interpretive Plan, LARO.HQ.CIO; Hebner phone interview. The decline of peregrine falcons

was due primarily to the use of pesticides such as DDT, to habitat loss, and to shooting.

70 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1991: 4, file A2621 Superintendent's

Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; Howerton et al., "Wildlife Protection," 43-44;

Gary Kuiper, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 11 Sept. 1990, file N1621

Threatened & Endangered Species, LARO.HQ.ADM; Science Applications International

Corp., "Lake Roosevelt Bald Eagle Foraging Study — 1995," drawer 5, LARO.FS.1107;

LARO, "Resource Management Plan, Natural Resources," 1997: Appendix F, "Project

Statements," 110; Maureen A. Murphy, "Bald Eagle Nest Production, Lake Roosevelt,

Washington 1987-1997," ca. 1997, file Bald Eagle Productivity, drawer 5, LARO.FS.1107;

Daniel R. Brown, "Coulee Dam National Recreation Area Statement for Interpretation,

FY93," 18 Feb. 1993, file K1817 Interpretive Plan, LARO.HQ.CIO.

71 Edward E. Starkey, Oregon State University Research Biologist, CPSU, to Gary Kuiper,

LARO Superintendent, 18 May 1988, file Kettle River Wildlife Mitig. Info., drawer 2,

LARO.HQ.RMO; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1992: 12, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; LARO, Draft General

Management Plan (1998), 82-83; Karen Taylor-Goodrich, LARO Chief of Resources

Management, to Gerry Wright, NPS, 31 May 1994, file Wildlife Mitigation Corres., drawer

4, LARO.HQ.RMO.

72 NPS, "Columbia River Reservoir Area, Washington: General Report and Development

Outline," June 1944: 1, LARO.HQ.100-USA.3.1; Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent,

to NPS Regional Director, 22 July 1947, file 3, box 9, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Olson,

"Natural Resources Management," 110-111.

73 NPS Regional Chief, Division of Ranger Activities, to LARO Superintendent, 16 Feb.

1961, file D18 Master Plan 1961, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO;

Arthur G. Holmes, "Report on Forest Protection Requirements: Coulee Dam National

Recreation Area," 30 May 1961, file D18 Master Plan 1961, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat.

#3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Donald P. Graham and Peter W. Orr, "Forest Insect and Disease

Evaluation, Grand Coulee National Recreation Area," 25 May 1962: 1-4, file Y1815 Trees &

Forests, LARO.HQ.ADM; LARO Superintendent to NPS Director, 11 Sept. 1964, file A2615

M. Narrative Reports CODA CY 1964, box 2, RG 079-95-05, NARA-PSR; LARO

Superintendent to NPS Director, 14 Sept. 1965, file A2615 M. Narrative Reports CODA CY

1965, box 1, RG 079-95-05.

74 Charles A. Connaughton, U.S. Forest Service Regional Forester, to John Rutter, NPS

Regional Director, 26 June 1967, file Y815 Trees & Forests, LARO.HQ.ADM; John A.

Rutter, NPS Regional Director, to LARO Superintendent, 19 July 1967, file Y1815 Trees &

Forests, LARO.HQ.ADM.

75 Olson, "Natural Resources Management," 190, 240; "Superintendent's Annual Report,

CODA," 1978: 8, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 10 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi10n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:23 PM]

76 CODA, "General Management Plan," 1980: 27; CODA, "Resource Management Plan and

Environmental Assessment," 1982: 4, 15-16, file D18 General Management Plan, box 1 of 3,

LARO.HQ.PAO.

77 Gordon Boyd, LARO Chief Ranger, to LARO Superintendent, 18 Aug. 1983, file Y1815

Trees & Forests, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," 1985: 9, file

H2621 Annual Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM; CODA, "Resource Management Plan and

Environmental Assessment," 1988: 6, 13, 33-34.

78 David Stiegelmeyer and Richard Paris, "Hazard Tree Management Plan, Coulee Dam

National Recreation Area," Jan. 1, 1984: 1-4, file N16 Hazard Tree Management Plan 1/94,

LARO.HQ.ADM; LARO, "Resource Management Plan, Natural Resources," 1997: 23;

CODA, "R-MAP Park Profile Input," 25 April 1994: 8, file L76 — Environmental Impact,

LARO.HQ.ADM.

79 CODA, "Continue Forest Pest Management Program," 1992, file Admin — Unified

Program Call, drawer 2, LARO.FS.1107; Linda Whitson, NOCA Ranger Morning Report, 17

July 1992, file WASO/SSO Report/Correspondence, drawer 1, LARO.HQ.RMO; CODA,

"Conduct Baseline Wetland Inventory," FY1997 project proposal, file F34 Budget Execution

1996, LARO.HQ.ADM.

80 LARO, "Resource Management Plan, Natural Resources," 1997: 2; Scott Hebner, LARO

Natural Resources Specialist, personal communication to Kathryn L. McKay, 1 June 2000.

81 Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 23 Dec. 1948, file 4,

box 8, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

82 Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 10 July 1951, file 4,

box 9, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; NPS Assistant Director to Greider, 18 July 1951, file 4,

box 9, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; "Master Plan Development Outline, Coulee Dam

National Recreation Area, Washington: Forestry," 1952: 5, file D18 Master Plan: Forestry,

1952, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Robert H. Coombs, LARO

Acting Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 3 Sept. 1952, file 10, box 8, RG 079-89-

001, NARA-PSR.

83 CODA, "Resource Management Plan and Environmental Assessment," 1982: 5; Vaughn

Baker, LARO Superintendent, to Sue Williams of Medical Lake, Washington, 10 Dec. 1997,

file L30 Lands 1/97-, LARO.HQ.ADM; Gary Kuiper, LARO Superintendent, to Ben F.

Roche, Jr., Range Management Specialist, WSU, 29 July 1986, file A2345 Committees Field

Office CODA, LARO.HQ.ADM; Gordon D. Boyd, LARO Park Pesticide Coordinator, to

LARO Maintenance Foremen, 18 Dec. 1984, file N50 Pest & Weed Control 1983-89,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Gary Kuiper, "Statement for Management, Coulee Dam National

Recreation Area," 1989: 17, file D18 SFM 1989, LARO.HQ.ADM; Gary Kuiper, LARO

Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 6 Jan. 1989, file N50 Pest & Weed Control 1983-

89, LARO.HQ.ADM; "War on Weeds," in "Visitor Guide: Lake Roosevelt National

Recreation Area," 1998: 3; Hebner phone interview.

84 LARO, "Resource Management Plan, Natural Resources," 1997: Appendix F, "Project

Statements," 90; LARO, Draft General Management Plan (1998), 89; Bucy and Funk, Lake

Roosevelt Management Plan, 87. LARO's 1963 Master Plan noted that aquatic weeds were

beginning to choke some of the water-use areas, but this has not yet become a serious

problem within the national recreation area ("Master Plan for the Preservation and Use of

Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," Feb. 1963: ch. 4, p. 13, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 10 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi10n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:23 PM]

#3250, LARO.HQ.PAO).

85 "Facts Affecting Recreational Development and Use," 4 Feb. 1948: 35, file D18 Planning

Program, closed 6/3/53, LARO.HQ.ADM. Nutrient enrichment of the upper Spokane Arm

remained a problem for many years. In 1978, for example, a toxic algal bloom occurred in

the Spokane Arm that was thought to have originated in Long Lake. LARO issued warnings

via public media and public contacts (William Dunmire, LARO Superintendent, to NPS

Regional Director, 17 Nov. 1978, file N3615 Pollution — Air, LARO.HQ.ADM).

86 Gerald T. Orlob, "A Preliminary Study of the Sources of Mining and Mill Waste Pollution

in the Upper Columbia River Basin and Lake Roosevelt" (Olympia, Wash.: Washington

Pollution Control Commission, 1950), 9; Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to

Charles Graham, Statesman-Examiner, 3 March 1950, file 6, box 8, RG 079-89-001, NARAPSR; O. A. Tomlinson, NPS Regional Director, to U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Regional

Director, 24 Feb. 1950, file 6, box 8, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Graham to Greider, 14

Feb. 1950, file 6, box 8, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

87 Robert D. Dellwo, Dellwo, Rudolf & Grant, to David Richie, LARO Superintendent, and

W. E. Rawlings, USBR, 15 Jan. 1969, file A94 Spokane Indians, LARO.HQ.ADM; H. L.

Nelson, USBR Regional Director, to DOI Regional Solicitor, 8 May 1969, file CODA Hist.

Files #2, LARO.HQ.SUP; W. E. Rawlings, USBR Project Manager, to USBR Regional

Director, 27 March 1969, file L54 Water Matters, LARO.HQ.ADM; Wayne R. Howe, LARO

Superintendent, to DOI Field Solicitor, Ephrata, 9 Dec. 1971, file 5, box 3, LARO #95, Cat.

#3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Dick Gentry, "Uranium Pact O.K.," Spokane Chronicle, 6 Oct.

1976; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1991: 5, file A2621 Superintendent's

Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Sherwood Mine Briefing Paper," March 1991, file

Mining, drawer 2, LARO.HQ.RMO; Scott Hebner, LARO Natural Resources Specialist,

personal communication to Kathryn L. McKay, 4 August 2000. The Dawn Mining Company

operated the Midnite uranium mine 1955-64 and 1968-8; it is on the Spokane Reservation

and is located about four miles upstream of the Spokane Arm of Lake Roosevelt ("Midnite

Uranium Mine: Reclamation Environmental Impact Study, Pre-Scoping Newsletter," Feb.

1996, file Mining, drawer 2, LARO.HQ.RMO).

88 Riedel, "Water Resources," 4; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1974: 14, file

A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; Bucy and Funk, Lake Roosevelt

Management Plan, 5-6, 70-74; USGS Fact Sheet No. 102-97, "Are Walleye from Lake

Roosevelt Contaminated with Mercury?" n.d., file N14 Animal and Plant Life,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Lake Roosevelt Forum, "Forum Meeting Minutes, Cottonwood Inn,

Davenport, Washington, January 16, 1991," file Lake Roosevelt, Grant County

Commissioners, Ephrata, Washington; Joel Connelly, "B. C. Pollution Is Fouling the Fish at

Coulee," Seattle Post-Intelligencer, 10 April 1991; Hebner phone interview.

89 Gerald Tays, "Statement for Management, Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 1995:

10, file D18 Statements for Management, LARO.HQ.ADM; Julie Titone, "B. C. Stops

Spewing Slag into Columbia," Spokesman-Review, 10 Sept. 1995; Riedel, "Water Resources

Scoping Report," 57; Lake Roosevelt Forum, "Forum Meeting Minutes, Cottonwood Inn,

Davenport, Washington, January 16, 1991," file Lake Roosevelt, Grant County

Commissioners, Ephrata, Washington; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1991: 4,

file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; John Haller, LARO

Hazardous Waste Coordinator, to Files, 28 May 1986, file D18 Maintenance Planning

Program, LARO.HQ.ADM.

90 Gerald Tays, "Statement for Management, Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 1995:
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 10 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi10n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:23 PM]

9-10, file D18 Statements for Management, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual

Report, CODA," CY1992: 10, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-,

LARO.HQ.ADM.

91 LARO, Draft General Management Plan (1998), 82; Bucy and Funk, Lake Roosevelt

Management Plan, 43, 109; Scott Hebner, LARO Natural Resources Specialist, personal

communication to Kathryn L. McKay, 1 June 2000; LARO, "Special Park Uses at Lake

Roosevelt National Recreation Area," 15 May 1998, Briefing Statements notebook,

LARO.HQ.ADM.

92 Mel Tonasket, Colville Business Council Chairman, to Andy Rustemeyer, Upper Columbia

River Counties Chairman, 16 Dec. 1988, file Multiparty Agreement April 1990,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Gary Kuiper, "Statement for Management, Coulee Dam National

Recreation Area," 1990: 9, file D18 SFM 1989, LARO.HQ.ADM; Bucy and Funk, Lake

Roosevelt Management Plan, i, 99; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," FY1996: 11,

file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; LARO, "Resource

Management Plan, Natural Resources," 1997: 29.

93 Riedel, "Water Resources Scoping Report," 6; LARO, "Prepare a Water Resource

Management Plan," FY1997 project proposal, file F34 Budget Execution 1996,

LARO.HQ.ADM. The NPS instructed all parks to prepare a Water Resources Management

Plan in 1979 (Olson, "Natural Resources Management," 216); Scott Hebner, LARO Natural

Resources Specialist, personal communication to Kathryn L. McKay, 4 August 2000.

94 CODA, "General Management Plan," 1980: 11; LARO, Draft General Management Plan

(1998), 79.

95 Edward G. Roberts, "A Report on the Coulee Dam National Recreation Area" (Sept.

1969), 10, file Archives, Drawer 2, LARO.FS.1107.

96 Gerald Tays, "Statement for Management, Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 1995:

11, file D18 Statements for Management, LARO.HQ.ADM; Julie Titone, "Firm Hit with Fine

for Ashes," Spokesman-Review, 10 April 1991; Gregory S. Flibbert, Air Quality Specialist,

Washington Department of Ecology, to Kelly Cash, LARO Acting Superintendent, 14 May

1993, file N36 Pollution/Environment Quality 1992, LARO.HQ.ADM.

97 Gary J. Kuiper, "Annual Narrative Report," 29 Jan. 1982, file A2621 Superintendent's

Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; Kelly K. Cash, LARO Assistant Superintendent, to Files,

14 March 1984, file L7617 Environmental Impact WWP Waste Wood Fired Plant,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Gary Kuiper, "Statement for Management, Coulee Dam National

Recreation Area," 1990: 10, file D18 SFM 1989, LARO.HQ.ADM.

98 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," Jan. 1994-Sept. 1995: 4, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; Gerald Tays, LARO

Superintendent, to Allen J. Fiksdal, Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council, 26 Oct. 1995,

file N36 Pollution/Environment Quality 1993, LARO.HQ.ADM; Karen Taylor-Goodrich,

former LARO Chief of Resources Management, personal communication to Kathryn L.

McKay, 18 Sept. 2000; Vaughn Baker, LARO Superintendent, email to Kathryn L. McKay,

10 April 2001.

99 LARO, "Resource Management Plan, Natural Resources," 1997: 30; Scott Hebner, LARO

Natural Resources Specialist, personal communication to Kathryn L. McKay, 1 June 2000. A

coal-fired plant in Creston was proposed in the 1980s.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 10 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi10n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:23 PM]

100 Gordon D. Boyd, LARO Acting Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 16 Oct. 1987,

file W2623 Situation Info, LARO.HQ.ADM; John Haller, LARO Coulee Dam District

Ranger, to LARO Chief Ranger, 8 Oct. 1987, file W2615 Monthly Reports,

LARO.HQ.ADM; questionnaire regarding aircraft overflights, 1 June 1996, file Aircraft

Overflights, LARO.FS.1107; Hebner phone interview.

101 Gary Kuiper, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 25 Oct. 1990, file W46

General & Misc. Reg., LARO.HQ.ADM; "Memorandum of Understanding Between U.S.

Department of the Interior, National Park Service, and State of Washington Department of

Wildlife," March 1992, file LARO.3252.96.2, LARO.HQ.RMO.

102 LARO, "Resource Management Plan, Natural Resources," 1997: Appendix F, "Project

Statements," 121; LARO, Draft General Management Plan (1998), 18, 86; CODA,

"Resource Management Plan and Environmental Assessment," 1988: 36; Scott Hebner,

LARO Natural Resources Specialist, personal communication to Kathryn L. McKay, 4

August 2000.

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

laro/adhi/adhi10n.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 10)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi10a.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:24 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 10:

An Uphill Struggle: Natural Resources

Management (continued)

Fishery Management

The status of the Lake Roosevelt fishery has always been an important aspect of Park Service

management of LARO. When the fish population changes, and sport fishing improves or

declines, LARO personnel have adapted their management of the area accordingly. The Park

Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service agreed in the 1940s that the state Department

of Fish and Wildlife would be responsible for managing the fishery of Lake Roosevelt, but

the history of the fishery and of attempts to "improve" it are significant aspects of Park

Service management of the area. Although current standard Park Service policies regarding

fisheries management encourage the preservation or restoration of natural aquatic habitats

and the natural abundance and distribution of native aquatic species, there is latitude in how

this is applied, particularly in Park Service units based on artificial reservoirs like Lake

Roosevelt. [14]

Two main issues involving the Lake Roosevelt fishery have affected federal and state

management of the lake since the 1930s. The first is the loss of salmon in the Upper

Columbia River due to the construction of Grand Coulee Dam and mitigation for this loss.

The second is efforts to enhance the sport fishery in the lake. Concern over both these issues

has led to a rather confusing array of studies and recommended actions over the years.

Loss of Salmon in Upper Columbia River

Four species of Pacific salmon — chinook, coho, sockeye, and chum - plus steelhead trout,

are found in the Columbia River. These anadromous fish are born in freshwater, spend three

to five years there as fry and juveniles, and then travel to the Pacific Ocean as smolts. There,

they feed continuously until they make their way back upstream to mate and die where they

were born. The salmon that once spawned above today's Grand Coulee Dam were of very

high quality and were highly valued both by American Indians of the region and by

commercial fishermen on the lower river. Intensive exploitation of the several species of

salmon and of steelhead trout began with the establishment of the salmon canning industry in

1866. Besides salmon and steelhead trout, early fishermen also reported resident rainbow

trout, cutthroat trout, and whitefish in the upper Columbia River. [15]

Because it had no fish ladders, Grand Coulee Dam completely blocked fish migration

upstream of the dam after 1938. As a result, some twenty-seven thousand salmon and

steelhead trout that had been part of the downstream commercial fishery could no longer

spawn above the dam. Chief Joseph Dam, completed in 1955, also has no fish ladders. It is

located fifty-two miles downstream of Grand Coulee Dam, and it now marks the upper limit

of anadromous fish on the Columbia River. [16]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 10)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi10a.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:24 PM]

The architects of the new

[Columbia] river have been

nearly constant in their

protestations of concern for

salmon, but they have quite

consciously made a choice

against the conditions that

produce salmon. They have

wanted the river and its

watershed to say electricity,

lumber, cattle, and fruit and

together these have translated

into carp, shad, and squawfish

instead of salmon. If ever a

death could be unintended and

Major dams on the Columbia River and its tributaries. (Dick,

"When Dans [sic] Weren't Damned," 116-117. Reproduced by

permission of Environmental Review and the American Society

for Environmental History.)

Reclamation officials were well aware in the early

1930s that the construction of Grand Coulee Dam

would forever block anadromous fish runs to the 1,140

linear miles of upstream spawning grounds. Engineers

felt that a 350-foot-high fish ladder for the dam was

not economically feasible, and there was no known

way for the returning downstream fingerlings to swim

safely over such a high spillway. Federal and state

biologists turned to hatcheries to enable continued

salmon production on the Columbia River. The

Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife proposed

an elaborate plan in 1938 that was implemented by the

U.S. Bureau of Fisheries and funded by Reclamation.

Salmon heading upstream for spawning grounds above

Grand Coulee Dam were caught in traps at Rock
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 10)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi10a.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:24 PM]

overdetermined, it is the death

of the wild runs of the

Columbia River salmon. 

-- Richard White, Organic

Machine, 1995 [18]

Island Dam and hauled alive in tank trucks to holding

ponds at three hatcheries. There, they were artificially

spawned, and the resulting fingerlings were released at

the proper time in four tributaries between Grand

Coulee Dam and Rock Island Dam. After five years of

transporting salmon, the fish had been retrained in

what Reclamation engineer Frank Banks called "Uncle

Sam's Fish College" to their new spawning grounds below the dam. They subsequently

returned on their own to spawn there. [17]

Problems with the relocation of the fish runs surfaced in the 1940s, including high mortality

of adult salmon in the hatcheries and natural holding areas. More recently, it has been

recognized that hatchery fish damage wild fish productivity through competition for limited

food and habitat, transmission of disease, and loss of genetic integrity through interbreeding.

They also perform poorly in the wild. Hatcheries, it is now widely believed, are a poor

substitute for natural river conditions. In the 1950s and 1960s, however, hatcheries were still

seen as an excellent tool for enhancing sport fisheries. Some of the problems at the hatcheries

improved in the 1960s as scientists began to understand the nutritional needs of young fish

better. Production of resident trout was undertaken at the three federal hatcheries mentioned

above, and beginning in 1965, thousands of pounds of resident trout were stocked annually

on the Colville Reservation as partial mitigation for the tribes' fish losses (these hatcheries

switched back to salmon production in 1974). [19]

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

laro/adhi/adhi10a.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 11 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi11n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:26 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 11:

Endnotes

1 LARO, Encroachment Plan, ca. March 1982: 1, file LARO.94.3249.26, LARO.HQ.ADM.

2 B.E. Stoutemyer, USBR District Counsel, to USBR Commissioner, 13 Oct. 1941, file 715

Columbia Basin Project, Administration of Recreational Areas, Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake,

Boise USBR.

3 Philip W. Kearney, NPS Associate Landscape Architect, to NPS Regional Director, 26

Aug. 1942, file 2, box 10, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; C. E. Greider, NPS Recreation

Planner, to Kearney, 29 Aug. 1942, file 2, box 10, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

4 Claude E. Greider, NPS Recreation Planner, to F. A. Banks, USBR Supervising Engineer,

23 April 1943, file 1, box 3, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

5 Ibid.

6 NPS, "Application for Special Use Permit," 26 May 1943, file 715 Columbia Basin Project,

Administration of Recreational Areas, Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake, Boise USBR; Felix Rea,

USBR Assistant District Counsel, to USBR Supervising Engineer, 20 Jan. 1944, file 17, Box

3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; F. A. Banks, USBR Supervising Engineer,

to Claude E. Greider, NPS Recreation Planner, 15 April 1944, file 2, box 10, RG 079-89-001,

NARA-PSR; H. W. Bashore, USBR Acting Commissioner, to Secretary of the Interior, 26

June 1943, file 17, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Greider to Banks, 26

Nov. 1943, file 17, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

7 Memorandum of Agreement Among the Bureau of Reclamation, National Park Service, and

Office of Indian Affairs Relating to the Planning, Development, and Administration of the

Coulee Dam Recreational Area, 18 Dec. 1946: III.4-7, IV.2-3, file 2, box 3 of 3, LARO #95,

Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

8 Claude E. Greider, NPS Recreation Planner, to F. A. Banks, USBR Supervising Engineer,

26 Nov. 1943, file 17, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; H. W. Bashore,

USBR Acting Commissioner, to Secretary of the Interior, 26 June 1943, file 17, box 3 of 3,

LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

9 F. A. Banks, USBR Supervising Engineer, to Claude E. Greider, NPS Recreation Planner,

19 Aug. 1943, file 2, box 10, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Greider to NPS Regional

Director, 17 Feb. 1947, file 2, box 10, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Banks to Greider, 15

July 1947, file 17, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #2350, LARO.HQ.PAO; Greider to Columbia

Lumber Co., 15 July 1947, file 6, box 9, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Greider to NPS

Director, 10 June 1950, file 19, box 136, RG 079-89-004, NARA-PSR.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 11 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi11n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:26 PM]

10 Thoralf Torkelson, USBR, to Files, 14 April 1943, file 1, box 3, RG 079-89-001, NARAPSR; Claude E. Greider, NPS Recreation Planner, to F. A. Banks, USBR Supervising

Engineer, 23 April 1943, file 1, box 3, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Greider to Banks, 26

Nov. 1943, file 17, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

11 CODA, "Lease of Land to Kettle-Stevens Soil Conservation District, 9 April 1948, file

Kettle River Management Concerns, drawer 2, LARO.HQ.RMO; Robert H. Coombs, LARO

Acting Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 3 Sept. 1952, file 10, box 8, RG 079-89-

001, NARA-PSR.

12 U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Recreational Development of Lake Roosevelt: Columbia

Basin Joint Investigations, Problem 26 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office,

1945), 39-40; F. A. Gross, Colville Indian Agency Superintendent, to Claude E. Greider, NPS

Recreation Planner, 15 July 1943, file 715 Columbia Basin Project, Administration of

Recreational Areas, Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake, Boise USBR; Greider to NPS Regional

Director, 7 Sept. 1943: 3, file Copy — CODA Historical Files #2, LARO.HQ.SUP;

Memorandum of Agreement, 18 Dec. 1946, Part I.5, Part III.8, Part IV.2, file 2, box 3 of 3,

LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

13 "Digest of Minutes, Committee on Problem No. 26, Olympia," 22 May 1941: 5, 9-11, file

Columbia Basin Area — Problem No. 26 1941, box 126, RG 187, NARA-PAR; Philip W.

Kearney, NPS Landscape Architect, to Claude E. Greider, NPS Recreation Planner, 25 April

1941, file 5, box 1, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Report for Calendar Year 1944, Leases,

Licenses, and Special Use Permits, Columbia River Reservoir Area, file 2, box 10, RG 079-

89-001, NARA-PSR; Greider to F. A. Banks, USBR District Manager, 9 December 1948, file

LARO.94.3249.25, LARO.HQ.ADM; Greider to NPS Director, 12 January 1951, file 19, box

136, RG 079-89-004, NARA-PSR.

14 Claude E. Greider, NPS Recreation Planner, to [H. O.] Younkin and Miller, Spokane, 11

Oct. 1945, file 7, box 4, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Younkin to Greider, 27 Dec. 1945, file

7, box 4, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Greider to F. A. Banks, USBR Supervising Engineer,

29 Dec. 1945, file 7, box 4, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Greider to NPS Regional Director,

2 Sept. 1947, file 7, box 4, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Greider to Deer Park Pine Industry,

Inc., 4 Dec. 1947, file 7, box 4, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Greider to Banks, 11 Dec.

1947, file 7, box 4, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Lawrence C. Merriam, NPS Regional

Director, to NPS Director, 17 Nov. 1955, file L2419 Trespass: Logging and Timber 1945-58,

box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

15 "Pioneer Tugboating on Lake Roosevelt Developed by Lafferty Transportation Co.,"

Marine Digest (14 December 1946): 9-10; NPS, "Application for Special Use Permit,"

[Lafferty Transportation Company of Coeur d'Alene], file 7, box 11, RG 079-89-001,

NARA-PSR; USBR, Project History 1944, 63.

16 Bert A. Hall, USBR Acting Supervising Engineer, to USBR Commissioner, 27 Sept. 1945;

file 7, box 11, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Claude E. Greider, NPS Recreation Planner, to

A. B. Lafferty, Coeur d'Alene, Idaho, 12 March 1946, file 7, box 11, RG 079-89-001,

NARA-PSR; Greider to Lafferty, 30 April 1947, file 7, box 11, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR;

Lafferty to Greider, 25 July 1947, file 7, box 11, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Greider to

Lafferty, 8 Aug. 1947, file 7, box 11, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Greider to NPS Regional

Director, 8 Aug. 1947, file 7, box 11, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

17 Handwritten letter from Claude [Greider, LARO Supervisor,] to Herb [Maier, NPS

Regional Director], 17 Nov. [1947], file 7, box 11, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 11 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi11n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:26 PM]

18 Claude E. Greider, LARO Supervisor, to Lafferty Transportation Company, 22 Aug. 1947,

file 7, box 11, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Greider to NPS Regional Director, 22 Aug.

1947, file 7, box 11, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; A. B. Lafferty, Coeur d'Alene, Idaho, to

Greider, 26 Aug. 1947, file 7, box 11, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; A. E. Demaray, NPS

Associate Director, to Lafferty, 1 Dec. 1947, file 7, box 11, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR;

Lafferty to Demaray, 5 Jan. 1948, file 7, box 11, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Demaray to

Lafferty, 4 Feb. 1948, file 7, box 11, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Lafferty to Greider, 16

Feb. 1948, file 7, box 11, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Greider to Lafferty, 17 Feb. 1948,

file 7, box 11, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Greider to Lafferty, 11 March 1948, file 7, box

11, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Greider to NPS Regional Director, 16 March 1948, file 7,

box 11, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

19 Felix Rea, USBR Assistant Regional Counsel, prepared for F. A. Banks to answer inquiries

from Walter S. Wynhoff, 12 Oct. 1943, file Proposed Regulations CODA, drawer 5,

LARO.HQ.RMO; Claude E. Greider, NPS Recreation Planner, to W. T. Pfaffle, 30 Sept.

1946, file 7, box 4, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Greider to NPS Regional Director, 3 Nov.

1947, file 2, box 10, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

20 Claude E. Greider, NPS Recreation Planner, to John M. Haydon, 23 Oct. 1945, file 6, box

7, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; R. T. Paine, Colville Chamber of Commerce President, to

Thomas J. Allen, NPS Assistant Director, 16 May 1952, file 6, box 7, RG 079-89-001,

NARA-PSR.

21 Thomas J. Allen, NPS Assistant Director, to R. T. Paine, 2 July 1952, file 7, box 6, RG

079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Allen to NPS Regional Director, 2 July 1952, file 7, box 6 RG

079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional

Director, 23 July 1952, file 7, box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

22 Fred O. Jones, USGS, to Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, 9 Oct. 1952, file 10,

box 8, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Greider to NPS Regional Director, 6 Aug. 1952, file 7,

box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; H. G. Fowler, NPS Park Landscape Architect, to NPS

Regional Landscape Architect, 22 Aug. 1952, file 7, box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR;

Greider to NPS Regional Director, 17 Sept. 1952, file 7, box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

23 Robert H. Coombs, LARO Acting Superintendent, to USBR District Manager, 19 Dec.

1952, file 18, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Claude E. Greider, LARO

Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 12 Dec. 1952, file 7, box 6, RG 079-89-001,

NARA-PSR; Alfred C. Kuehl, NPS Regional Landscape Architect, to LARO Superintendent,

30 Jan. 1953, file 7, box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Greider to Carl Walden, Colville,

Washington, 20 April 1953, file 1, box 8, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

24 Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 20 April 1953, file 7,

box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

25 R. H. Coombs, LARO Chief Ranger, to Files, 20 Oct. 1952, file 7, box 6, RG 079-89-001,

NARA-PSR; Edward Nash, LARO Engineer, to LARO Superintendent, 7 Oct. 1952, file 1,

box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR.

26 LARO, "Basic Specifications for Home Sites, Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," [ca.

Fall 1952], file 7, box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Alfred C. Kuehl, NPS Regional

Landscape Architect, to LARO Superintendent, 30 Jan. 1953, file 7, box 6, RG 079-89-001,

NARA-PSR.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 11 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi11n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:26 PM]

27 Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 20 March 1953, file

7, box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; H. J. Allcock, NPS Engineer, to NPS Regional

Engineer, 8 April 1953, file 1, box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; [Lawrence C.] Merriam,

NPS Regional Director, teletype to NPS Director, 8 April 1953, file 7, box 6, RG 079-89-

001, NARA-PSR; [Conrad] Wirth, NPS Director, telegram to NPS Regional Director, 9 April

1953, file 7, box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent,

telegram to NPS Regional Director, 17 April 1953, file 7, box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARAPSR.

28 Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 23 April 1953, file 7,

box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; LARO, "Supporting Data to Accompany Interim

Master Plan Sheet, Drawing NRA-CD-2043, Vacation Cabin Sites, Coulee Dam NRA,"

[Spring 1953], file 7, box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Hugh Peyton, LARO

Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 21 Sept. 1954, file D18 Master Plan July 1954-

July 1956, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

29 Hugh Peyton, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 28 Jan. 1955, file D18

Master Plan July 1954-July 1956, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Lyle

E. Bennett, NPS Acting Chief, Western Office, Division of Design and Construction, to

LARO Superintendent, 20 April 1955, file D18 Master Plan July 1954-July 1956, box 3 of 3,

LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Peyton to NPS Chief, Western Office, Division of

Design and Construction, 25 April 1955, file D18 Master Plan July 1954-July 1956, box 3 of

3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Peyton to NPS Regional Director, 22 March

1957, file D18 Planning Programs 1957-59, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250,

LARO.HQ.PAO; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," FY1957: 3, 6, file A2621

Annual Reports Field Areas 1-1-57 to 12-31-57, box 3, RG 79-95-05, NARA-PSR.

30 Paul J. Moody, lease holder, to Homer W. Robinson, LARO Superintendent, 14 April

1958, file L30 SUP Moody 1958-73, box 1 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO;

Paul Lemargie, USBR Field Solicitor, to Moody, 14 May 1958, file L30 SUP Moody 1958-

73, box 1 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Mrs. Paul J. Moody, lease holder, to

President [Eisenhower], 2 June 1958, file L30 SUP Moody 1958-73, box 1 of 3, LARO #95,

Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

31 Homer W. Robinson, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 23 June 1958, file

L30 SUP Moody 1958-73, box 1 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Conrad L.

Wirth, NPS Director, to Mrs. Paul J. Moody, lease holder, July 1958, file L30 SUP Moody

1958-73, box 1 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

32 Raymond O. Mulvany, NPS Acting Regional Director, to LARO Superintendent, 7 May

1968, file L30 SUP Moody 1958-73, box 1 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

33 David A. Richie, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 14 March 1968, file

L30 SUP Moody 1958-73, box 1 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Richie to

Mrs. Paul J. Moody, lease holder, 13 May 1968, file L30 SUP Moody 1958-73, box 1 of 3,

LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Paul J. Moody, lease holder, to William Burgen,

LARO Superintendent, 1 Oct. 1973, file L30 SUP Moody 1958-73, box 1 of 3, LARO #95,

Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Jerry D. Lee, LARO District Ranger, to LARO files, 18 May

1974, file L30 SUP Moody 1958-73, box 1 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO;

Don Carney, LARO District Ranger, to Dan Farrell, LARO Land Management Specialist, 25

May 1976, file L30 SUP Moody 1958-73, box 1 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250,

LARO.HQ.PAO.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 11 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi11n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:26 PM]

34 Application for Special Use Permit, signed by Allen Spratlin for Boy Scouts of America,

Grand Coulee Dam District, 3 April 1944, file 3, box 12, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Boy

Scout Committee, Troop 79, to Claude E. Greider, LARO Superintendent, 15 Nov. 1948, file

3, box 12, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Greider to NPS Regional Director, 22 Dec. 1948,

file 3, box 12, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; O. A. Tomlinson, NPS Regional Director, to

LARO Superintendent, 20 Jan. 1949, file 3, box 12, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Greider to

NPS Regional Director, 19 Oct. 1949, file 3, box 12, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR. The first

camp, in 1944, was located in the NW 1/4 of Section 9, T28N, R31E.

35 Gertrude L. Apel, General Secretary, Council of Churches and Christian Education, to

unknown recipient, 15 April 1950, file 5, box 6, RG 079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Claude E.

Greider, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 3 May 1950, file 4, box 7, RG

079-89-001, NARA-PSR; Greider to NPS Regional Director, 7 June 1950, file 4, box 7, RG

079-89-001, NARA-PSR; handwritten memo from S.[Sanford] Hill, Regional Landscape

Architect, to Herb [Maier], Associate Regional Director, n.d., file 5, box 6, RG 079-89-001,

NARA-PSR; Greider to Rev. Vernon K. Brooks, 19 Feb. 1952, file 4, box 7, RG 079-89-001,

NARA-PSR.

36 Glenn O. Hendrix, NPS Chief of Development Planning & Project Control, SSC, to NPS

Regional Director, 10 March 1966, file D18 Master Plan 1964-1967, box 3 of 3, LARO #95,

Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Edward A. Hummer, NPS Regional Director, to NPS Director,

22 March 1966, file D18 Master Plan 1964-1967, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250,

LARO.HQ.PAO.

37 C. C. Templeton, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Executive Assistant, to LARO, 12 Aug.

1963, file 3, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Paul Lemargie, DOI Field

Solicitor, to Homer W. Robinson, LARO Superintendent, 24 Sept. 1963, file 3, box 3 of 3,

LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; CEG [Claude E. Greider, NPS Recreation Planner,]

to L. S. Osborne, Spokane, 26 April 1943, file 17, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250,

LARO.HQ.PAO; Howard H. Chapman, LARO Superintendent, to Ford S. Barrett, Attorney,

14 Sept. 1967, file A44, LARO.HQ.ADM.

38 Press release, "New Regulations on Cabin Site Permits Approved," 9 June 1967, file

Interior Dept. — National Park Service, box 252, May Coll., WSU.

39 LARO, Briefing Statement, Special Use Permit Guidelines, prepared for Senator Slade

Gorton, 27 July 1989, file Cong. Corr. notebook, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Summary of meeting

held at Colville, Washington, April 13, 1977, for the purpose of presenting new fee schedule

for Vacation Cabin Site leases," file Kettle Falls Letters, box 1 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250,

LARO.HQ.PAO; William W. Dunmire, LARO Superintendent, to cabin permittees, 20 April

1977, file L30 Land Use, LARO.HQ.ADM.

40 USBR, Project History 1977, 14; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1977: 1,

file H2621 Annual Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM.

41 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," FY1957: 4, file A2621 Annual Reports Field

Areas 1-1-57 to 12-31-57, box 3, RG 79-95-05, NARA-PSR; Homer W. Robinson, LARO

Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 23 June 1958, file L30 SUP: Moody 1958-73, box

1 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA,"

CY1972: 7, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM.

42 Donald W. Carney, Kettle Falls District Ranger, to LARO Lands Specialist, 19 July 1974,
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 11 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi11n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:26 PM]

file Land Management Planning Folder, LARO.HQ.PAO.

43 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1974: 10, file A2621 Superintendent's

Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1976: 14,

file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Report, LARO.HQ.ADM.

44 Gary J. Kuiper, retired LARO Superintendent, interview with Nancy F. Renk, 10 Dec.

1999, Tape 1-A, tape and index on file, LARO.HQ.

45 Charles V. Janda, LARO Chief Ranger, to LARO Superintendent, 19 Jan. 1982, file L30

Land Use, LARO.HQ.ADM.

46 U.S. Department of the Interior, "Resources Management Plan and Environmental

Assessment: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area," 1982: 10, file D18 General

Management Plan, box 1 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.ADM.

47 Ibid., 2, 9-12.

48 LARO, "Encroachment Plan," ca. March 1982: 1-3, file LARO.94.3249.26,

LARO.HQ.ADM.

49 Kelly Cash, former LARO Assistant Superintendent, personal communication to Nancy F.

Renk, 1 June 2000.

50 L. Mac Foreman, LARO Land Management Specialist, to LARO Files, 17 Jan. 1986, file

L30 Vacation Cabin Site Correspondence, LARO.HQ.ADM.

51 LARO Land Management Specialist to LARO Superintendent, 14 July 1987, approved 15

July 1987, file A3615 Service and Personnel 1987, LARO.HQ.ADM.

52 NPS, "Special Park Uses Guideline NPS-53," Aug. 1986: 3.1-3.3, 5.1, 5.6, Appendix 2.1.

LARO Chief Ranger Darrell Cook was the primary person working on the field level to clear

up trespasses (Kelly Cash, former LARO Assistant Superintendent, personal communication

to Nancy F. Renk, 1 March 2001).

53 John W. Keyes, [sic] III, USBR Regional Director, to William J. Briggle, NPS Regional

Director, 16 Dec. 1986, file 13, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; William

J. Briggle, NPS Acting Regional Director, to John Keys, USBR Regional Director, 20 March

1987, file 715 Columbia Basin Project, Administration of Recreational Areas, National Park

Service, Boise USBR; Kelly Cash, former LARO Assistant Superintendent, personal

communication to Nancy F. Renk, 1 June 2000.

54 John W. Keys, III, USBR Assistant Regional Director, to USBR Project Manager, 1 April

1986, file 715 Columbia Basin Project, Administration of Recreational Areas, Franklin D.

Roosevelt Lake, Boise USBR; Charles H. Odegaard, NPS Regional Director, to Keys, 30 July

1987, file 715 Columbia Basin Project, Administration of Recreational Areas, National Park

Service, Boise USBR; Gordon D. Boyd, LARO Chief of Interpretation &Resources

Management, to LARO Superintendent, 17 Feb. 1988, file F5419 Fees and Revenues 1987-

88, LARO.HQ.ADM.

55 Charles H. Odegaard, NPS Regional Director, to Jack Tenter, Save Our Shoreline, 21 July

1989, file Special Park Use Management Plan 1989-1992, LARO.HQ.ADM; LARO, Briefing
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 11 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi11n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:26 PM]

Statement, Draft Special Use Permit Policy, n.d., file A26 Briefing Statements,

LARO.HQ.CIO; LARO, Briefing Statement, Special Use Permit Guidelines, prepared for

Senator Slade Gorton, 27 July 1989, file Cong. Corr. notebook, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Coulee

Dam NRA, Chronological Events," attached to letter from Charles H. Odegaard, NPS

Regional Director, to Thomas S. Foley, U.S. House of Representatives, 13 Feb. 1991, file

L30 Land Use 1/92 — 6/92, LARO.HQ.ADM. George Phillips, LARO Management

Assistant, did a great deal of the staff work for the Special Park Use Management Plan

(Kelly Cash, former LARO Assistant Superintendent, personal communication to Nancy F.

Renk, 1 March 2001).

56 LARO, Special Park Use Management Plan: Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, 30

Aug. 1990: 1-3.

57 Ibid., 3-4, 6-7, 11, 13; Kelly Cash, former LARO Assistant Superintendent, personal

communication to Nancy F. Renk, 1 June 2000.

58 LARO, Special Park Use Management Plan, 6, 9; Richard L. Winters, LARO Acting

Superintendent, to Keith R. Green, Lake Roosevelt Property Association President, 12 April

1996, file LARO.94.3249.24, LARO.HQ.ADM.

59 LARO, Special Park Use Management Plan, 3

60 Ibid., 17, Appendix 1.1-1.3, Appendix 2.4-2.5, Appendix 8.11; Kelly Cash, former LARO

Assistant Superintendent, personal communication to Nancy F. Renk, 1 June 2000.

61 LARO, Special Park Use Management Plan, 15, Appendix 9.12; Roberta Miller, LARO

Program Assistant, email to Nancy F. Renk, 21 March 2000.

62 Kelly K. Cash, LARO Assistant Superintendent, to Riverview Area Association, 7 May

1986, file L30 Vacation Cabin Site Correspondence, LARO.HQ.ADM; Gary J. Kuiper,

LARO Superintendent, to Riverview Area Association, 5 June 1986, file L30 Vacation Cabin

Site Correspondence, LARO.HQ.ADM; Chester Timm, Riverview Area Association, to

Kuiper, 6 June 1986, file L30 Vacation Cabin Site Correspondence, LARO.HQ.ADM; Kuiper

to Riverview Area Association, 9 June 1986, file L30 Vacation Cabin Site Correspondence,

LARO.HQ.ADM; William J. Briggle, NPS Acting Regional Director, to Stan Albright, NPS

Assistant Director, 23 Oct. 1986, file A3615 Service and Personnel 1987, LARO.HQ.ADM;

Robert H. Lamp, Witherspoon, Kelley, Davenport & Toole, to William Penn Mott, Jr., NPS

Director, 15 June 1987, file A3615 Service and Personnel 1987, LARO.HQ.ADM; Mott to

Lamp, 30 July 1987, file A3615 Service and Personnel 1987, LARO.HQ.ADM; Kelly Cash,

former LARO Assistant Superintendent, personal communication to Nancy F. Renk, 1 June

2000.

63 Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, Including Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake, Annual

Safety and Management Review, August 9, 10, and 11, 1988, file 715 Columbia Basin

Project — Administration of Recreation Areas — National Park Service, Boise USBR;

LARO, Briefing Statement, Trespasses — CODA, 6 Nov. 1989, Briefing Statements

notebook, LARO.HQ.ADM.

64 Harlan F. Hobbs, NPS Regional Chief of Division of Lands, to NPS Deputy Regional

Director, 19 June 1989, file L30 Land Use 1989, LARO.HQ.ADM.

65 William W. Dunmire, LARO Superintendent, to Stevens County Planning Commission, 14

March 1977, file L30 Land Use, LARO.HQ.ADM; John Haller, LARO Coulee Dam District
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 11 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi11n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:26 PM]

Ranger, to Terry D. Goodman, Lincoln County Planner, 31 Aug. 1984, file L32 Public Land,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Gary J. Kuiper, LARO Superintendent, to Bob Garringer, Colville, 1 Dec.

1983, file L30 Real Estate Ads and Corres. 1983-1990, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250,

LARO.HQ.PAO; Kuiper to Jack Hall, Spokane, 18 April 1988, file L30 Real Estate Ads and

Corres. 1983-1990, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

66 USBR and NPS, "Lake Roosevelt Trespass Action Plan," March 1990 draft, file L24

Encroachments, LARO.HQ.ADM; Interagency Agreement for a Trespass Management Plan,

Agreement No. 1-AA-10-12370, 15 April 1991, file Cooperative Interagency Agreements,

drawer 1, LARO.HQ.RMO; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1992: 12, file

A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual

Report, CODA," CY1993: 17, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-,

LARO.HQ.ADM.

67 Gary J. Kuiper, LARO Superintendent, to Michael J. Malone, Seattle, 15 Sept. 1987, file

L24 (M. Malone), LARO.HQ.ADM; Kuiper to Malone, 2 Nov. 1987, file L24 (M. Malone),

LARO.HQ.ADM; Kuiper to John E. Lamp, U.S. Attorney's Office, 9 Nov. 1987, file L24 (M.

Malone), LARO.HQ.ADM; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1987: 8, file

H2621 Annual Reports, LARO.HQ.ADM; John W. Hempelmann, Cairncross, Ragen &

Hempelmann, to Thomas S. Foley, U.S. House of Representatives, 22 July 1988, file 100th

Cong./Dept. Files/Dept. of Interior — National Park Service, Part 2, box 277, Foley Coll.,

WSU; Lamp to Tom Teaford, LARO Ranger, 27 June 1989, file CI#870298, Issues drawer,

LARO.HQ.CRO; United States of America vs. Michael J. Malone, Agreement for Pre-Trial

Diversion, signed 5 March 1992, file CI#870298, Issues drawer, LARO.HQ.CRO; Darrell J.

Cook, LARO Acting Superintendent, to Malone, 23 Dec. 1992, file CI#870298, Issues

drawer, LARO.HQ.CRO.

68 Darrell J. Cook, LARO Chief of Operations, to NPS Associate Regional Director, 16 Nov.

1992, file F14 Advances/Transfers of Funds within the Service, LARO.HQ.ADM; Gary J.

Kuiper, LARO Superintendent, to Deputy Regional Director, 30 Dec. 1992, file L30 Land

Use 7/1/92 — 12/31/92, LARO.HQ.ADM; LARO, Briefing Statement — Unauthorized

Facilities, 25 Feb. 1993, Briefing Statements Notebook, LARO.HQ.ADM; William D. Back,

DOI Acting Regional Solicitor, to James B. Crum, Assistant U.S. Attorney, 2 May 1994, file

W34 Law Enforcement 1993-94, LARO.HQ.ADM.

69 Lake Roosevelt Management Review, Congressional Staff, 2 April 1991, file

Congressional Info/Committee Designation, drawer 1, LARO.HQ.RMO; NPS, Lake

Roosevelt Boat Trip, 2 April 1991, file Congressional Info/Committee Designation, drawer 1,

LARO.HQ.RMO; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1991: 2, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; Kuiper interview, Tape 1-B.

70 Sid Buckley, Kettle Falls Lions Club President, to Tom Foley, U.S. House of

Representatives, 2 March 1987, file 100th Cong./Dept. Files/Dept. of Interior — National

Park Service, Part 1, box 277, Foley Coll., WSU; Board of Directors, Lake Roosevelt

Property Owners Association, to Editor, Davenport Times, 29 Nov. 1990; Gary J. Kuiper,

LARO Superintendent, to Rowena McIntosh, Kettle Falls, 21 April 1987, file A3615 Service

and Personnel, LARO.HQ.ADM; Don Phillips, Lake Roosevelt Property Owners Association

President, to Foley, 14 Feb. 1991, file 102d Cong. — Dept. Files — Interior — Nat'l. Park

Service, box 288, Foley Coll., WSU; Patrick A. Barker, Lake Roosevelt Permittees

Association, to Kuiper, 16 July 1991, file L30 Vacation Cabin Site Correspondence,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Kelly K. Cash, LARO Acting Superintendent, to Barker, 23 Aug. 1991,

file L30 Vacation Cabin Site Correspondence, LARO.HQ.ADM.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 11 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi11n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:26 PM]

71 Steve Castro-Shrader to Gordon [D. Boyd, LARO Chief Ranger], Gary [Kuiper, LARO

Superintendent], George [S. Phillips, LARO Ranger], 13 July 1987, file SUP Memos and

Corres. 1987-89, box 3 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO; Rich Landers, "Lake

Roosevelt: The discovery has been made," Spokesman-Review, 16 April 1989; Jack Tenter,

Save Our Shoreline President, 24 June 1989, file Special Park Use Management Plan 1989-

1992, LARO.HQ.ADM; Gary N. Fields, Winchester Gold Corp., to Thomas S. Foley, U.S.

House of Representatives, 18 April 1990, Cong. Corr. notebook, LARO.HQ.ADM; Tenter to

Slade Gorton, U.S. Senate, 12 May 1992, Cong. Corr. notebook, LARO.HQ.ADM.

72 Donald H. Seeborg, San Poil Bay Improvement Association, to Steve Clark, USBR Project

Manager, 6 Aug. 1991, file L30 Land Use 7/1/92 — 12/31/92, LARO.HQ.ADM; Clark to

Seeborg, 21 Aug. 1991, file L30 Land Use 7/1/92 — 12/31/92, LARO.HQ.ADM; Yvonne

Passmore, Parks Service Director, CCT Parks and Recreation Department, to Seeborg, 14

April 1992, file L30 Land Use 7/1/92 — 12/31/92, LARO.HQ.ADM; Seeborg to John Smith,

CCT Physical Resources Director, 7 May 1992, file L30 Land Use 7/1/92 — 12/31/92,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Passmore to Seeborg, 8 June 1992, file L30 Land Use 7/1/92 — 12/31/92,

LARO.HQ.ADM.

73 LARO, Briefing Statement, Grazing, May 1991, file Grazing Info., drawer 2,

LARO.HQ.RMO; George Phillips, LARO Management Assistant, to LARO Files, 2 Oct.

1991, file L30 Land Use 7-12, 1991, LARO.HQ.ADM; "Notes, Meeting 8-2-91, Kettle Falls,

Wa., Park Service and Cattlemen," file Grazing Info., drawer 2, LARO.HQ.RMO; Charles H.

Odegaard, NPS Regional Director, to Donald E. Horton, Deer Park, Washington, 25 Oct.

1991, file LARO.3252.96.5, LARO.HQ.RMO; Gary J. Kuiper, LARO Superintendent, to

Slade Gorton, U.S. Senate, 1 May 1992, Cong. Corr. notebook, LARO.HQ.ADM; Vaughn

Baker, personal communication to Nancy F. Renk, 1 March 2001.

74 Untitled document, [ca. Nov. 1996], file Grazing Info., drawer 2, LARO.HQ.RMO;

LARO, Briefing Statement, Livestock Grazing, [ca. 1996], and attachment: Questions and

Answers to Superintendent message 12/17/96, with answers by Gig LeBret, Gifford

Subdistrict Ranger, file Grazing Info., drawer 2, LARO.HQ.RMO.

75 Vaughn Baker, LARO Superintendent, form letter, 12 Feb. 1997, file Grazing Info., drawer

2, LARO.HQ.RMO; C. Ronald Rosenberg, Grazing Permittee, to Baker, 18 Feb. 1997, file

Grazing Info., drawer 2, LARO.HQ.RMO.

76 LARO Grazing/Ag Options, 15 Jan. 1998, revised draft, file Grazing Info., drawer 2,

LARO.HQ.RMO; Vaughn Baker, LARO Superintendent, to Planning Partners, Lake

Roosevelt NRA GMP, 27 Feb. 1998, file Grazing — AUM's, drawer 2, LARO.FS.1107;

Vaughn Baker, personal communication to Nancy F. Renk, 1 March 2001.

77 FY2000 Appropriations Committees Directive, Conference Committee Report H.R. 106-

479, Congressional Record — House, 17 Nov. 1999, H12367, H12373.

78 "NPS raises rent on scout camp, continuance remains in doubt," Wilbur Register, 17 Oct.

1991; Terry J. Engelson, Wilbur, Washington, to Thomas Foley, U.S. House of

Representatives, 31 Jan. 1992, file L30 Land Use 1/92 — 6/92, LARO.HQ.ADM.

79 Terry J. Engelson, Wilbur, Washington, to Thomas Foley, U.S. House of Representatives,

31 Jan. 1992, file L30 Land Use 1/92 — 6/92, LARO.HQ.ADM; Gary J. Kuiper, LARO

Superintendent, to Foley, 6 Feb. 1992, file L30 Land Use 1/92 — 6/92, LARO.HQ.ADM;

LARO, Briefing Statement, Camp Hellgate Boy Scout Camp, 9 March 1992, Briefing
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 11 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi11n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:26 PM]

Statements notebook, LARO.HQ.ADM; Memorandum of Agreement between National Park

Service and Hellgate Youth Camp (Under Authority of the Wilbur Amateur Athletic

Association), MA# 9260-3-9001, 11 June 1993, lands files, LARO.HQ.PAO.

80 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," CY1991: 1, file A2621 Superintendent's

Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; Memorandum of Agreement Between National

Park Service and Camp Na-Bor-Lee Association, Agreement No. 1443MA926079001, 8 May

1997, lands files, LARO.HQ.PAO.

81 Gary J. Kuiper, LARO Superintendent, to NPS Regional Director, 25 Aug. 1987, file L30

Land Use — Special Use Permits 1987-, LARO.HQ.ADM; Kuiper to NPS Regional Director,

10 Oct. 1990, L30 Land Use 8-12, 1990, LARO.HQ.ADM; LARO, Special Park Use

Management Plan, Appendix 8.11; Vaughn Baker, LARO Superintendent, personal

communication to Nancy F. Renk, 1 June 2000.

82 Gary J. Kuiper, LARO Superintendent, "Removal of Docks, Near Riverwood

Subdivision," 11 Oct. 1985, file A3615 Service and Personnel, LARO.HQ.ADM; Chris

Cowbrough and Diane Besand, "Rickey Point residents ‘burned' by Park Service," Colville

Statesman-Examiner, 18 June 1986; Kelly K. Cash, LARO Assistant Superintendent, to

Thomas S. Foley, U.S. House of Representatives, 20 Aug. 1986, Cong. Corr. notebook,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Cash, Call/Visitor Record, 21 Oct. 1985, file Riverwood Subdivision —

1985 — Unauthorized Boat Docks, box 1 of 3 ?, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO.

83 Chris Cowbrough and Diane Besand, "Rickey Point residents ‘burned' by Park Service,"

Colville Statesman-Examiner, 18 June 1986; Kelly K. Cash, LARO Assistant Superintendent,

to Thomas S. Foley, U.S. House of Representatives, 20 Aug. 1986, Cong. Corr. notebook,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Kuiper interview, Tape 1-B.

84 Chris Cowbrough and Diane Besand, "Rickey Point residents ‘burned' by Park Service,"

Colville Statesman-Examiner, 18 June 1986; Robert D. Appling to LARO Superintendent, 8

July 1986, file Kettle Falls Letters, box 1 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO;

Diane Besand, "Rickey Point dilemma continues," Colville Statesman-Examiner, 30 July

1986.

85 Kelly K. Cash, LARO Assistant Superintendent, to LARO District Rangers, Maintenance

Mechanic Foremen, Land Management Specialist, Chief Ranger, and Administrative Officer,

15 Aug. 1986, file Kettle Falls Letters, box 1 of 3, LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO;

Cash to Thomas S. Foley, U.S. House of Representatives, 20 Aug. 1986, Cong. Corr.

notebook, LARO.HQ.ADM.

86 Don Phillips, Lake Roosevelt Property Owners Association Chairman, to Bill Briggle, NPS

Deputy Regional Director, 24 Feb. 1991, file Special Park Use Management Plan 1989-1992,

LARO.HQ.ADM.

87 Draft letter from William Briggle, NPS Regional Director, to Don Phillips, Lake Roosevelt

Property Owners Association Chairman, 1 March 1991, file Special Park Use Management

Plan 1989-1992, LARO.HQ.ADM.

88 "Gorton Encourages Community Involvement in Lake Roosevelt Planning Process," press

release from Slade Gorton, 13 March 1992.

89 Slade Gorton, U.S. Senate, to Charles Odegaard, NPS Regional Director, 9 July 1991, file

Grazing Info., drawer 2, LARO.HQ.RMO; "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA,"
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 11 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi11n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:26 PM]

CY1992: 1-2, file A2621 Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; Julie

Titone, "Gorton fights agency over docks, ranching in Coulee Dam area," SpokesmanReview, 3 April 1992.

90 Gerald W. Tays, former LARO Superintendent, interview with Nancy F. Renk, 20 July

2000, Tape 2-B, tape and index on file LARO.HQ.

91 Ibid., Tape 1-A.

92 "Superintendent's Annual Report, CODA," Jan. 1994-Sept. 1995: 4, file A2621

Superintendent's Annual Reports, 1990-, LARO.HQ.ADM; Jim Pritchard, Lake Roosevelt

Property Owners Association President, to members, June 1995, file L30 Lands 1/95 — 6/95,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Gerald W. Tays, LARO Superintendent, to members of Lake Roosevelt

Coordinating Committee, 2 Aug. 1995, file Multi-Party Agreement April 1990,

LARO.HQ.ADM.

93 Lake Roosevelt Council of Governments to Bruce Babbitt, Secretary of the Interior, and

Roger Kennedy, NPS Director, 22 March 1996, file Lake Roosevelt, Grant County

Commissioners' Office, Ephrata, Washington; William C. Walters, NPS Deputy Field

Director, to Lake Roosevelt Council of Governments, 5 April 1996, Congressional Corr. Log

1996 — Notebook, LARO.HQ.ADM.

94 "Counties want a say in lake matters," Davenport Times, 4 July 1996.

95 Ted Hopkins, Lake Roosevelt Council of Governments, to members, 10 April 1996, file

Lake Roosevelt, Grant County Commissioners' Office, Ephrata, Washington; "Letter

campaign initiated," Davenport Times, 4 Nov. 1996.

96 LARO, "General Management Plan Update," 23 Oct. 1996, file Lake Roosevelt, Grant

County Commissioners' Office, Ephrata, Washington; Vaughn Baker, LARO Superintendent,

to Grant County Commissioners, 24 Oct. 1996, file Lake Roosevelt, Grant County

Commissioners' Office; Vaughn Baker, LARO Superintendent, interview with Nancy F.

Renk, 9 Dec. 1999, Tape 1-A, tape and index on file, LARO.HQ.

97 Gil Goodrich, LARO Chief Ranger, to owners, 29 Jan. 1997, file L30 Lands 1/97-,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Linnwood D. Sampson, Goss, Hipperson & Sampson, to Ted Hopkins,

Lincoln County Commissioner, 24 March 1997, file Lake Roosevelt, Grant County

Commissioners' Office; Ted [Hopkins] to Stevens County Commissioners, Ferry County

Commissioners, Okanogan County Commissioners, Grant County Commissioners, Lincoln

County Commissioners, and Spokane Tribe of Indians, 27 March 1997, file Lake Roosevelt,

Grant County Commissioners' Office, Ephrata, Washington.

98 Lake Roosevelt Property Owners News, v. 97.2 (June 1997): 2, 4, file Lake Roosevelt,

Grant County Commissioners' Office, Ephrata, Washington.

99 E. G. Torrison, Spokane, to Sid Morrison, U.S. House of Representatives, 21 May 1991,

file Environment — Misc. - Lake Roosevelt, box 72, Morrison Coll., WSU; Lake Roosevelt

Council of Governments, Statement to LRCOG [Lake Roosevelt Council of Governments] by

Linnwood Sampson, Re: National Park Service and Lake Roosevelt, 13 March 1997, file

Lake Roosevelt, Grant County Commissioners' Office, Ephrata, Washington.

100 Kristi Streiffert, "Boater access plan is praised," Wenatchee World, 24 March 1998;
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 11 Endnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi11n.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:26 PM]

LARO, "Draft, General Management Plan/Environmental Impact Statement," Sept. 1998: iii,

3, 28-30; LARO, Briefing Paper, Community Access Points for Lake Roosevelt National

Recreation Area, 15 May 1998, Briefing Statements notebook, LARO.HQ.ADM.

101 Gary J. Kuiper, LARO Superintendent, to Ray Burge, Grand Coulee Dam Yacht Club

Commodore, 24 Aug. 1981, file LARO.94.3249.22, LARO.HQ.ADM; Merv Schmidt, Grand

Coulee Dam Yacht Club Commodore, to Kuiper, 30 Nov. 1990, file Environment — Misc.

— Lake Roosevelt, box 72, Morrison Coll., WSU; draft letter to Frank Thomas, Grand

Coulee Dam Yacht Club Commodore, 19 Jan. 1992, Cong. Corr. notebook,

LARO.HQ.ADM; Thomas to Manuel Lujan, Secretary of the Interior, 3 Jan. 1992, Cong.

Corr. notebook, LARO.HQ.ADM; Don L. Francis, Grand Coulee Dam Yacht Club

Commodore, to Joyce N. Fleischman, DOI Deputy Inspector General, 27 March 1996,

Congressional Corr. Log 1996 — Notebook, LARO.HQ.ADM; Kristi Streiffert, "Boater

access plan is praised," Wenatchee World, 24 March 1998.

102 Torrison v. Baker et al., No. CS-97-285-FVS, United States District Court, Eastern

District of Washington, 27 Sept. 2000: 6-7. For the full text of the decision, see Appendix F.

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

laro/adhi/adhi11n.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 11)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi11a.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:28 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 11:

Regaining Ground: Leases and Special Use

Permits (continued)

Early Permits for Agriculture, Industry, and Transportation

Within a few years after the establishment of LARO, livestock posed a considerable trespass

problem for federal land managers. Large areas between the high water level and the 1,310

line had grasses suitable for grazing, attractive to cattle on adjoining lands. It was also

attractive to the ranchers and farmers who viewed the vacant, unfenced land as available for

free use. Reclamation and the Park Service discussed ways to deal with the problem,

including increased patrols, asking county commissioners to establish herd districts, and

securing public cooperation through education. Initially, LARO was reluctant to consider

opening these lands for grazing since much of the shore land was already overgrazed by

cattle. After consideration, however, Greider concluded that grazing could be allowed below

the 1,310 line in certain areas, with the stipulation that the tracts be fenced to prevent animals

from wandering onto adjacent government land. He believed that containing the livestock

would enable LARO to control both overgrazing and noxious weeds. Greider also suggested

that some of the best agricultural lands along the shore could be leased for gardens. [10]

Farm bordering LARO, 1957. Photo courtesy of National Park

Service, Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area (LARO.FS).

LARO considered the bottomland along the Kettle River as "an extreme public nuisance" at
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 11)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi11a.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:28 PM]

the time the agency took over administration. The unfenced area was overgrazed and infested

with noxious weeds, causing neighboring farmers to complain. Individual leases did not seem

feasible, so the Park Service signed a long-term lease for seventeen hundred acres in January

1948 with the Kettle-Stevens Soil Conservation District, which then subleased the land to the

Kettle River Grazing Association. After the Soil Conservation Service drew up rehabilitation

plans, farmers undertook the work of fencing and building up the land with legume crops.

The Park Service charged just a token fee for the first four years to encourage the work, then

began charging in 1952 at the rate of fifty-five cents per animal per month for grazing. By

that time, the Park Service believed the program to be a success for both the government and

for the lessees. "It is enabling the National Park Service to maintain a normal farm picture

along the Kettle River at a minimum cost to the government, and places the area under close

administrative control," wrote LARO's Chief Ranger. The lease ran through 1957 and then

was renewable on an annual basis for another ten years. [11]

The OIA was particularly concerned with keeping open options for industrial and agricultural

uses of lands in the Indian Zones. The agency knew the abundant timber on the reservations

provided a source of revenue for the tribes, supplying area mills with an annual cut of at least

thirty-five million feet. Because the tribes depended on this income, OIA insisted that

recreation planning at Lake Roosevelt not interfere with the development of the timber

industry on the reservations, including log dumps, transportation of logs and lumber on the

lake, and milling beside the lake. When the Park Service tried to shut down a log dump at

Sanpoil Bay in 1943 due to its location at a proposed recreation site, OIA was quick to

disagree. The two agencies sparred over this site but resolved the general issue three years

later when the Tri-Party Agreement gave OIA responsibility for permitting log dumps in the

Indian Zones at sites selected in consultation with the Park Service. Livestock grazing also

was important to the tribes and formed a major use of shore lands adjoining the reservations.

[12]

Sawmill at the South Marina site, November 1956. This was one of

several sawmills that were granted permits to operate along Lake

Roosevelt. Photo courtesy of National Park Service, Harpers Ferry

Center (HFC WASO-B-343).
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 11)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi11a.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:28 PM]

The Park Service kept industrial needs in mind when formulating early plans for the

development of Lake Roosevelt. Kearney identified three areas for concentration of industrial

uses: from Spring Canyon to Plum, the mouth of Hawk Creek, and the original townsite of

Kettle Falls. He also suggested that industries would want to use water transportation for both

raw materials and finished products. Lincoln Lumber Company already operated a mill at

Hawk Creek in 1941, and within three years there were three more mills running beside the

lake. The lumber industry boomed after the end of World War II, and the forests around Lake

Roosevelt were harvested heavily. There were twenty-seven permitted logging uses in 1948,

and by 1951 demand was so high that some dumps had to serve two operators. [13]

While the Park Service was willing to grant permits for industrial use of federal lands, the

agency also had to deal with the resulting downside of permits — encroachments and

trespasses. The post-war increase in logging brought problems of trespassing on government

lands at LARO, an issue that has plagued land managers since. The OIA told the Park Service

of timber trespass at Cedonia, Fall Creek, and other locations in the fall of 1945, where

loggers evidently had ignored the need for a permit and cleared the reservoir shore for use as

landings. By December the loggers sent a check for $98.20 to the Park Service to cover

19,640 feet of pine logs taken, valued at $5 per thousand board feet. Two years later,

Superintendent Greider ruled that a Deer Park lumber company's cutting of 65,000 board feet

on recreation area lands appeared to be accidental, based on an error in running the boundary

line, and he assessed the company $295. When the same company trespassed again in 1955,

the Park Service recommended a fine of double the stumpage rate. [14]

The long body of calm water formed by Grand Coulee Dam offered opportunities for

transportation, with tugboats and barges providing a convenient means of moving logs and

lumber for the growing timber industry. One of the first to enter this market was Albert "Cap"

Lafferty, an experienced operator who had been running tugs on Lake Coeur d'Alene in

Idaho since 1918. He was quick to see the potential at the new Columbia River Reservoir and

received his certification from the Interstate Commerce Commission in August 1941. After

the Great Northern Railway agreed to extend its line to the lakeshore at Kettle Falls, Lafferty

established his headquarters there. The Park Service gave him a special use permit in

November 1943 to build barges at a site on the south bank of the Spokane River. The

following year, Reclamation signed leases with Lafferty for a spur track at the Kettle Falls

bridge as well as a tugboat terminal near Lincoln Lumber Company. [15]

Problems arose within a few years. Although both Reclamation and the Park Service

approved Lafferty's request in 1945 to build employee housing at the terminal in Kettle Falls,

by April 1947 Greider told Lafferty that he would have to remove the temporary housing,

contending that LARO had approved neither the location nor the sub-standard construction.

Lafferty agreed to comply with Park Service regulations, but Greider was unimpressed. "By

his evasive actions over a long period, we feel he has no intention of complying," Greider

wrote. "His promise of cooperation . . . is empty of any sincerity." Evidently the Park Service

had been watching Lafferty's lease for some time but did not want to make an issue of it until

the agency gained full jurisdiction over the recreation area. Once this happened, Greider

moved to resolve it speedily, hoping to demonstrate to others that the Park Service had the

courage to enforce its lease provisions. [16]

The issue was not resolved quickly, however. After receiving no response from Lafferty,

Greider cancelled the lease in August 1947. At that time, the tug company had not only

retained the three shacks that the Park Service found objectionable but had also added a

fourth building plus a six-hundred-foot access road across federal land. Lafferty complained

that LARO was "very abrupt" with its cancellation and was not taking into account the dismal

economic climate that limited his ability to develop his business properly. He asked for a

continuation of the lease. Through inaction, the office of the National Park Service Director
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 11)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi11a.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:28 PM]

effectively granted an extension, causing Greider to complain three months later that the

delay was "developing into an acute situation" for LARO, and he asked the regional office to

intervene. Greider was feeling under siege at this time, hampered by lack of funding for the

recreation area yet pushed by local residents who wanted immediate development. Lafferty's

lease was one more stress he did not need. "Possibly age and fiscal uncertainties are finally

making me edgy," Greider confided to Regional Director Herb Maier. He continued:

Unloading lumber from barge at Lafferty Transportation Company

docks at Kettle Falls, 1955. Photo courtesy of National Park Service,

Harpers Ferry Center (HFC WASO-B-350).

But delays of so many different kinds with relation to this area have created an

explosive condition with relation to the public. Any one of a number of fuses

might touch off the works if the match is applied. One way to forestall this is to

keep a tight check rain [sic] on uncooperative elements by demonstrating

efficient operation — such as it is. [17]

Lafferty appealed the final cancellation of his lease in January 1948 and was told he would

have to reapply to Greider for a new lease. Instead, after various discussions, LARO

bypassed Lafferty and leased the land to the Great Northern Railway, which then subleased

to the tug operations. Greider was relieved: "I feel that the Great Northern can handle Mr.

Lafferty just as effectively as we can with much less controversy." [18]

A number of individuals applied to LARO for permits to install water pumps, for both

domestic use and irrigation. In addition to the Park Service permit, they also had to get a

permit from the state for the amount of water to be withdrawn. Some installed pumps in

trespass and when caught, they were encouraged to get the proper permits. Greider assured

one such violator that LARO was "anxious to cooperate with any individual desiring to make

proper use of Coulee Dam Recreational Area." Permits could be approved quickly if their

locations did not interfere with planned recreational use. By 1947, however, Greider began to

have concerns about future impacts from these leases. Although there were only nine permits

or leases for pumps at that time, he foresaw potential problems if people claimed that a state

permit gave them a right to use federal land. LARO continued to issue these permits,

however, and water withdrawal systems have caused few problems for LARO over the years.

They remain one of the few special uses still allowed at the park. [19]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 11)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi11a.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:28 PM]

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

laro/adhi/adhi11a.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 1)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi1c.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:30 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 1:

When Rivers Ran Free (continued)

The Secretary of War turned the abandoned post over to the Secretary of the Interior for an

Indian School on August 28, 1899. At that time, the federal government had been funding

Indian schools for nearly eighty years. A new off-reservation industrial school at Carlisle,

Pennsylvania, opened in 1879 and soon became the model for Indian boarding schools. The

philosophy moderated ten years later, with increased emphasis on day schools for younger

children, boarding schools for intermediate students, and off-reservation industrial schools to

carry students through the eighth grade. [31]

The Indian Service saw the abandoned buildings at Fort Spokane as a good site for a

boarding school to supplement the day school at Nespelem. The school opened on April 2,

1900, serving up to two hundred Indian children. The underlying philosophy of all Indian

schools was the destruction of Indian culture, which, it was believed, would lead to

assimilation into American culture. The children at the Fort Spokane school attended classes

only half a day, with the remainder of each day devoted to vocational training. The boys

practiced farm skills, such as feeding chickens, milking cows, or working in the garden. The

girls, on the other hand, learned domestic work such as cooking, laundry, ironing, and

making beds in the dormitory. Children who ran away were returned to the school where they

spent time in the former military guardhouse as punishment. Enrollment dropped and

expenses increased, causing the school to close in 1908. A hospital that followed the school

specialized in treating respiratory diseases in children from reservations throughout the West.

Again, rising costs forced its closure after just two years. Another hospital operated there

from 1918 until 1929, when the facilities were closed permanently. [32]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 1)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi1c.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:30 PM]

Group of girls who were students at the Indian School at Fort

Spokane, ca. 1903. Photo courtesy of National Park Service, Lake

Roosevelt National Recreation Area (LARO 3016).

The displacement of Indians continued as more non-native people settled permanently in

northeastern Washington. Interest in the mining and agricultural potential of the Colville

Reservation led to the cession of the north half in 1891, a move bitterly opposed by Sanpoil

and Nespelem tribal members. This agreement allowed 1.5 million acres to return to the

public domain for eventual settlement by non-Indians. The north half of the Colville

Reservation was opened to mineral entry in 1896, followed two years later by the opening of

the south half. This gave non-natives claims on even more Indian land. The final blow came

with the allotment of both the Colville and Spokane reservations in the early 1900s. Such

division of reservation lands was guided by the General Allotment (Dawes) Act of 1887,

under the premise that encouraging farming on individual allotment parcels within the

reservations would help break the traditional social order and hasten assimilation. After each

family head was given 160 acres and other individuals lesser amounts, the remainder of the

reservation was thrown open to settlement by non-Indians. Indians on both reservations took

allotments along the rivers wherever there was flat land. This caused a local newspaper to

complain in 1914, "The Indians have taken the cream of the reservation. Their allotments

cover practically all of the valleys along the streams, including the rich irrigable lands along

the west bank of the Columbia." The Spokane Reservation was opened for homesteaders in

1909 and the following year for mineral entry. Settlers began claiming Colville Reservation

lands in 1916. [33]

Indian hospital in former bachelor officers' quarters, Fort Spokane,

1920s. Photo courtesy of National Park Service, Lake Roosevelt

National Recreation Area (LARO 2217).

Railroads stimulated settlement along their routes in northeastern Washington. The

completion of the Northern Pacific Railroad through Spokane and Lincoln counties in the
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 1)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi1c.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:30 PM]

early 1880s brought an influx of new settlers. Later that decade, the Spokane Falls &

Northern line initiated service from Spokane Falls to Colville and brought both residents and

industries to this region; this line extended to Northport in 1892 and to the border a year

later. The railroads not only brought new people but also provided a way for farmers and

industries to get their products to market. By 1900, farming was the dominant land use in the

Columbia valley, with particular emphasis on orchard crops. While many farmers pumped

irrigation water from the Columbia, those associated with the Fruitland Irrigation District

used water from the Colville River, which reached their farmlands with an extensive ditch

and flume. Grain and livestock came to dominate the more arid lands of Lincoln County. [34]

The perceived potential for these arid lands stimulated investigations into ways to bring water

to the Columbia Basin. Two plans were extensively examined, one to develop a gravity plan

to bring water from the Pend Oreille River with a dam at Albeni Falls and one to pump water

from the Columbia River. The pumping plan prevailed and called for construction of a dam

at Grand Coulee and an equalizing reservoir to provide enough water to irrigate 1.2 million

acres. This set the stage for a project that changed the face of northeastern Washington and

generated ripple effects that reverberate today. [35]

Town of Peach and some of the orchards that gave the town its name,

ca. 1920. Both the town and the trees were flooded by Lake

Roosevelt. Photo courtesy of National Park Service, Lake Roosevelt

National Recreation Area (LARO 2930).

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

laro/adhi/adhi1c.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/images/fig1-4.jpg[2/26/2014 3:35:36 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/images/fig1-4.jpg[2/26/2014 3:35:36 PM]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 1)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi1b.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:39 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 1:

When Rivers Ran Free (continued)

Miners initially concentrated on placer gold, found most readily in sand and gravel deposits

in rivers and streams. The prospectors included many Chinese, who frequently worked claims

abandoned by their Euroamerican counterparts. A store at Hawk Creek served nearly three

hundred Chinese miners working along the river in the late 1870s. Within a few years, the

region's Chinese population had grown to approximately one thousand, making more Chinese

than white miners along the Upper Columbia. Their numbers dropped, however, as ore

deposits decreased and restrictive laws increased. Some returned to China, while others

moved to cities for more lucrative work. [21]

Mining with a sluice box on the Columbia River, 1890s. Photo

courtesy of U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Grand Coulee (USBR

Archives 908).

The mining boom stimulated the growth of agriculture in the region, particularly in the

relatively temperate Colville Valley and in the Columbia Valley south of Fort Colvile. Some

former HBC employees had taken up farms in this area, starting as early as the 1830s. They

supplied food to the fur trade post and later sold agricultural products to the Army and the

burgeoning mining population. In addition to the non-Indian farmers, many Colville and

some Lakes Indians farmed their traditional lands in the same area. Some continued their

semi-nomadic lifestyle at least part of the year. After planting their crops in the spring, they
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 1)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi1b.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:39 PM]

left for their annual cycle of root gathering and fishing. They then returned to their farms in

the fall to harvest crops from their untended fields. Indian agent William P. Winans reported

that Indians apparently had more success with garden produce than their non-Indian

neighbors due to their warmer growing season at the mouth of the Colville River. "I

purchased early in July peas, carrots, beets, onions, cabbages, etc.," he wrote, noting that the

Indians "are the only ones that have so far successfully cultivated the tomato, the frosts not

troubling them as early as those living further up the valley." [22]

Winans was one of a series of Indian agents who dealt with tribes on behalf of the

government during this period. Pinkney Lugenbeel had taken on these duties as early as 1861

in connection with his role at Fort Colville. From 1868-1872, the agent was known as the

"farmer-in-charge." His duties included encouraging agriculture in the belief that this would

help Indians adapt to white culture. Once native people had settled on individual farms, the

government planned to open "excess" lands for non-Indian settlement. [23]

By the early 1870s, Indians realized that it was in their interests to secure a reservation since

settlers were taking over much of their traditional lands. The government also believed that it

was important to move non-treaty Indians to reservations to finally establish which lands

were available for white settlement. Superintendent of Indian Affairs for Washington

Territory, T. J. McKenny, recommended that the Colville reservation be an area at least forty

miles square that included "the old fisheries south and west of the Hudson's Bay trading

post." An Executive Order of April 9, 1872, set aside a reservation that included roughly all

of northeastern Washington east of the Columbia River and north of the Spokane River, to

accommodate Colville and neighboring tribes. [24]

Agent Winans had a different view, however. As a merchant, he perceived development of

the Colville area proceeding more smoothly without Indians; this was a view probably shared

by many settlers. Winans wrote to his Congressional delegate and recommended that the

reservation be moved to the other side of the Columbia River. The Executive Order of July 2,

1872, accomplished his goal with a 2.8 million-acre reservation bounded on the north by

Canada, on the west by the Okanogan River, and on the south and east by the Columbia

River. Winans saw the proposition as a win-win situation. The earlier reservation was too

small for the large Indian population, he claimed, and did not have enough grazing land for

their herds. Further, since most of the good agricultural land was already taken by nonIndians, they would have to move before Indians could have the land. [25]

Colville leaders appealed to President Ulysses S. Grant in the strongest terms, saying that this

move would deprive them not only of their farms and hay lands, but also their homes,

villages, and mission that were all east of the Columbia. They feared being unable to rebuild

if forced to move and worried that "the little progress in civilization we made already will be

lost." [26] Special Commissioner John P. C. Shanks, assigned to investigate Indian affairs,

reported on conditions in the Colville area in 1873. He noted the duplicity of Agent Winans

and called the forced move to the new reservation "expensive, troublesome, dishonorable,

and wicked." [27] Ultimately, the effort was futile and most Indians had moved to the

reservation by the 1880s. The government reached agreement to move the Moses band of

Columbia Indians to the reservation in 1883, followed by Joseph's band of Nez Perce two

years later. [28]

The Spokane Indians were not happy with this new reservation, however, since the area north

of the Columbia was outside their traditional territory. In addition, most Spokane tribal

members considered themselves Protestants, but most Indians on the newly formed Colville

Reservation were Catholics. They refused to move, claiming that they would starve in the

barren land north of the river. Agent John Simms advised the government that these people

would not move voluntarily and warned of potential war if they were forced off their lands.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 1)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi1b.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:39 PM]

Members of the Lower Spokanes negotiated with Col. E. C. Watkins, an Indian Inspector, in

August 1877, with the result that land known as "Lot's Reservation" was set aside for their

use. They pushed for additional land to accommodate the whole tribe and achieved some

boundary adjustments reflected in the Executive Order of January 18, 1881. This officially

established the Spokane Reservation with 154,898 acres. The Middle and Upper Spokanes

did not want to move to the new lands until they had been compensated for the loss of their

traditional lands, by then occupied by the rapidly growing city of Spokane Falls. In an

agreement signed in March 1887, tribal members ceded their lands and agreed to move in

return for approximately $127,000 for building materials, cattle, seeds, and farm equipment.

Most of the Upper Spokanes moved to the Coeur d'Alene Reservation in Idaho while the

Middle Spokanes moved to the Spokane Reservation. [29]

Map of Camp Spokane and vicinity, 1880-1881. (Frame 774, RG

049, WSA-ERB, Cheney.)

General Oliver O. Howard, commander of the Department of the Columbia, approved the site

for a new military post, at the confluence of the Columbia and Spokane rivers, in 1880. The

advantages of the new location included proximity to the new Northern Pacific Railroad line

at Spokane Falls to facilitate rapid movement of troops if needed. Howard relocated a

garrison of the 2nd Infantry from Camp Chelan to Camp Spokane in October 1880, and they

were joined over the next five years by troops from Fort Colville. An Executive Order in

January 1882 made the camp a military reservation, and the name changed to Fort Spokane a

month later. The original tents and log cabins were replaced eventually with forty-five

buildings suitable for a permanent six-company post. The fort's layout featured a large parade

ground surrounded by frame and brick buildings. This was a time of relative peace in the

Inland Northwest, however, and the troops at Fort Spokane saw little action aside from

routine drills, parades, and patrol duty. In an effort at efficiency and economy, the Army

decided to consolidate Fort Spokane with two other regional posts, with the new post to be

built near the city of Spokane. Before this change was completed, troops left Fort Spokane

for the last time in April 1898, heading to the Spanish American War. The Army did not

reoccupy the post after this date. [30]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 1)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi1b.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:39 PM]

View of Fort Spokane from the south, ca. 1903. Photo courtesy of

National Park Service, Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area

(LARO 3014).

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

laro/adhi/adhi1b.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 2)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi2c.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:42 PM]

Total construction costs of

reservoir (Lake Roosevelt) for:

surveys

geological investigations,

relocation and

reconstruction of

railroads, highways, and

roads, including bridges

relocating Kettle Falls

ranger station

channel widening and

shore protection at Little

Dalles

procurement of rights-ofway, including landslide

areas

clearing, grubbing, and

logging in reservoir area

relocation of cemeteries

reimbursement to

Washington Water Power

Company

marine operating and

maintenance facilities

(government docks)

assistance to National

Park Service ($1,505.58)

total cost: $15,134,532.99

-- Hall, Final Construction

Report, 1952

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 2:

The River Becomes a Lake (continued)

Grand Coulee Dam from World War II to Present

Grand Coulee Dam was completed just in time to help

with the war effort. During World War II, power from

the dam went to defense programs such as aluminum

production for airplanes and the Hanford project

developing plutonium for atomic bombs. The rapid

industrial expansion and population growth that the

Pacific Northwest experienced due to the war

guaranteed a market for the electricity that some had

predicted would become an embarrassing surplus. [36]

While Grand Coulee Dam was under construction,

plans moved ahead for the larger Columbia Basin

Irrigation Project, the largest single reclamation project

ever undertaken in the country. In 1933, the state

formed the Columbia Basin Commission to promote

the general plan for the dam, storage reservoir,

pumping plant, canals, and other elements of the

irrigation plan. The upper Grand Coulee's "equalizing

reservoir" was created to store water pumped some

three hundred feet up from the lake behind Grand

Coulee Dam. This water was then available to be

distributed for irrigation. This thirty-mile-long

reservoir, named Banks Lake in 1958 in memory of

Reclamation engineer Frank Banks, was first filled

with water in 1951. The irrigation network was never

fully completed to the extent envisioned in the 1930s,

however. Today, the project irrigates over 556,000

acres covering an area of about 60 by 120 miles (about

half the amount possible for the entire project). [38]

One more round of large-scale construction occurred at

Grand Coulee Dam later in the twentieth century.

Construction of the third powerhouse, authorized by

Congress in 1966, required the removal of a section of

the original dam's east end. The finished building

could hold twelve generators; the first six went on line between 1975 and 1980. The new

power plant allowed Reclamation to double its irrigation flow from Banks Lake. It also

allowed Grand Coulee Dam to become a "peaking plant" as well as a day-to-day power

producer, coming on and going off during each day depending on the demand for power.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 2)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi2c.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:42 PM]

Power generated at Grand Coulee Dam is fed into the Pacific Northwest Power Grid

maintained by BPA and is sold to Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and parts of Montana and

California. In addition, ties to other grids allow power to be sold outside the region. [39]

The construction of Grand Coulee Dam had far-reaching effects in many realms besides

power generation and irrigation. The creation in the late 1930s of a reservoir where there had

once been a river dramatically affected the lives of many living in the area. The lake also

created new recreational opportunities, leading to the establishment of a national recreation

area to serve both local residents and visitors.

1937 map of the Columbia Basin Project showing lands to be

irrigated by water pumped from the Upper Columbia River at

Grand Coulee Dam into the equalizing reservoir (Banks Lake).

(USBR Project History 1933.)

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

laro/adhi/adhi2c.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/images/fig2-4.jpg[2/26/2014 3:35:43 PM]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 2)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi2b.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:46 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 2:

The River Becomes a Lake (continued)

Clearing the Land for the Reservoir

Clearing the reservoir area was one of the largest Work Projects Administration (WPA)

projects ever undertaken. The clearing project was completed in December 1941; it took just

over three years from start to finish. The WPA furnished all the labor, built the camps, and

operated the mess halls, and Reclamation supplied the equipment and materials. Most of the

area cleared lay between the low-water elevation of the Columbia River and its tributaries

and elevation 1,290 feet, but clearing was done higher in upper reaches of the reservoir and in

areas with landslide potential. Approximately 54,000 acres were cleared, over 11,000 acres

grubbed (even the roots were dug up), and thirty-three million board feet of merchantable

timber harvested. When the work was completed, the government had spent $4.9 million on

labor. [27]

The height of Grand Coulee Dam and the maximum level of the reservoir were determined

by the elevation of the Columbia River at the Canadian border. The water level in the lake is

not allowed to rise above 1,290 feet; otherwise, it would back water into Canada. In the early

1930s, Reclamation surveyors marked the 1,290-foot high-water line to show the land to be

cleared of trees, brush, and other objects that could present hazards to boaters or to the water

intakes behind the dam. The clearing procedure varied with elevation. Between 1,250 and

1,290 feet, most combustible or buoyant material was uprooted, pulled, or grubbed for

complete removal, then piled and burned (small brush was cut off flush with the ground, and

non-combustible material was razed and placed in pits). Between 1,200 and 1,250 feet,

stumps were cut no more than six inches above the ground. Between the Columbia River and

1,200 feet, stumps were cut no more than two feet above the ground. Building foundations,

walls, and chimneys were razed, and brush less than three feet high was left as it was. [28]

Timber cruising to estimate the amount of merchantable timber was done in the late 1930s.

The timber within the reservoir area was logged by WPA crews, skidded to the river, and

floated downstream where it was sold to the highest bidder. In 1939, the Lincoln Lumber

Company bid $2.25 per thousand board feet for this timber. The company's mill was located

at the mouth of the Spokane River, so timber cut downstream ended up being burned or

otherwise disposed of. This lumber company's plant close to the river had to be dismantled

when the backwaters advanced. The trees in the many peach orchards along the river were

uprooted and burned. [29]

Reclamation began surveys for the relocation of railroads and roads in the reservoir area in

1935, and contractors began constructing the realignments that spring. Great Northern

Railway branch lines to Nelson, British Columbia, and to Republic, Washington, had to be

realigned. Old roads within the reservoir area were kept open as long as possible. Some

ninety miles of state highways were reconstructed, under supervision of the state.

Reclamation supervised the construction of relocated county roads and then turned them over
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 2)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi2b.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:46 PM]

to the counties. New highway bridges were built. Affected roads on the two reservations

totaled approximately thirty-three miles, and the Indian Service did the relocation work on

these roads. Old railroad bridges were dismantled and new ones constructed. Public utilities

and industrial sites had to be relocated or purchased. The state provided a ferry at the mouth

of the Sanpoil River (Keller Ferry), and the private ferry at Gifford-Inchelium continued

operation. The old cable ferries had to be replaced by power ferries because of the lack of

current in the new reservoir. [30]

Other tasks faced by Reclamation during the years between 1933 and 1942 included widening

a section of the Columbia River channel in the Little Dalles area near the Canadian border by

removing a rock island down to 1,255 feet along with part of the left river bank. This was

done in order to prevent inundating Canadian lands during periods of high floodwaters. A

legal case that took several years to settle was the claim by Washington Water Power that

backwater from the reservoir caused injury and reduced power output at its Little Falls Power

Plant on the Spokane River. [31]

Camp Kettle, largest of the eight camps built by the WPA to house

the men clearing the reservoir site. At the height of its use, more than

1,300 men lived at this camp. Photo courtesy of MSCUA, University

of Washington (Grand Coulee Dam 216).

The number of WPA workers hired for the clearing project peaked in March 1941 at 2,626.

The men stayed in temporary camps of frame buildings or tents set up at various locations

along the Columbia River. The five main camps each had barracks, recreation hall, mess hall,

dispensary, offices, warehouse, garage, and blacksmith shop. Camp Lincoln was established

first, followed by camps Spokane, Detillion, Gerome, Gifford, and Kettle. Camp Kettle was

located on the old townsite of Kettle Falls and in 1940 became headquarters for the entire

clearing project. Camp Ferry was a floating camp of three barges that held up to eighty men

who cleared lands inaccessible to the land crews, and it operated from March 1939 until

October 1941. [32]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 2)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi2b.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:46 PM]

The clearing crews were supported by over twenty WPA boats and barges, all built by the

crews except the Blue Ox, a tug that had been used at Boulder Dam. Tugs and boats hauled

Camp Ferry and transported men and equipment to work sites along the river/reservoir. Land

equipment included power shovels, Caterpillar tractors, and a fleet of sixty trucks. [33]

WPA workers boarding Gerome Ferry to take them to Camp

Gerome, on the far side of the river. Note the tree stumps on the land

that will be inundated by the reservoir. Photo courtesy of MSCUA,

University of Washington (Grand Coulee Dam 5).

In April 1941, the government declared the clearing work a national defense project, which

intensified the push to complete the work. Contractors built the dam faster than anticipated,

and the WPA was hard pressed to complete the clearing on time. The last tree was cut July

19, 1941, near Kettle Falls. The work at Kettle Falls then consisted of grubbing and burning

and dismantling camp buildings, but the clearing had not been completed when water began

flowing over the site. [34]

On June 1, 1942, people gathered to watch the first trickle of water flow down the spillway

face of Grand Coulee Dam. The reservoir was full at the downstream end, but it took another

six weeks to reach the 1,290-foot level all the way up the reservoir. [35] The clearing project

was done. The still waters of the Columbia River Reservoir - soon to be known as Lake

Roosevelt - now lay where the Columbia River had once flowed. The home sites of some

three thousand people lay beneath the water.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 2)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi2b.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:46 PM]

Bureau of Reclamation Supervising Engineer Frank A. Banks

and State WPA Administrator Carl W. Smith felling the symbolic

"last tree" in the reservoir area, on the site of old Kettle Falls,

July 19, 1941. Photo courtesy of U.S. Bureau of Reclamation,

Grand Coulee (USBR Archives 189).

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

laro/adhi/adhi2b.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi3f.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:48 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 3:

A Long Road Lies Ahead: Establishing Lake

Roosevelt National Recreation Area (continued)

Aftermath of the Regulations Controversy

The controversy had run its course, but it left two legacies. The first was strained relations

between Reclamation and the Park Service, still healing from the 1949 concrete plant

controversy. While that conflict went to the heart of the interbureau agreement, the fight over

regulations came down to personal relations between employees of the two agencies.

Through the Yacht Club, many Reclamation employees had taken a stand against the

regulations. Greider complained to Reclamation officials in mid-1951 about "the unusual

activities of its employees" in opposing not only the rules but the Park Service's planning and

development as well. He conceded that they had a right to their private opinions, but he

emphasized that

when representatives of one government agency organize and carry on an

intensive high-pressure public campaign . . . in which they misrepresent the

purposes and policies of another agency with which they have a cooperative

agreement, it is entirely another matter. [104]

A number of non-governmental people in the community had told Greider of being

approached by Reclamation employees looking for support in their opposition to the Park

Service. Greider finally met with the District Project Manager and his staff who agreed that

Reclamation's propaganda campaign had gone to unjustifiable lengths. Reclamation agreed to

draft a statement of support for the Park Service, and all believed that its release would

reassure the public that the agency gave no official support to most of the complaints voiced

by individual employees. [105]

The problem did not end there, however. The Park Service appeared vindictive later that fall

when it requested transfer of the Yacht Club lease from Reclamation to Park Service control,

less than two days after the club had taken a formal stand against the Park Service. The

recently retired Frank A. Banks, former Reclamation supervising engineer, saw this move as

retaliatory, and he also harshly criticized the Park Service for its lack of recreational

improvements. He said that he had initially worked to attract the Park Service to the area but

saw that the agency had done little to develop it or encourage recreational use. Instead, he

believed the regulations and other rules discouraged and antagonized people, causing the

Park Service's public relations to become "terrible." [106]

The second legacy from the fight over regulations led to the Park Service losing its bid to

manage the Equalizing Reservoir, now known as Banks Lake. The reservoir formed after

Reclamation constructed Dry Falls Dam near Coulee City and filled the formerly dry Grand

Coulee with water from Lake Roosevelt. Water from the reservoir is used to irrigate the

Columbia Basin Irrigation Project. The Park Service had studied this area in the 1930s for
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi3f.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:48 PM]

possible inclusion in the National Park System. While many believed it had unique

geological and scenic values, a bill to establish the area as a national park received an

unfavorable report in both 1918 and 1926, and National Park Service Director Horace

Albright disapproved the idea in May 1933. Washington State acquired close to 470 acres at

Dry Falls ca. 1922 for a state park. Construction of Grand Coulee Dam rekindled Park

Service interest in the area, and a 1938 report suggested that the area south of the planned

reservoir could be established as a national monument to showcase its outstanding geological

features. The report also recommended that the Park Service consider the recreational

development along both the Columbia River and the proposed reservoir to be formed in the

North Coulee, with the combination of recreation and education offering "even greater appeal

to the traveling public." [107]

Planning moved from the theoretical to the practical stage by the late 1940s as agencies and

community groups tried to assess who could best manage the recreational aspects of the

Equalizing Reservoir. The Grant County Recreation Committee, a subcommittee of the Grant

County Chamber of Commerce, was concerned primarily with fast results. A secondary

concern was development of a fishery program, and many on the committee felt that the state

would be unable to produce results in a reasonable time. "Perhaps it is needless to say I did

not say anything that would discourage . . . [this] line of reasoning," admitted Greider. [108]

Before the end of the year, Washington State informed the Park Service that it would be

unable to assume management and development of the reservoir, so Secretary of the Interior

Oscar Chapman told both the Park Service and Reclamation to proceed with plans to add the

reservoir to LARO. Five of the regional office staff spent several days the following spring

conducting a preliminary study of the Equalizing Reservoir, and both agencies continued to

plan for the Park Service to administer the new lake. [109]

By September 1951, as complaints escalated about the proposed regulations for Lake

Roosevelt, public support for Park Service administration of the Equalizing Reservoir began

to erode. Hubert H. Walter, Administrative Assistant for the Columbia Basin Commission,

said that local people were worried about potential restrictions and they believed that state

parks administration would be more sympathetic to their concerns. At a meeting later that

fall, the CBC supported local concerns by passing a resolution that the new reservoir be given

to the state for administration. A few months later, the Park Service decided to back off from

its push to include the reservoir in the NRA until public relations improved. In the meantime,

Reclamation would continue to handle permit requests in consultation with Greider. The

Regional Director recognized that the Park Service faced a difficult situation at LARO, one

so volatile that he decided to send a representative there on special assignment to handle

public relations prior to implementation of any regulations. [110] It is unclear whether or not

this person ever came.

Washington State once again indicated interest in the Equalizing Reservoir early in 1952

when it became apparent that the Park Service was losing its hold on the area. The director of

the Department of Game asked Reclamation for eight months to conduct a joint wildlife and

recreation study to see what lands might be needed. Within less than two months, however,

the director of the Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission announced that the

Park Service should take responsibility for the area north of Coulee City and State Parks

would take the area to the south. Even with that reduced area, the state agency would have

insufficient finances to develop parks for several years. After the state backed out, the Park

Service met with Reclamation, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington Department of

Game, and State Parks to negotiate an agreement to administer the reservoir. The CBC

continued to object, saying that people wanted the state to administer the area even if

development took many years. [111]

The fate of the Equalizing Reservoir remained up in the air for the rest of 1952 as agencies
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi3f.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:48 PM]

vied for influence and control. The Park Service continued to plan for the recreational

development there, which was to become a fourth ranger district at LARO. National Park

Service Director Conrad Wirth backed the inclusion of the new lake in the NRA, saying that

the administration of both lakes by one agency was both logical and economical. To critics

concerned about over-regulation of Park Service units, he responded that the agency's

approach to reservoir recreation areas was considerably less restrictive than its policies

concerning national parks. Because the reservoirs were artificial in nature, they were more

appropriate for "man-made attractions" than other parks. Meanwhile, the Washington

Department of Game Director maintained his agency's interest in the reservoir and

complained to Congressman Walt Horan that while Reclamation had done a fine job with the

Columbia Basin Irrigation Project, it was not in the state's interest to have other federal

agencies step in and "literally create a federal empire within the Basin." In addition, he

believed that his agency would be better at administering the reservoir since "the record of

the Park Service in this State as regards recreational development is one of glowing promises

and . . . few accomplishments," with bureaucratic regulations that made enjoyment of natural

resources "onerous" to many people. [112]

The CBC kept pushing its case for state control as well. It succeeded in delaying any

decision when National Park Service Director Wirth agreed that his agency would not sign

the Memorandum of Agreement for the Equalizing Reservoir before discussing the issue with

the Commission. CBC's Hubert Walter suggested that they should continue stalling to delay

the transfer until the new Eisenhower administration took over. The change of leadership

brought a variation in the original plan when Douglas McKay, the new Secretary of the

Interior, proposed a cooperative solution with both state and federal agencies combining

efforts. Under his plan, the Park Service would retain general supervision of both LARO and

the Equalizing Reservoir area, both of which he considered nationally significant. The

administration could be flexible enough, however, to allow state and local agencies to

develop and manage some areas. For instance, the state Department of Game might manage

some areas for wildlife, while the State Parks and Recreation Commission could develop park

facilities both at the reservoir and Lake Roosevelt. Despite these suggestions, the Park

Service retained control of Lake Roosevelt while the State took over the Equalizing

Reservoir. [113]

Administration of the Equalizing Reservoir did not work as well as supporters had hoped, at

least initially. By 1958, local opinion had reversed and begun pushing for transfer of the area

to the Park Service. "Our people are, of course, not participating in the promotion of this

transfer," reassured the Regional Director. [114] Dissatisfaction was based apparently on the

state's lack of development at the reservoir, ironically the same reason cited by those

displeased with the Park Service's administration at Lake Roosevelt a decade earlier. [115]

Despite complaints, the reservoir remained under state management.

It is difficult to pinpoint all the factors that contributed to the unrest at LARO during the late

1940s and early 1950s, but reasonable speculation suggests at least three: slow pace of

development, imposition of regulations, and the personality of Superintendent Greider.

Released from wartime constraints, local people eagerly awaited the development of the new

lake. At first they were patient with limited budgets and supported the local Park Service

administration. But as months stretched into years, they took out their frustrations on LARO

staff. As relations began to sour, the Park Service imposed regulations on all NRAs. Many of

the initially strict rules were modified following a comment period, but the simmering

resentment turned to outright anger as residents saw the Park Service trying to limit their use

of the NRA to developed areas only, when LARO had not yet received sufficient funding to

develop many public facilities.

The strong personality of the first superintendent, Claude E. Greider, may have compounded
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi3f.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:48 PM]

the problem. Greider had definite ideas about how to run the NRA and periodically clashed

with Regional personnel. He vigorously defended Park Service interests at LARO against

attacks by both the OIA (the log dump at Sanpoil Bay) and Reclamation (the concrete plant at

the South Marina). During the controversy over regulations, several critics described Greider

as confrontational suggesting, at least, that his actions occasionally could be misinterpreted.

Don Everts, a long-time LARO employee, remembered Greider as "kind of a pompous

person . . . [but] a pretty good superintendent." [116] Soon after Everts arrived at LARO in

1951, he accompanied Greider and several staff to Hunters to discuss potential development

work there.

And he got out, he was a little guy, bald-headed, just a small guy, strutted

around in his uniform. And [he] looked around and decided he'd ask us what

we'd suggest. Well, that didn't go over too well right at first. We didn't suggest

what he had in mind. So he . . . says, "Now we'll vote on it." So we did, and he

was all by himself. And the classic statement that stuck in my mind for years,

"That's the end of democracy in this area." He was quite a guy. [117]

Passions evidently cooled following the fights over LARO regulations and management of

the Equalizing Reservoir. Greider's annual report for FY1953 was brief: "No events of

sufficient significance to the National Park Service occurred in this area to suggest the need

for a special report." By that time, the Superintendent was ready to move on. The Park

Service transferred Greider to the Portland Office on August 12, 1953, where he was named

Assistant Chief of the Columbia Basin Recreation Survey and placed in charge of the Rogue

River Recreation Survey. He was replaced at LARO by Hugh Peyton, the former

superintendent of the Millerton Lake NRA in California. Greider's connection with LARO

and Lake Roosevelt spanned nearly fourteen years. He nurtured the idea of a recreation area,

oversaw its initial development, and stayed long enough to help it get its feet wet. Many of

the issues he faced, especially Indian rights and public rejection of Park Service rules and

regulations, have continued to challenge LARO managers to the present. [118]

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

laro/adhi/adhi3f.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi3b.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:51 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 3:

A Long Road Lies Ahead: Establishing Lake

Roosevelt National Recreation Area (continued)

1944 Plans

The small Park Service staff continued its planning work during 1943 and 1944. Normally,

the Branch of Plans and Designs produced the final site layouts and Master Plans for park

units, but it did not become involved in the early planning for the Columbia River Reservoir

since it was not yet a Park Service area and might not become one. Still, the Park Service felt

an obligation under the interbureau agreement to give Reclamation workable development

plans for each of the selected sites, especially since that agency was funding the Park Service

work. Greider also believed that these detailed plans would be useful in case a "less

experienced planning agency" were designated to take over recreation development. [54]

By mid-summer 1943, Greider and Kearney sent proposed layout plans for Spring Canyon

and Hawk Creek to the regional office for comments, followed soon after by plans for

additional areas. The comments they received were less about the specific designs than about

the future of the recreation area itself. Herbert Maier, Acting Regional Director, worried that

the plans should not be carried too far since the Park Service was not sure how much the

general public would use the new reservoir. Greider disagreed. "Is it not true that this factor

of future use is a problem in connection with any undeveloped area?" he asked. "It would

seem that if exact knowledge of attendance and use is to be a prerequisite for park planning

very little advance planning for any area would be justified." [55] He reminded the Regional

Director that the Committee on Problem No. 26 had studied the recreational needs of the

region and concluded that ultimately the area would need full development. While cautioning

that the Committee was not party to the working agreement with Reclamation, Maier deferred

to Greider for the final word on plans. [56]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi3b.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:51 PM]

Log dump on the Sanpoil River, August 1957. Photo courtesy of

National Park Service, Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area

(LARO.HQ.MENG).

Greider and Kearney finished the "General Report and Development Outline" for the

Columbia River Reservoir in mid-1944. It not only outlined plans for specific areas but also

laid out the Park Service approach to development, which was to maintain tight federal

control of the entire reservoir area. The Problem No. 26 report had recommended that 80

percent of the shore lands were more valuable for recreation than any other purpose. Further

study for the 1944 report showed that just 3 percent of the lands would be needed for

recreation, but "in order to protect the full recreational values of this 3 percent, the

preservation of at least 80 percent of the Area is essential." Greider and Kearney believed

that federal standards were higher than those of private developers (whose standards were

"only high enough to meet competition"), and thus the government needed to establish and

enforce appropriate requirements for all phases of shoreline development, public and private.

The plan proposed that the federal government construct and own all the basic facilities and

utilities needed for public recreation on the reservoir, from boat docks and campgrounds to

cabins and concession buildings. It also recommended that private resorts built on adjacent

lands should be denied access to the reservoir unless these developments supplemented

existing facilities and conformed to the overall program. [57]

Director Drury found the report excellent, but he requested a change in the section dealing

with administration. He would not agree to have the Park Service assume jurisdiction and

administration of the recreation lands at the reservoir, but he was willing to have the agency

continue to advise Reclamation under the interbureau agreement. Reclamation also approved

the report and reiterated its request to have the Park Service assume responsibility for the

administration and development as soon as possible. After signing his approval of the report,

Regional Director Maier penned the comment, "Thank God — that's over!" [58]

Agreements
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi3b.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:51 PM]

Park Service Expenditures for

FY1943:

Personal Services $8,257

Travel $390

Transportation of

Things $210

Communications $57

Other Contractual

Services $9

Supplies and

Materials $8 [59]

Relief did not come swiftly for either Reclamation or

the Park Service. An agreement to formalize the longterm administration of the entire reservoir area was

pending clarification of Indian rights in the area. While

awaiting final accord, the two agencies renewed the

interbureau agreement described earlier, with

Reclamation continuing to provide funding for Park

Service operations. Banks defended this $10,000

appropriation in 1943, when emphasis was on winning

the war. He argued that planning was needed to lay the

groundwork for post-war development of the

recreation area that would provide employment for

returning servicemen. Reclamation funding enabled

Phil Kearney to stay with the Park Service through the

drafting of the "General Report and Development Outline." By April 1944, however, Banks

decreed that Reclamation could not justify further expenditures for architectural plans until

the agency in charge of recreational development and management had been selected. Banks

thus requested that Kearney be transferred to Reclamation, leaving Greider as the primary

Park Service employee until late October 1946 when he was joined by Robert D. Waterhouse,

the Resident Engineer. Kearney had worked hard at maintaining good relations between the

two agencies, and Greider benefited initially from this good will. [60]

The agreements between the Park Service and Reclamation were renewed several times as

the agencies waited for a clear definition of Indian rights. Finally, in June 1945, the Solicitor

set forth his interpretation of the 1940 Act for Acquisition of Indian Lands, including

delineation of Indian rights to one-quarter of the area. Once this hurdle was crossed, the three

Department of the Interior agencies negotiated the Tri-Party Agreement, signed on December

18, 1946. The Park Service, with so few employees, did not feel ready to assume full

responsibility for the reservoir area, so it postponed this transfer of authority until July 1,

1947. [61]

Legislative Authority

LARO is one of only two units in the National Park System that lacks specific enabling

legislation; the other is Curecanti National Recreation Area in Colorado. The Park Service

gained authority at Lake Roosevelt in other ways, however. Initially, the Act of June 23, 1936

(49 Stat. 1894), authorized the Service to cooperate with other federal agencies, paving the

way for the subsequent cooperative agreements with Reclamation at LARO. Congress passed

more significant legislation with the Act of August 7, 1946 (Public Law 633), that authorized

Park Service appropriations for "Administration, protection, improvement, and maintenance

of areas, under the jurisdiction of other agencies of the Government, devoted to recreational

use pursuant to cooperative agreements." [62]

A few months later, the Park Service, Reclamation, and OIA signed the Tri-Party Agreement

to delineate administration of the recreation area. This occurred during the period when the

National Park System excluded recreational areas, national parkways, and other nontraditional categories. Consequently, the agreement reflected this ambiguous relationship and

stipulated that the Park Service's work at the recreational area

in no way implies that this Area is a part of, or intended to become a unit of, the

National Park System or that the basic preservation policies under which the

National Parks and Monuments are administered shall necessarily be applied in

the planning, development, and management of the recreational resources of the
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi3b.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:51 PM]

Recreational Area. [63]

Park Service administration at LARO was strengthened on August 24, 1961, by a Deputy

Solicitor's opinion concerning the Shadow Mountain NRA. It held that the Act of August 7,

1946, authorized the Park Service to apply its statutes and regulations to any recreation area,

including LARO, that it administered through a cooperative agreement with Reclamation.

Finally, the Act of August 18, 1970 (Public Law 91-383), amended the earlier Act of August

8, 1953, to define the National Park System as including "any area of land and water now or

hereafter administered by the Secretary of the Interior through the National Park Service for

park, monument, historic, parkway, recreational, or other purposes." This finally removed any

lingering ambiguity about the status of NRAs such as LARO. The Act further stipulated that

all authorities governing administration and protection of the National Park System applied to

all units within the system, as long as they did not conflict with any specific provision. [64]

These laws have provided the legislative authorization for LARO.

A recent District Court decision reinforced LARO's status within the National Park System.

Torrison v. Baker et al., filed in 1997, disputed the Park Service's authority to require

removal of previously permitted private docks within the NRA. In ruling against the

plaintiffs, the Court wrote,

Since the Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area is part of the National Park

System, the Park Service must manage it in a manner "consistent with and

founded in the purpose established by section 1 of this title, to the common

benefit of all the people of the United States." 16 U.S.C. 1a-1 That purpose "is to

conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and the wild life therein

and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means

as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations." 16

U.S.C. 1 (emphasis added). [65]

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

laro/adhi/adhi3b.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4i.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:53 PM]

Members of the Negotiating

Team, who approved the

agreement before sending it to

the Secretary of the Interior for

signing, included: Chairman

William A. Sinclair, DOI; John

W. Keys, III, Reclamation

Regional Director; Lawrence E.

Cox, DOI Regional Solicitor;

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 4:

Agreements and Disagreements: From TriParty Agreement to Multi-Party Agreement

(continued)

1990 Lake Roosevelt Cooperative Management Agreement

The final round of meetings began late in 1988 and continued for a year and a half until the

new agreement was signed. While many of the issues, such as disagreement over the size and

jurisdiction of the Indian Zones, had been concerns since the start of negotiations, this time

the tribes and agencies were able to compromise enough to reach a final agreement. Many of

the meetings took place in Washington, D.C., with a DOI official as chairman. The other

members of the negotiating team were from the regional level of government, joined by the

chairmen of the tribal councils. [132]

Three individuals worked to resolve the contentious issues for the Park Service and the tribes,

resulting in the preparation of a final agreement. Alan Stay, CCT attorney, wrote the final

document with recommendations from John Rydzik, a local BIA official (who had formerly

worked for the CCT and retained their trust), and Kelly Cash, LARO's negotiator. The

collaboration of these individuals in fine tuning the language resulted in a document that

could be sent to Washington, D.C., for final approval. [133]

Secretary of the Interior Manuel Lujan, Jr., signed the Lake Roosevelt Cooperative

Management Agreement on April 5, 1990. The agreement addressed many concerns raised by

the tribes for several decades: reservation boundaries had not been changed by acquisition of

lands for Grand Coulee Dam, and the tribes retained "certain governmental authority and

responsibility" within these exterior boundaries; the tribes retained the right to exercise

governmental authority within their reservations; and the tribes could assert regulatory

authority over issues such as fish and wildlife, recreation, and cultural resources on their

reservation lands. In addition, the agreement recognized the tribal argument that development

in one part of the reservoir affected areas and/or cultural resources in other areas. The Park

Service also scored an important victory with the official recognition in the agreement of

LARO as an existing unit of the National Park system. [134]

The five parties to the agreement, all referred to as

"governmental parties," included the Park Service,

Reclamation, BIA, CCT, and STI. The agreement

allowed these parties to coordinate management of the

lake and surrounding federal lands, identified in the

agreement as the Lake Roosevelt Management Area,

"and to plan and develop facilities and activities on

Lake Roosevelt and its freeboard lands." Like the TriParty Agreement, this one divided the reservoir area

into three zones: Reclamation, Recreation, and
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4i.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:53 PM]

William J. Briggle, NPS Deputy

Regional Director; Stanley M.

Speaks, BIA Area Director;

Jude C. Stensgar, Chairperson,

Colville Business Council; and

Joe V. Flett, Chairperson,

Spokane Tribal Council. [135]

This Agreement is a significant

milestone indicating a

recognition by the Federal

government that the Colville

and Spokane Tribes are equal

partners in the management of

Lake Roosevelt. This type of

government-to-government

relationship will be beneficial

for all citizens whether living in

the area or visiting it for the

many recreational opportunities

that Lake Roosevelt offers.

-- Jude C. Stensgar, Chairman,

Colville Business Council, April

4, 1990 [138]

Reservation. As before, Reclamation was given

management responsibilities for the Reclamation Zone

and the Park Service for the Recreation Zone. Unlike

the earlier agreement, however, the Reservation Zone

was turned over to the tribes for management, with

each tribe responsible for its own reservation lands and

the BIA available for assistance. The agreement called

for periodic meetings to coordinate management

activities and an annual meeting to monitor compliance. In addition, it set up a process to

resolve disputes among the parties. The Park Service and the tribes agreed to "review,

coordinate, communicate and standardize the management plans, regulations and policies"

and permits to provide uniform management. Although the National Environmental Policy

Act already required federal agencies to accept public input on planned activities, the parties

placated other governmental entities by acknowledging the need to take comments from state

and local governments as well as citizens' groups and individuals. [136]

The parties reached compromise on the issue of funding, agreeing to share budget, cost, and

technical information. Each party, however, was responsible for securing funding for its own

management responsibilities. In the event that extra funds became available, the agencies

pledged to make "an equitable portion" available to the tribes for their compliance work.

While the agencies did not agree to implement an Indian preference for employment, they did

agree to notify the tribes of opportunities to contract with the agencies for projects or

services. [137]

The agreement also addressed cultural resources. This

issue was so important to the tribes that the team

drafting the new agreement recognized that most

points were not open to negotiation. Under the

Cooperative Management Agreement, all parties

agreed to develop a Cultural Resources Management

Plan to identify and protect resources, as well as

develop a procedure for returning artifacts, removed

under governmental authority, to the tribes for

curation. The federal agencies also agreed to notify

and consult with the tribes while planning "any survey,

monitoring, or removal of Indian Resources" from the

reservoir lands. In addition, the tribes would have the

chance to participate and/or undertake these activities

themselves. [139]

A local ceremony celebrated the new agreement. Jude

C. Stensgar, CCT Chairman, invited Superintendent

Gary Kuiper to a signing ceremony on April 20, 1990 -

Earth Day - at Grand Coulee Dam. Stensgar praised the agreement that recognized both the

CCT and STI as equal management partners at Lake Roosevelt. He believed that all citizens,

both local residents and visitors, would benefit from the government-to-government

relationship established by the agreement. Close to two hundred people attended the

ceremony, which featured Indian drumming, dancing, and singing. [140]

Conclusion

Years of hard work by dozens of federal and tribal officials finally reached fruition with the

signing of the Lake Roosevelt Cooperative Management Agreement, also known as the
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4i.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:53 PM]

Multi-Party Agreement. The end of negotiations finally freed LARO staff to carry out other

responsibilities at Lake Roosevelt. The Multi-Party Agreement has not resolved all issues at

the NRA, of course. During ten years of operating under its provisions, the parties have

worked through many jurisdictional and management concerns, with no legal challenge to the

agreement. A few disagreements, such as jurisdiction over the south half of the Spokane

Arm, remain unresolved. Still other issues, such as cultural resources management, pose

continuing challenges. The five parties are equal partners now, each with its own

management responsibilities. The action of one affects the others, and the coming years will

further test how well they work together to manage the varied resources of Lake Roosevelt.

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

laro/adhi/adhi4i.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4b.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:54 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 4:

Agreements and Disagreements: From TriParty Agreement to Multi-Party Agreement

(continued)

Tri-Party Agreement

The uncertainty that had clouded jurisdictional issues for several years dissipated

immediately, and federal agencies revived their work on a cooperative agreement. Park

Service Director Drury sent a copy of the Solicitor's opinion to Regional Director Owen A.

Tomlinson asking for his opinion on areas to be set aside for paramount use of the Indians.

Although it was primarily the responsibility of Reclamation and the OIA to delineate these

areas, Drury suggested that it would be good for the Park Service to be involved in these

discussions. He also urged Tomlinson to revise the draft agreement of September 26, 1941,

and have it reviewed by the other agencies. If necessary, the Park Service could negotiate

separate agreements with Reclamation and the OIA. [28]

Banks pushed for a commitment from the Park Service, causing it to pull back temporarily.

Greider and Raymond E. Hoyt, Regional Chief, Recreation Study Division, had a meeting

with Banks on February 16, 1946. When they arrived, they found that not only had he invited

Reclamation and OIA officials, but he also expected Hoyt to work out the interbureau

agreement so that the Park Service could take over management of the recreation area on July

1st. Both Hoyt and Greider made it clear that they were not aware of these plans and

furthermore, they had no authority to commit the Park Service to this. Banks, in turn, was

unhappy when he found out that the agency had not budgeted any funds to cover the costs of

administering the area in FY1947. Despite these disagreements, the federal representatives

reached consensus that one agency should have administrative responsibility for the entire

area, including commercial operations. The only exception to this was that the OIA would

retain control of agricultural and grazing permits in the Indian Zones. The points discussed

that day formed the basis for the eventual agreement. Banks scheduled another meeting for

the following month, and Park Service officials realized he wanted action. "The attitude of

the Bureau people was one of wishing to be relieved of all administrative responsibility

above the dam," noted Hoyt. "We feel from their remarks that they will insist that the

National Park Service assume the entire responsibility." [29]

Negotiations continued, and on April 8, 1946, twenty-three people met at Coulee Dam to

prepare a final draft of the interbureau agreement, including Supervising Engineer Frank A.

Banks, Right-of-Way Engineer Thoralf Torkelson, and Regional Counsel H. Stinson for

Reclamation; Herbert Maier, Raymond E. Hoyt, George Collins, and Claude E. Greider for

the Park Service; and the superintendents of the Colville and Spokane reservations, other

OIA officials, and various members of the tribal councils representing Indian interests. Using

a memo from Hillory Tolson as a guide, Maier was pleased to report that seven hours of

negotiations produced an agreement that incorporated nearly all of the Park Service
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4b.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:54 PM]

proposals. After considerable discussion of a name, the delegates agreed on Coulee Dam

Recreational Area. A more difficult point involved funding. Banks argued that Reclamation

should not have to fund the work since the Park Service was responsible for recreation

development and administration. Maier countered that the agency could not request funding

for developing and administering an area that was not part of the National Park System.

Banks conceded this point, but Maier noted, "It is my feeling that Mr. Banks acquiesced only

with the thought in mind that when he transmits the draft to the Commissioner he will

suggest further consideration of this item before final submission to the Secretary." [30]

The OIA continued to have some reservations about the agreement. The agency insisted that

it be designated to issue permits and administer log dumping operations within the Indian

Zones, after consultation with the Park Service. More importantly, Acting Commissioner

John McGue maintained that since Indian rights had not yet been defined, he hesitated to sign

a document that might be viewed later as a departmental interpretation of these rights. Until

the Secretary defined these rights, McGue wanted the agreement to include "a specific

provision to the effect that nothing therein contained shall be construed as a waiver of any

rights the Indians may have." [31] This statement was included in the final agreement.

Map showing Reclamation, Recreation, and Reservation zones at

Lake Roosevelt. Although the map is dated 1990, the zones are

essentially the same as the Reclamation, Recreation, and Indian
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4b.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:54 PM]

zones defined in the 1946 Tri-Party Agreement. (U.S. Bureau of

Reclamation, Exhibit A, Lake Roosevelt Cooperative

Management Area, 9 March 1990. USBR Archives 222-117-

19083.)

Both tribal councils passed resolutions approving the April 1946 draft MOA, but they also

voiced concern. In fact, the Colville Business Council passed a second resolution the same

day asking that Indians of both reservations be allowed to hunt and fish within the Indian

Zones without being charged for a license. In addition, they wanted access to, and the right to

build and operate, docking facilities within their zones, as well as the right to rent and

operate boats without paying any fees. If their paramount interests were later found to be in

jeopardy, they requested that the Secretary set aside all or part of the Indian Zones for their

exclusive use. [32]

The final MOA, known as the Tri-Party Agreement, was signed on December 18, 1946. It

divided the reservoir area into three zones: Reclamation, Recreation, and Indian. The Bureau

retained jurisdiction over activities in the Reclamation Zone, including recreation, although

the agency was to consult with the Park Service on development of any recreational facilities

there. The OIA had responsibility for both the Colville and Spokane Indian Zones, including

issuing agriculture, grazing, and log dump permits; fire prevention; and construction and

maintenance, in consultation with the Park Service, of any structures needed in conjunction

with Indians' paramount rights. The OIA also agreed to provide the Park Service with any

help needed in its relations with individual Indians at the new recreation area. [33]

A large portion of the agreement spelled out Park Service duties in the new recreation area.

One of the primary functions, of course, was developing and implementing plans for facilities

throughout the recreation area. In addition, the Park Service agreed to consult with the OIA

in locating and protecting potential recreation sites in the Indian Zones. The agency was also

directed to establish policies covering uses of all the land in the recreation area, except for

agriculture and grazing in the Indian Zones and special hunting, fishing, and boating rights of

Indians. The Park Service took responsibility for issuing and administering permits for

special uses, including industrial and recreational, for all the land in the recreation area, and

grazing and agricultural uses for lands outside the Indian Zones. The agreement also

designated the Park Service as the agency to promulgate rules and regulations governing

public uses and protection of resources. Finally, the Park Service agreed to advise both

Reclamation and the OIA in recreation matters in their respective zones. [34]

While the federal agencies were still fine-tuning their final agreement at Lake Roosevelt,

Congress passed a law that added legitimacy to Park Service administration of the recreation

area. Public Law 633, passed August 7, 1946, authorized Park Service appropriations for

"Administration, protection, improvement, and maintenance of areas, under the jurisdiction of

other agencies of the Government, devoted to recreational use pursuant to cooperative

agreements." [35] The Secretary of the Interior issued a statement in July 1947 on the

Department's policy for recreation development and administration at Reclamation reservoirs.

The Park Service would assist Reclamation on a reimbursable basis to develop preliminary

plans for recreational facilities at reservoir areas. As part of this work, the Park Service would

submit estimates of construction costs to Reclamation to be included in the annual costs of

reservoir construction. If funded by Congress, the Park Service would agree to build these

recreational facilities. This information left both Greider and Banks scrambling to determine

how it applied to Coulee Dam Recreational Area. Both had just submitted their 1949

estimates to their respective regional offices, and they wondered if Reclamation was to cover

Park Service estimates. Regional Director Tomlinson reassured Greider that he believed this

new policy did not apply to recreational areas already taken over by the Park Service, so the
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4b.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:54 PM]

budgets remained unaltered. [36]

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

laro/adhi/adhi4b.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5h.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:55 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 5:

Charting the Course: Managers and

Management Issues (continued)

Public Relations/Community Relations

The Park Service and other agencies, including those involved with the Problem No. 26

committee, recognized by the early 1940s that an advisory committee would be helpful in

recreational planning for Lake Roosevelt. As things heated up during the controversy over

regulations, the Park Service resurrected the idea. National Park Service Director Drury

opposed holding public hearings on the proposed rules in 1949 but favored a committee of

local citizens to work with Superintendent Greider on the regulations and, as a corollary,

"build support for Service objectives." [119] Regional Director Owen A. Tomlinson

disagreed with the idea of an advisory group, however, since he believed that Park Service

opponents would have a place on such a committee. "They would be even more difficult to

deal with through such an organization," he noted. [120]

By 1952, the Park Service once again began supporting an advisory committee for LARO,

similar to ones found at other NRAs like Millerton Lake. Greider agreed that a committee

could be "an effective means of squashing unwarranted criticism of the Park Service," such as

that leveled by the Grand Coulee Dam Yacht Club. [121] He preferred a committee of nonagency people known for honesty and integrity. In addition, he insisted that Reclamation not

be allowed a voice in the selection of members and that Frank A. Banks, in particular, be

disqualified from membership due to his past opposition to the Park Service over regulations.

Regional Director Herbert Maier suggested that including "at least one prominent woman"

might be advisable, and Greider suggested that Mrs. Frank Laughbon of Davenport was "of

sufficient importance" to warrant inclusion. [122] Just as the advisory committee was nearing

reality, the Park Service shelved the idea in 1953 because of additional criticism leveled

against the agency over administration of the Equalizing Reservoir. It resurfaced a year later,

however, when the Park Service came up with a list of recommended members. Perhaps

bowing to criticism, the agency allowed the Columbia Basin Commission to appoint the first

advisory committee in 1955. Superintendent Hugh Peyton reported that it was "a most

valuable organization" that was providing guidance on development issues. [123]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5h.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:55 PM]

Park Service float at the Western Festival, Grand Coulee, 1955.

Photo courtesy of National Park Service, Lake Roosevelt National

Recreation Area (LARO.FS).

Public relations for LARO had improved by the mid-1950s under Superintendent Peyton,

who enlisted local people to help the agency with development of minor areas. He noted in

1955 that this cooperation had improved public relations with the nearby communities and

had won the approval of the visiting public. In the decades since, the Park Service has taken

part in the life of surrounding towns in a variety of ways, from participating in parades and

giving talks to hosting Easter egg hunts and cross-country track meets. In 1964, Chief Ranger

Charles Woodbury represented the NRA as a guest caller at a square dance sponsored by the

Spokane Boat Club. That same year, two other LARO rangers served as judges for the bestlooking motorcycle and the best-dressed riders at the Northwest Harley Davidson dealers

meet at Spring Canyon. LARO sponsored an Old Fashioned Community Christmas

Celebration for several years during the 1980s, bringing in as many as six hundred visitors.

Tight budgets and changing priorities brought an end to this popular event around 1988.

[124]

The Park Service expanded its outreach under Director George B. Hartzog, Jr., opening

offices in many urban areas to provide information and environmental education and serve as

a congressional liaison. LARO opened such an office in Spokane in the early 1970s in

response to plans for Expo 74, a world's fair with an environmental theme. At the time, the

Park Service was considering the possibility of operating a major environmental education

center at the site after the close of the fair. While this never happened, Arthur Hathaway, the

interpretive specialist at the Spokane field office, was actively involved with a group that

promoted the potential center. In addition, Hathaway developed environmental programs in

cooperation with area colleges. He also maintained regular contacts with the Spokane

representatives of Washington's congressional delegation. More routine business included

answering phone calls, handing out brochures, mailing information, and selling Golden Age

and Golden Eagle passes. In addition, the office served as a sales outlet for the Pacific
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5h.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:55 PM]

Northwest National Parks Association, raising money for LARO and other regional parks.

Although the Park Service planned to discontinue the office after the World's Fair ended, it

decided to keep it running in a partnership with the U.S. Forest Service, like similar joint

agency offices in Seattle and Portland. The agency closed the Spokane field office in January

1982, about the same time it terminated the Portland office. [125]

Relations with Counties and Congress

LARO has signed numerous cooperative agreements with surrounding counties over the years

to cover issues like road maintenance, law enforcement, fire protection, and weed control.

County governments became increasingly interested in management issues at LARO during

the late 1980s when they formed a new organization, Upper Columbia River Counties

(UCRC), to lobby for change. Most issues revolved around the 1990 Special Park Use

Management Plan and the 1991 Concessions Management Plan, both of which limited and

directed development on Lake Roosevelt. UCRC believed these limits would scare new

investors away from the lake as well as devalue properties adjacent to the lake, thus reducing

the tax base. Some officials also believed that the NRA negatively impacted the counties by

increasing their budgets for road maintenance, law enforcement, and solid waste disposal.

They resented being left out of the management process and asked to be included. The Park

Service temporarily held back the Concessions Management Plan in 1988 to allow for

additional public hearings, even though elected officials and the public had been involved

from the outset. The UCRC also asked that the Multi-Party Agreement not be approved until

the counties were included, but parties to the agreement did not accept this request since the

counties neither owned nor managed any lands at Lake Roosevelt. [126]

During this time of uneasy Park Service-county relations, LARO and Lincoln County worked

together on a new launch ramp at the end of a county road, at the site of the old Lincoln mill.

The county secured a grant in 1989 from the Interagency Committee for Outdoor Recreation

in Olympia for $150,000, matched by $127,000 from the county, $22,500 from LARO, with

the remaining $37,000 raised from donations. The ramp opened in July 1991, filling a need

expressed by many county residents. The mood soon turned sour, however, when the Park

Service began charging county residents a launch fee. (Such fees had been implemented

nationwide in an effort to have users pay for services.) Lincoln County commissioners

believed that local residents should be able to use the ramp at no charge since the county had

helped pay for its construction. The two sides finally reached agreement in 1995 when

Superintendent Tays offered to allow Lincoln County residents to have free use for ten years,

terminating at the end of 2005. [127]

Superintendent Gerald Tays worked on easing tensions between regional counties and the

Park Service. He and Assistant Superintendent Kelly Cash recognized the potential for a

confrontation along the lines of Catron County, New Mexico, where county commissioners

passed ordinances designed to get local control over federal resources. The movement had

spread to the Pacific Northwest and was reflected in the local counties' interest in helping

manage federal resources at Lake Roosevelt. Tays negotiated a Memorandum of

Understanding with the Stevens County commissioners in September 1994 as a way to

improve communication on issues of mutual concern. The Park Service promised the county

early notification and an opportunity for input on agency actions and land use issues that

might affect county residents. In return, the county agreed to inform the Park Service and

allow agency input on any county plans that might affect federal resources. Both agreed to

work on resolution of policy and management differences as soon as possible. The Park

Service signed a similar MOU with Lincoln County in 1995. Tays pursued agreements with

the other three counties but none were signed. He noted that while the MOUs did not resolve

all issues, they at least ensured communication. "That's a giant first step," he said. [128]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5h.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:55 PM]

Ironically, Tays' role as a peacemaker on the issue of the Lincoln boat ramp and with the

MOUs seems to have gone unnoticed as some county officials pursued a vendetta against the

Park Service in the mid-1990s, ultimately causing Tays' transfer from LARO in 1996.

On a national level, the Park Service lost both political and financial support during the

1980s. In addition, the agency found itself responding to increasing Congressional oversight

and several investigations by the General Accounting Office. Members of Congress were less

interested in broad agency issues than in specific management questions, however. This

manifested itself locally at Lake Roosevelt through numerous inquiries directed to the park on

behalf of constituents. In the first three months of 1991, LARO staff had to answer twentyone letters to Rep. Tom Foley, twenty-one to Sen. Brock Adams, and four to Rep. Sid

Morrison, all concerning issues surrounding the Special Park Use Management Plan. [129]

By 1992, Sen. Slade Gorton was voicing concerns about the recently approved Multi-Party

Agreement. He believed that the agreement should include Washington State to represent

"local, non-Indian populations" and give them an equal voice in management. [130] The Park

Service responded that while neither the state nor the counties had any management authority

on federal lands, the agency allowed them input and considered their concerns during the

planning process. Furthermore, the Park Service was mandated by law to manage the NRA as

a unit of the National Park System, and it could not support inclusion of the state with equal

status. [131]

Gorton continued to pursue this issue, joining forces with Sen. Brock Adams. Both men sat

on the Senate Appropriations Committee, which directed the Lake Roosevelt Coordinating

Committee to identify and address concerns from those who were not represented on the

committee. The LRCC and the Lake Roosevelt Forum then sponsored a series of regional

meetings to hear concerns of local citizens. Many people addressed the clash between public

and private use of federal lands, as well as opposition to federal and/or tribal management.

Others identified needs such as additional funds for infrastructure, improved communication,

economic impact studies, youth programs, and citizen involvement. The LRCC submitted its

report to the Park Service regional office in January 1993. By September of that year, Gorton

had recommended the addition of language to the FY1993 Interior Appropriations bill to

make both the state and counties equal partners in managing Lake Roosevelt. In addition, he

stipulated that LARO reconsider its Special Park Use Management Plan within a year. These

recommendations never became law. [132]

One result of this conflict with counties and Congress was the revision of the park's General

Management Plan (GMP). Although LARO was not quite due for a new GMP, the time

seemed right for updating the plan because the planning effort could draw in county

governments and encourage public participation. LARO staff discussed this as early as 1994,

but the process was not set in motion until Vaughn Baker replaced Gerald Tays as

Superintendent in 1996. In October, Baker notified county commissioners of the upcoming

GMP process and explained that while the plan pertained to land and waters managed by the

Park Service, the agency did not want to prepare such a document without input from

counties and other interested parties. The counties did participate and much of the

dissatisfaction has died away. LARO continues to deal with them on a government-togovernment basis as needed. [133]

Lake Roosevelt Forum

Another group, the Lake Roosevelt Forum, eventually became an ally for LARO. The Forum

formed about 1988 at a time when the Park Service was negotiating the Multi-Party

Agreement and the Concessions Management Plan, as well as dealing with neighboring
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5h.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:55 PM]

counties and property owners who disagreed with management decisions. With multiple

managers and users, it became clear to many people that they needed to find ways to

cooperate on issues concerning the lake. The people pushing the Forum concept came from

the Partnership for Rural Improvement and the Washington State University (WSU)

Cooperative Extension Service. With assistance from Terry Knapton, then CCT Executive

Director, and other interested parties, the Forum was refined. The Park Service has been

involved closely from the start, and other members include county commissioners, tribal

representatives, federal and state agency personnel, concessionaires, adjacent property

owners, and user groups. The goal of the Forum was to encourage a "dialogue based on trust

and respect for all views" by finding ways to protect environmental quality and enhance the

quality of life in relation to both the lake and the regional economy. [134]

The Partnership and the WSU Cooperative Extension Service sponsored the first forums.

Then the organization got a boost with a three-year grant of $250,000 from the Northwest

Area Foundation in 1989. The funds were used to hire an executive director, pay for meeting

facilities, and publish a newsletter. The Park Service contributed office space and furnishings

in 1990 as part of the in-kind match for the grant. After a second grant ran out, primary

funding was taken over by member organizations; both Reclamation and the Park Service

contributed $10,000 in 1998. In addition to quarterly meetings, open to the public, the Forum

has active committees that work on issues such as water quality. It also sponsors educational

initiatives, such as the Floating Classroom and the Lake Roosevelt Water Festival. After

declining in the late 1990s, the Forum has revived and continues its educational outreach.

[135]

Over the years, Forum members have disagreed on the organization's role, causing occasional

friction. Some county commissioners, adjacent landowners, and liaisons from WSU initially

wanted the Forum to participate in the decision-making process at Lake Roosevelt, reaching

consensus on management of areas within tribal and Park Service jurisdiction. At meetings,

Wendell George, a CCT employee, and LARO Assistant Superintendent Cash routinely

explained that the Forum could not legally make such decisions. They used such meetings to

educate Forum members about management roles and jurisdictional issues at Lake Roosevelt.

[136]

Cooperating Association

During the 1920s, cooperating associations formed to help individual national parks raise

additional money to fund extra projects. They specialized in publication of maps and a

variety of books to enrich visitors' appreciation of the park. LARO's Natural History

Association formed in September 1962 to assist the park. One of its first projects was raising

money to acquire a small strip of land next to one of the Park Service houses in Coulee Dam,

enabling better access to the property; the Association then donated the land to the

government. It began publication of a free park newspaper, the Lake Roosevelt Mirror, in

1979 and maintained this service until recent years when the Government Printing Office

took over printing. Sales of Association materials were sluggish in the early 1980s following

closure of the Spokane field office, but they picked up after 1984 with the establishment of a

sales outlet at the Bureau of Reclamation's Visitor Arrival Center (VAC) at Grand Coulee

Dam. Increased park visitation contributed to a rapid increase in sales in the early 1990s;

profits totaled over $34,000 in 1991, up from just $8,000 two years earlier. A new outlet at

the Dry Falls Interpretive Center in 1992 caused sales to double, and they continued to rise to

a high of $112,000 in 1994. The next year, however, sales dropped to $94,000 when the

outlet at the VAC closed. They fell further the next year due to lower visitation and fewer

operating days at Dry Falls. The LARO cooperating association became part of the Pacific

Northwest National Parks Association, now known as the Northwest Interpretive Association.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5h.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:55 PM]

[137]

Lake Roosevelt Coordinating Committee

The 1990 Cooperative Management Agreement established a committee with a representative

from each party to coordinate management of the Lake Roosevelt Management Area

(LRMA). The committee was to review and coordinate management plans, policies,

regulations, and permits; incorporate plans developed by other parties "to provide to the

extent practicable uniform management"; monitor compliance with the agreement; receive

comments from individuals, groups, and governmental entities concerning activities related to

management of the LRMA; and coordinate budgets. One of the key provisions of this

committee was the establishment of a dispute resolution process through which parties could

mediate disagreements. [138]

When Superintendent Gerry Tays arrived in 1993, he found the Lake Roosevelt Coordinating

Committee working "extremely well." Composed of the senior officials of all five signatory

parties, "it truly was an opportunity to sit down in a room around a table . . . and talk about

our problems." At that time, the Park Service had leadership of the committee and Tays

served as chairman. Leadership then rotated to another party, and Tays remembered that the

number of meetings began to drop off until the LRCC essentially ended. "Most of the issues

that we talked about at the table had to do with the Park Service one way or another," Tays

said. "It clearly was in the Park Service's interest to keep this thing going. And when we

weren't the driving force, it just kind of petered out." [139] Vaughn Baker found that the

committee had pretty well disintegrated by the time he was appointed Superintendent in

1996. For a while, the committee tried to meet in conjunction with meetings of the Lake

Roosevelt Forum, but Baker noted that the Park Service and Reclamation were the only

parties represented at such gatherings. He soon recognized that the STI preferred to do

business on a government-to-government basis, and that remains the foundation for LAROtribal relations today. [140]

Conclusion

While the LRCC is no longer active, the staff at LARO continues to work with groups and

individuals who raise a wide variety of issues concerning the park. Sometimes the interests

of these groups parallel those of the Park Service while at other times they clash. This has

been true from the beginning of the park when the superintendent and his small staff dealt

with supporters and occasional detractors as they worked to build facilities and establish

regulations. Through the years the LARO staff has been challenged with short-term issues,

like boundary adjustments, as well as continuing ones, like floating debris on Lake Roosevelt.

Their actions and decisions have helped shape the park as it is today.

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

laro/adhi/adhi5h.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5b.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:57 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 5:

Charting the Course: Managers and

Management Issues (continued)

Radio Communications

Communication has presented a challenge to Park Service staff at Lake Roosevelt since the

beginning. Many of the problems stem from the physical nature of the park, a narrow band of

land and water stretching more than 150 miles, bounded by hills and mountains. Inadequate

budgets also contributed to communication difficulties in this remote area.

In 1947, Reclamation helped the Park Service install a radio antenna, with two more added

the following year. Park Service staff initially maintained a radio room in the Federal Guard

building in Coulee Dam but later moved the base station to the North Marina. The equipment

was old, however, and in 1950, Superintendent Claude Greider reported that the results

remained unsatisfactory after three years of trying to make the outdated equipment work. He

decided not to spend any more money or time at that point, preferring to wait for an

improved system. That may not have come until 1962 when Superintendent Homer Robinson

reported that the park had received $234,298 for a complete communications system. It was

to include three base stations, twelve mobile radios, and five portable stations. He believed

that coverage should be complete, improving both operations and administration for LARO.

[44]

That system was deemed inadequate nearly ten years later due to increasing interference with

the radio signal. At that time, Reclamation took care of maintaining the system but did no

preventative maintenance. The regional office approved a Project Construction Proposal for a

high-band radio system for the entire park in February 1971. Over the next year and a half,

representatives from both the Western Service Center and the DSC came to LARO to analyze

the park's needs. They recommended a new system with a repeater on Monumental

Mountain, southwest of Colville, and a second one in the hills above Jones Bay.

Superintendent Burgen submitted justification for the new system in October 1973, saying

that the radios were needed to cover the NRA because only five of the twenty-five developed

sites had a telephone. Repairs on the radio system in the last fifteen months had cost close to

$2,000, causing a great deal of down time. In addition, interference during the critical

summer months came from as far away as Arkansas. Don Everts remembered one time when

he had tried for half an hour without success to reach Kettle Falls from the south end of the

lake. Finally a person who was hearing both sides broke in to ask Don if he needed help in

relaying the message. It turned out to be the regional office in Santa Fe, New Mexico. [45]

One of the main improvements in the radio system in the 1970s was the addition of a repeater

station within the park boundaries. Because the Park Service lacked the authority to purchase

any land, Superintendent Burgen turned to the Mount Rainier Natural History Association for

help. In 1974, the Association paid $330 for one-quarter acre of land on the plateau above

Keller Ferry and donated it to Reclamation, who then put it under the administration of the
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5b.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:57 PM]

Park Service. LARO staff constructed a concrete block building and erected a 160-foot radio

tower that year. Reclamation's repeater on Monumental Mountain was "in various stages of

obsolescence" at this time, and it asked permission to make a couple of additions to the new

Park Service repeater to allow the agencies to share frequencies. Burgen turned down the

request, however, saying that the Park Service needed to be able to control confidentiality in

its transmissions, a special concern of law enforcement. He offered to occasionally loan

portable units to Reclamation instead. Installation of the new radio system, including new

base stations and mobile units, continued at least into mid-1975. At the turn of the new

century, LARO still maintains a repeater on Monumental Mountain. The other repeater has

been moved from Creston Butte to Johnny George Mountain on the Colville Reservation.

[46]

Paul McCrary, Homer Robinson, and Al Drysdale installing

equipment in the radio transmitter building, March 1961. Photo

courtesy of National Park Service, Lake Roosevelt National

Recreation Area (LARO.HQ.MENG).

The most recent significant change in the radio system at Lake Roosevelt has been the

mandated reduction in bandwidth in all federal VHF radio channels to be completed by 2005.

By the summer of 1998, however, all radio equipment at LARO was still the old wideband

type and included three fixed-base stations, one mobile base station, nineteen remotecontrolled units, one bay-communication console, one commercially powered repeater, three

solar-powered repeaters, eight marine radios, forty-five mobile radios, and seventy portables.

At that time, LARO staff was interested in cellular phones as possible replacements for the

radio system, since close to 75 percent of the park could be reached with cellular service. The

park had six cellular phones in 1998 and anticipated increased use in the future. [47]

Staff at LARO have used radios for many purposes over the years. In 1998, there were forty

full-time equivalents, twenty seasonals, and ten volunteers who needed radios, with the

heaviest use occurring from May through September. First priority was law enforcement,

followed by fire protection, maintenance, natural resources, and administration. Law

enforcement personnel at Lake Roosevelt needed to communicate not only with each other

but also with other law enforcement agencies outside the park. LARO approached the

Stevens County Sheriff in 1975 to arrange for direct communication from the park to both the
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5b.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:57 PM]

Sheriff and State Patrol. Since the Park Service planned to purchase units for some vehicles

that year, LARO hoped to buy ones that would be compatible with nearby agencies. LARO

continued to establish cooperative relationships with local agencies during the 1980s,

including the Stevens County Department of Emergency Services in 1984, Lincoln County

Fire Protection District #7 in 1987, and Stevens County Fire Radio System in 1989. When

Reclamation eliminated its dispatch services, on which the Park Service had depended,

LARO contracted in 1996 with Lincoln and Stevens counties to take over dispatch full-time.

[48]

Computers and Electronic Mail

The advent of computers and electronic mail, or email, changed communications at LARO.

Email now supplements telephone communication, enabling staff to send and receive written

messages at their convenience. In addition, email within the National Park System has altered

communications among parks and regional offices, frequently replacing traditional written

communications sent through the postal system.

LARO purchased its first computer, a Datapoint 1800, in 1982. Employees soon developed

programs for use within the park. The system expanded rapidly two years later with the

addition of a Wang word processing system with terminals in maintenance, administration,

and the office of the Superintendent's secretary. The used equipment was acquired from the

regional office, saving close to $25,000. The original Datapoint computer enabled LARO to

transmit the payroll to the regional office electronically by 1984. The park developed a fiveyear computer plan that year. [49]

Computers, designed to save time with work, actually led to a backlog of work in 1988. By

that year, nearly every office in the park had a work station, and employees all wanted to

learn to use the new technology. The administrative staff had gained expertise on computers,

mostly outside normal working hours, teaching themselves and others. "We crossed our

fingers and forged ahead as a team," wrote Superintendent Kuiper, "sharing knowledge and

learning as we progressed." The administrative personnel then spent extra time tutoring other

staff, leaving lower priority tasks undone. This caused a backlog of work by the end of the

year that the park realized would take considerable time to clear up. Still, they had seven new

work stations up and running that year, "thanks to this pioneering spirit!" LARO hired its first

computer specialist in April 1991. [50]

Electronic communications within and among offices became available in the late 1980s and

1990s. The Park Service installed SEADOG nodes in three districts in 1989 but still had no

way to share data between offices. Instead, staff carried diskettes among the twelve work

stations at Headquarters, a method they found "annoying, but tolerable." [51] LARO installed

a Local Area Network at Headquarters in 1992 and followed with one in the North District in

1994-1995 and one in the South District in 1996. Electronic mail became available in 1992 at

LARO Headquarters and the District offices. A router installed two years later allowed the

park to link up with the Department of the Interior network. The router also improved the

speed and efficiency of electronic mail between LARO and the Seattle Support Office and

enhanced utilization of the budget programs, Federal Financial System and the Federal Pay

Pers System. In addition to adding new capabilities to the computer system, LARO upgraded

individual computers so that nearly all of the older 286 models had been eliminated by 1995.

The park also moved to change all of the technology to work in the Windows-based system,

training some of the staff in this program in 1996. [52]

<<< Previous <<< Contents >>> Next >>>
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5b.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:57 PM]

laro/adhi/adhi5b.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6j.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:59 PM]

Fire equipment on hand at

LARO in 1960:

1942 pumper truck

3 portable pumpers

3 outboard boats

6 pickup trucks

4 portable radios

3 10-12-man hand-tool caches

1 20-man hand tool cache

60 hand tools at headquarters

chainsaws

8 additional boats

2 D-4 Caterpillars

2 100-gallon sprayers [132]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 6:

Family Vacation Lake: Recreation Planning

and Management (continued)

Wildland Fire Management

Preventing, detecting, and suppressing wildland fires at LARO has never been a major

management concern. Total suppression of all forest fires has been the policy at LARO since

it was established, unlike many other park units that now allow natural fires to burn within

certain parameters. The main concern at LARO is preventing fires that originate on the

narrow strip of federal lands from spreading to adjacent lands. Most of LARO's wildfires are

human-caused. In the 1940s, LARO had no funds for any fire detection or suppression, so

the Superintendent arranged with the U.S. Coast Guard to provide fire patrols and the

necessary equipment for initial attacks. LARO and other agencies in the area agreed that the

Park Service had a responsibility to be involved in fire prevention because of the potential of

fires being started by visitors in the NRA. LARO began using posters and interpretive

programs to spread the fire prevention message. By the terms of the 1946 Tri-Party

Agreement, the Park Service was responsible for coordinating fire prevention and suppression

efforts within the NRA except for the Indian Zones, for which the BIA was responsible. [131]

LARO worked out agreements with the Colville

National Forest, the Washington Department of

Conservation and Development, and county fire

wardens to provide fire detection and suppression on

LARO lands outside of the reservations, paying a fixed

annual per-acre fee (3.5 to 6.67 cents per acre) for the

services of the Forest Service and the state. In 1952,

LARO began to purchase equipment for small fire

caches at Kettle Falls and Coulee Dam. Appropriations

for fire management remained small, around $500 per

year, until the Mission 66 period. LARO's Mission 66

prospectus noted that much greater funding was

needed for fire-related activities, including annual

spring burning, fire trail construction and maintenance,

fire equipment, payments to cooperating fire protection

agencies, and structural fire protection. [133]

Communications systems that relied on telephones greatly limited the effectiveness of LARO

employees in fighting fires. In the early 1960s, the park began to receive funding for a muchneeded radio system. Although LARO had no fire lookouts, several lookouts administered by

other agencies covered part of the land area of the NRA. The Park Service relied on

employees, visitors, residents, and travelers to report fires. LARO hired seasonal fire control

aides as needed to supplement the ranger force in pre-suppression work. In the early 1960s,
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6j.htm[2/26/2014 3:35:59 PM]

the written cooperative agreements had expired, but verbal mutual aid agreements continued

the cooperative fire protection arrangements of the 1950s. In 1964, LARO signed an

agreement with the state providing for mutual initial fire suppression on all Park Service

lands plus surrounding state lands within one mile of the Lake Roosevelt shoreline, and this

agreement was periodically updated. [134]

The number and acreage of LARO's fires remained small through at least 1980. At that time,

the average number of fires per year was three, and the largest was in 1970, when 195 acres

of federal land burned. About two-thirds of all fires involved less than one acre of federal

land. LARO's 1980 Fire Management Plan re-emphasized full suppression of all fires. LARO

began to use the National Interagency Incident Management System in fire emergencies in

the 1980s, as did other park units around the country. This system establishes an on-scene

management structure that can be used to deal with a wide variety of incidents. To aid in

cooperative firefighting and other efforts, Park Service radio frequencies were incorporated

into county units. LARO has also recently received some funding for equipment through the

nationwide FIREPRO program. [135]

LARO occasionally used controlled burns to reduce fuel loads in developed areas and to burn

vegetation in roadside ditches in the 1970s, and it allowed agricultural permittees to burn

their leased lands. By 1981, the park was considering implementing a formal prescribed burn

program that would help restore the historic scene at Fort Spokane, reduce fire hazard in

developed areas, restore natural fuel loading, reestablish the natural influences of fire,

maintain open fields, moderate insect activity, improve wildlife habitat, and control exotic

plants. In 1995, Park Service representatives from the National Interagency Fire Center and

the Columbia Cascades Cluster provided on-site technical assistance to LARO for

establishing such a program. The NRA established burn units, personnel were trained in fire

ecology, and a draft burn plan for a pilot burn project was prepared. These changes were in

line with Park Service direction to use fire to enhance natural systems. LARO is currently

preparing the environmental assessment for its prescribed burn plan. [136]

Conclusion

LARO's managers in the 1940s and 1950s looked at the big picture and drew up a basic

framework for developing the recreation area that has changed little over succeeding decades.

The sites that they envisioned as most suitable for development are, generally, the ones that

receive the most use by visitors and attention from park staff today, with a few notable

exceptions such as the still-undeveloped Crescent Bay.

The tremendous climb in visitation at LARO in the 1980s and 1990s, and the shift of

jurisdiction over the Reservation Zone to the CCT and STI, have had significant impacts on

recreation management at LARO. The national recreation area is changing with the times.

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

laro/adhi/adhi6j.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6b.htm[2/26/2014 3:36:05 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 6:

Family Vacation Lake: Recreation Planning

and Management (continued)

Recreation Planning for Lake Roosevelt up to 1956

The Park Service became involved in planning for recreation on Lake Roosevelt in late 1939,

when Reclamation organized the Joint Investigations of the Columbia Basin Irrigation Project

to provide an orderly program for the development and settlement of the project area.

Problem No. 26 focused on the recreational development of Lake Roosevelt. The Park

Service selected Claude Greider, a state supervisor with the agency based in Portland,

Oregon, to head the committee. This was the start of Greider's fourteen-year involvement

with Lake Roosevelt and the NRA that was eventually created around its shores. [20]

The committee's report, completed in April 1942, provided preliminary layouts of various

recreational sites bordering the lake in order to facilitate rational coordination of private and

public development. Ten sites were selected for priority development for general public use.

General problems noted by the committee included the pollution of the Spokane River and

the lack of shade trees at proposed development sites. [21]

For the next several years, Claude Greider and his small staff performed land use studies and

formulated a development program for the NRA. Reclamation provided funds on an annual

basis for the supervision of current uses. The Park Service was not allowed to initiate any

development or protection of the area; its responsibilities were limited to administrative

duties and planning. [22]

Finally, the decision as to which agency would manage Lake Roosevelt was made. In April

1946, representatives of the Park Service, Reclamation, and Office of Indian Affairs (OIA)

drafted the tri-party interbureau agreement that designated the National Park Service as the

principal administrative agency for the Lake Roosevelt area. The Secretary of the Interior

approved this agreement December 18, 1946, and the area was designated Coulee Dam

Recreational Area. Under this agreement, the Park Service assumed responsibility to plan for

recreational facilities and arrange for their construction, operation, and maintenance; establish

policies regarding the uses of the NRA; negotiate contracts for concessions; and designate (in

consultation with the OIA) suitable recreation sites within the Indian Zones. The Park Service

agreed to submit itemized cost estimates to Reclamation, which would advance the necessary

funds as available. Reclamation agreed to provide facilities within the Reclamation Zone near

Grand Coulee Dam for the Park Service to use in administering the area. [23]

Between 1941 and 1946, the years of temporary interbureau agreements and debates over

which agency should manage recreation on Lake Roosevelt, a handful of Park Service

employees worked on recreation planning for the reservoir in addition to administering its

current uses. Philip W. Kearney, a landscape architect employed by the CCC, and Greider,

with help from the Regional Office, completed a Master Plan for Lake Roosevelt in 1944 that
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6b.htm[2/26/2014 3:36:05 PM]

Proposed development sites,

1944 Master Plan:

 1. Coulee Dam Marina

(adjacent to Reclamation's

Visitor Access Center, most

needed, administrative

headquarters)

 2. Spring Canyon

 3. Keller Ferry Park

 4. Keller Wayside (only site on

superseded the report of the committee on Problem No. 26. [24]

Landscape park planning and design had matured in the late 1920s, and the Park Service

hired many talented landscape architects during the 1930s. Master Plans represented an

attempt to prepare plans for orderly development of an area. Individual layout plans for sites

to be developed provided details concerning the location of individual features. Master Plans

were intended to protect parks from excessive or poorly coordinated road construction and

other development. They detailed multi-year programs of prioritized construction activity and

were intended to be flexible to allow for changing conditions. Following this general

program, Greider and Kearney classified the reservoir shore land according to zones for "best

social and economic uses"; located sites for development of various resources; determined

additional private lands for the federal government to acquire; prepared general layout plans

for development of each recreational site; and coordinated all uses of the area. In 1943,

Greider stated that the aim of the recreation program for Lake Roosevelt was to "provide

wholesome recreation at the lowest possible cost to the individual." [25]

The Master Plan completed by Greider and Kearney in 1944 delineated a number of sites

appropriate for recreational development. The report emphasized the need to provide a

balanced program for the area as a whole, planning for full development but understanding

that development would be made in phases only as required by public use. Post-war

development, the report stated, should cover the estimated requirements for the first five

years, guarding against over-development. The federal government (agency not yet

determined) should develop and administer free public recreational facilities and boating.

Private concessions should provide facilities for which a user fee was charged, such as boat

docks, boat service facilities, concessionaire and lodge buildings, and cabin camps. [26] The

plans prepared for this report generally provided the basis for the development of LARO that

was finally funded in the 1950s.

The 1944 development plans for a number of sites included provision for one- and two-room

cabins, shelter kitchens, softball fields, summer homes, and tennis courts, plus more

traditional Park Service facilities such as swimming and picnicking areas, campgrounds, and

restrooms. The "rustic" style of architecture popular during the 1930s was now seen as

outmoded and too costly since the CCC program had been discontinued. The 1944 plans

correlated nicely with recommendations made in Frank A. Waugh's 1935 book, Landscape

Conservation: Planning for the Restoration, Conservation, and Utilization of Wild Lands for

Parks and Forests. This work recommended that park structures should be in harmony with

the setting, lacking in ornamentation, and arranged in clusters. Waugh stressed the need to

plan for and select the best locations for a variety of sites, even if they were not to be

developed initially. These included administrative, service, hotels and accommodations,

water conservation and supply, sewage disposal, clubhouses, group campsites, tent campsites,

playing fields, tennis courts, golf courses, bathing beaches, and fishing sites. [27]

Like other Park Service units established soon after

World War II, LARO's earliest facilities were designed

to be functional and relatively easy to maintain. For

example, in 1954 Superintendent Hugh Peyton

described the optimal comfort station design for Fort

Spokane as having a concrete floor, pitched roof with

composition roofing, steel windows, metal partitions

and stall doors, and plumbing and storage space in the

center between the men's and women's sections. [29]

Once rationing of gas and rubber was lifted at the end

of the war, and as leisure time, disposable income, and
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6b.htm[2/26/2014 3:36:05 PM]

Colville Reservation)

 5. Lincoln Canyon

 6. Hawk Creek Harbor

 7. Old Fort Spokane

(important site, but river

pollution will limit

development)

 8. Hunters Landing

 9. Old Kettle Falls Park (on

original townsite)

10. Marcus Island (major

development)

11. Kettle River Camp

12. various remote overnight

campsites for fishermen and

boaters and also summer home

sites

-- Park Service, "Columbia

River Reservoir Area," 1944

[28]

mobility increased, millions of Americans took to the

highways for vacations. Outdoor recreation grew

tremendously popular. In 1941, swimming was the

most popular outdoor sport in America, and boating

was eighth. But on newly formed Lake Roosevelt,

industrial uses dominated, especially uses related to the

timber industry. In 1944, for example, only eight out

of the sixty special-use permits granted by Greider's

office were for recreation. For several years, the only

public boating facilities on the reservoir were boat

slips built by the Works Projects Administration in

1938 or 1939 and then leased by Reclamation to the

Grand Coulee Dam Yacht Club. In 1940, a

commercial outfit known as the Grand Coulee

Navigation Company began providing passenger

service on Lake Roosevelt, and soon Reclamation

granted a few permits for boat fueling and fuel and

mechanical service for seaplanes. [30]

By 1941, some fifty or sixty private "pleasure boats"

were maintained on Lake Roosevelt (this number

dropped dramatically, however, during the war). One of the influential promoters of boating

on Lake Roosevelt was Reclamation engineer Frank Banks, whose thirty-four-foot cruiser

was the largest pleasure craft on the lake. Many promoted the 328-mile waterway between

Revelstoke, British Columbia, and Grand Coulee Dam, and in 1946 a Reclamation employee

took eight days to paddle the full length in a homemade kayak. [31]

During the ten years between 1946, when the Park Service officially took over the

administration of recreation on Lake Roosevelt, and 1956, when the Mission 66 program

began, LARO staff concentrated on recreational planning, administering current uses, and

constructing the first facilities for the public on the reservoir. Three districts were established:

Coulee Dam, Fort Spokane, and Kettle Falls. By the late 1940s, a private float plane base

that also provided storage and service for boats was established at the North Marina. This

first public facility along the entire reservoir was located on land managed by Reclamation,

not the Park Service. Initial Park Service planning concentrated on developments such as

roads, water and sanitation systems, utilities, boating facilities, beaches, and picnic grounds at

the major sites of Coulee Dam and vicinity, Fort Spokane, and Kettle Falls. NRA staff

expected Kettle Falls to become the most important recreational site in the area, and they

hoped for boating, float plane facilities, bathing, picnicking, camping, tourist cabins, and

other facilities at that location. Secondary development sites included Keller Ferry, Sanpoil,

Hunters, and North Gorge. Problems facing the Park Service, however, were significant.

They included the poor fishery; woody debris floating on the lake and along the lakeshore

(especially after the 1948 floods); pollution of the Spokane River, South Marina, Hawk

Creek, and Colville River; and land acquisition (including much land needed at Fort

Spokane). [32]

Private development by concessions began at LARO before the Park Service was able to

begin construction projects. In fiscal year 1947, the Coulee Dam Amphibious Aircraft

Company established a float plane and sightseeing boat operation; Grand Coulee Navigation

Company initiated scheduled and chartered boat rides; and Stranger Creek Grange

constructed a recreation site at Gifford. Over the next few years, concession facilities

concentrated at North Marina, Fort Spokane, and Kettle Falls. [33]

Local groups did some development on their own, with Park Service approval. For example,
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6b.htm[2/26/2014 3:36:05 PM]

the towns of Grand Coulee and Kettle Falls developed swim beach facilities in the 1940s,

and the Red Cross provided swimming instruction at these and at the Reclamation beach at

Coulee Dam. The Park Service tried to provide simple development such as hand pumps,

beach improvements, pit toilets, tables and fireplaces, shade trees, and even boat launch

ramps at some sites, often in cooperation with local groups such as the Wilbur Boat Club

(Sanpoil campground), Wellpinit 4-H Club, and Greenwood Park Grange (Hunters).

Superintendent Greider worried about public use of the area without adequate facilities and

area regulations, but local communities successfully organized events such as a 1949 Fourth

of July celebration at Kettle Falls that attracted seven thousand people for boat races and

salmon barbecues. [34]

Swimming class at North Marina, August 1946. Photo courtesy of

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Grand Coulee (USBR Archives 1346).

Greider spent much of 1948 working on a new Master Plan for LARO that included

drawings, a Development Outline, and proposals for construction projects for 1950-1951. The

plans included a number of minor boat landings and picnic grounds at more remote sites to

help meet the needs of area residents. Park Service Acting Director A. E. Demaray approved

this plan in the fall of 1948. The proposed Park Service program for LARO involved

spending $1.7 million over the next six years to develop Lake Roosevelt for recreation, with

an anticipated $1 million in private funds expected to be invested by concessionaires. LARO

staff felt that priority should go to facilities to make boating available, such as boat slips,

fueling stations, docks, repair facilities, and the removal of hazardous floating debris on the

lake. [35]

Development of a couple of the areas targeted for intensive development proved problematic

early on in the planning process. One of these areas was South Marina (known today as

Crescent Bay). In the late 1940s, this area was dropped from consideration as a development

site because Reclamation needed to use it for a concrete manufacturing plant and because of

dangerous slide conditions. Similarly, much of the development of Fort Spokane was

reworked and then delayed because of new information on possible hazardous landslide

potential and because the Park Service needed to acquire additional land there. [36]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6b.htm[2/26/2014 3:36:05 PM]

The 1948 Master Plan contemplated a total of $2.226 million to be spent for physical

improvements at LARO, of which $1.851 million was earmarked for the three districts' major

development and minor areas. Development was planned to take place evenly throughout the

area as the need for facilities was seen to be "equally acute" in each district. LARO, like

other areas administered by the Park Service, prepared Project Construction Plans (PCPs) that

allowed the Park Service to justify budget requests for development projects to the Bureau of

the Budget and to Congress. At the end of 1949, the PCP priority list for LARO included

three headquarters residences; an administrative building; dredging the channel at Kettle Falls

to make it suitable for the concessionaire; a residence, warehouse, water and power system,

sewer, beach and picnic area, and comfort stations at Kettle Falls; warehouse machine

storage and partial water and sewer systems at Fort Spokane; a warehouse at headquarters;

and a fence at North Marina. [37]

The planning for LARO's recreational development did not always go smoothly, partly

because many offices and individuals were involved in the process. In 1954, the Acting Chief

of the Western Office, Division of Design and Construction, commented to the Park Service

Director that there had been "considerable disagreement on planning for Coulee Dam." [38]

As an example, in 1954 and 1955 the Regional Office and LARO Superintendent Hugh

Peyton conducted a prolonged argument over proposed layouts for Fort Spokane. Peyton

wanted the approved plan revised, eliminating a motel that he did not believe likely to be

built soon, so that some public service could be established that year. The Regional Office

emphasized that any permanent development had to conform to the approved plan or be

delayed until the Park Service Director approved a new drawing. Finally, in 1955 the

Director approved the tenth version of the Fort Spokane drawing, one that eliminated both

the proposed motel and concessionaire cabins and made other changes requested by Peyton.

[39]

Once South Marina/Crescent Bay had been rejected for development, attention turned to

Spring Canyon as the principal developed area at the lower end of Lake Roosevelt, an

important site because Grand Coulee Dam received so much visitation. The Regional Office

urged LARO to install a temporary boat ramp at Spring Canyon (along with picnic tables and

fireplaces at North Marina) to relieve the public pressure. An access road to Spring Canyon

was estimated to cost $123,000; Greider suggested that this expensive road be replaced with

a gravel road because "it would not be good advertising to build a $123,000 road to Spring

Canyon and then provide no means of using Spring Canyon beach at the end of this road."

[40]

One of the challenging issues facing Greider was the acquisition of tracts of private lands that

he believed "vital" for the recreational program proposed for Lake Roosevelt. In 1946, he

recommended that the federal government acquire 1,600 to 1,700 acres. This included tracts

totaling 325 acres along Highway 25 (Bissell to Evans) that might be developed in

undesirable ways. The desired acreage also included land adjacent to sites proposed for

intensive recreational development, about sixty acres to be donated for the Spring Canyon

development, and about 370 acres in the Fort Spokane Military Reservation. In 1949,

Reclamation began the process of acquiring some of the tracts considered essential for the

development of key recreational areas. [41]

One land-acquisition case that took much time and effort to accomplish and resulted in

difficulties in later years was the acquisition of some seventy acres in the Spring Canyon

area. This land, located just a few miles above the dam, provided access to a proposed

recreation site at Spring Canyon. The land was owned by the Columbia City Development

Company, organized by residents of Grand Coulee to develop a city to replace the "shanty

town" of Grand Coulee and to provide a site for a smelter at the mouth of Spring Canyon.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6b.htm[2/26/2014 3:36:05 PM]

I feel that everyone understands

the urgency of the current

rearmament program and that

much of the development we

considered so necessary a year

ago should properly give way to

this greater emergency. We

therefore feel it might be

presumptious [sic] on our part

at this time to urge [Spokane

Chamber of Commerce] efforts

toward appropriations for

recreation developments for

this area. 

-- Claude E. Greider, LARO

Superintendent, 1950 [45]

The developers, seeing the advantage of a recreational site adjacent to the new town, in 1943

agreed to donate land to Reclamation contingent on future recreational development of the

site. The Columbia City Development Company and Julius Johnson, who held principal

interest in the company, signed an agreement giving the government five years to develop the

recreational site. Some of the land to be donated was state land withdrawn for the Grand

Coulee Dam project in 1934 and later sold by the state to the private company. The land

donation did not actually take place until the summer of 1952, when Raymond and Vesta

Johnson donated eighty-eight acres next to the Spring Canyon site. The land included a rightof-way for a two-mile entrance road and land needed for a beach, campground, and picnic

facilities. This donation allowed the Park Service to request funds for the development of the

site, and the campground, bathhouse, and swimming beach opened for visitors in June 1955.

Almost twenty-six thousand people visited Spring Canyon that first summer. [42]

Launching a boat at Kettle Falls, no date. Photo courtesy of National

Park Service, Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area (LARO.FS).

The recreational development of LARO was severely

hampered by budget restrictions. National Park Service

appropriations were cut more than 50 percent during

World War II. Funding levels remained low around the

nation until 1950. In 1949, for example, the total Park

Service operating budget was barely $14 million, and

LARO at that time estimated that it needed some $2

million to complete enough development work to

attract private capital to supply concession facilities.

As Greider noted, "[the] little driblets of appropriations

for this area such as we are to receive this year will

accomplish exactly nothing." [43] Until 1949, all funds

advanced to LARO were for administration purposes

only, not for protection, development, or maintenance.

Finally, in fiscal year 1950, LARO was appropriated

$180,345, which allowed the Park Service to begin

work on access roads, reservoir clean-up, and the

construction of employee residences. It was one of
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6b.htm[2/26/2014 3:36:05 PM]

LARO's existing buildings and

buildings under contract,

December 1953

Coulee Dam district:

3 residences, Coulee Dam

garage, Coulee Dam

paint storage building, Coulee

Dam

bath house, Spring Canyon

comfort station, Spring Canyon

Fort Spokane district:

residence, Fort Spokane

office-warehouse, Fort Spokane

shop-garage, Fort Spokane

2 pit toilets, Fort Spokane

residence, Gifford

2 pit toilets, Gifford

2 pit toilets, Keller wayside

2 pit toilets, Hawk Creek

Kettle Falls district:

shop-warehouse, Kettle Falls

warehouse, Kettle Falls

ranger station, Kettle Falls

paint and oil building, Kettle

Falls

pump house, Kettle Falls

bath house, Kettle Falls

comfort station, Kettle Falls

6 pit toilets, Kettle Falls (beach,

picnic area, campground)

Concessionaire (Coulee Dam):

residence duplex

hangar

boat repair shop

-- Robert H. Coombs, LARO

Acting Superintendent, 1953

[48]

only four recreation areas in the nation to receive such funding that year. [44]

The first construction projects at LARO included work

on approach roads to Kettle Falls, Fort Spokane, and

North Marina and a boat launch ramp at Fort Spokane,

all built in 1950 with the intention of enabling the

Grand Coulee Navigation Company to install boat

docks and to begin other developments. No money,

however, was appropriated for fiscal year 1951

because of the Korean War. In 1952, on the principal

that limited funds should be concentrated in one area

to make it usable, all the development funds were

spent at Kettle Falls, and the ranger office there was

constructed. By 1956, the Spring Canyon and Kettle

Falls beaches and campgrounds were essentially

completed and landscaped, and a few small areas had

minimum facilities (tables, fireplaces, and pit toilets),

partly just to reserve the sites for public rather than

private use. By 1955 Kettle Falls, for example, had a

ranger station, bathhouse and comfort station, lawns,

irrigation system, diving raft, and an improved beach.

The picnic area at North Marina, built primarily for

locals, was landscaped and outfitted with tables,

fireplaces, and pit toilets. The development of Fort

Spokane lagged behind somewhat because of the

controversy over the layout for proposed development.

[46]

LARO planners made provisions for permitting

summer home sites and recreation sites for organized

groups. The selection of summer home sites was

delayed somewhat, partly to ensure that no sites were

set aside that would have better served as campgrounds

or other public use areas. In the 1940s it was decided

that organized camping groups of "character building

agencies," including statewide religious organizations,

could obtain camping sites if their use did not conflict

with general public use. In the early 1950s, ten sites at

Sherman Creek and seventeen sites at Rickey Point,

both in the Kettle Falls vicinity, were leased for

summer cabins on a fee permit basis. [47]

One of Greider's major concerns during his tenure at

LARO was Lake Roosevelt's poor fishery; he knew

that improved fishing opportunities would greatly

increase the area's recreational appeal. Rainbow trout

could be caught at the northern end of the lake, but

"scrap fish" such as carp, sucker, and squawfish predominated. The Washington Department

of Game said it could not conduct a fisheries improvement program, but in 1947 Greider

requested that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service undertake a limnological study of the

reservoir to determine ways to improve sport fishing, and the agency complied. Meanwhile,

many visitors to the area (including the family of Park Service Regional Director O. A.

Tomlinson) stayed at fishing resorts at Twin Lakes on the Colville Reservation or fished at

other small regional lakes. [49]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6b.htm[2/26/2014 3:36:05 PM]

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

laro/adhi/adhi6b.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7j.htm[2/26/2014 3:36:09 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 7:

Building and Maintaining the Park:

Administrative and Visitor Facilities (continued)

South Marina and Crescent Bay

Today's Crescent Bay Lake, located near the town of Grand Coulee and Grand Coulee Dam,

was created in 1942. During the 1930s, a long conveyor belt carried overburden excavated

during construction of the dam to Rattlesnake Canyon. The canyon was diked in 1942 to

prevent raw sewage from Grand Coulee from entering Lake Roosevelt, and this formed

Crescent Bay Lake. The depth of fill is over one hundred feet in many parts of the shore

lands around Crescent Bay Lake; only the base of the rock quarry is not a waste dump site.

Because it was polluted by sewage, for many years locals called the body of water "Lake

Urine" and "Poop Lagoon." The lake is fed by springs and by discharge from the under-drain

system of the feeder canal, and at full pool it is twelve feet higher than Lake Roosevelt. As

early as 1942, the Park Service was including Rattlesnake Canyon in the list of areas

proposed for recreational development along the new reservoir, although acknowledging that

a sewage disposal plant would be needed to eliminate the pollution. A drawing prepared for

LARO in 1944 of the proposed "Coulee Dam Marina Development Site" showed marina

administration buildings, cabins, and a campground along the shores of Crescent Bay Lake

and a swimming beach, boat docks, a parking lot, storage and repairs building, a picnic area,

and a vista house and associated parking lot on the shores of Lake Roosevelt between

Crescent Bay Lake and the left end of Grand Coulee Dam. [122]

LARO Superintendent Claude Greider promoted the development of concession facilities and

administrative headquarters at South Marina (Crescent Bay) in the late 1940s. In 1948, the

proposed facilities at South Marina had changed slightly from the 1944 plans to include a

boat terminal, picnicking, parking for dam visitors, and a concessionaire's building. The

facilities were to be constructed by the government but operated by private interests. Park

Service hopes for early development of the site were dashed, however, at the end of 1948,

when Greider learned that Reclamation was establishing a concrete plant and putting into

operation an old sawmill at South Marina, making the site unusable for recreational purposes

for the next four years. Greider, dismayed at having to revamp the entire six-year

development program for the Coulee Dam district with no advance warning or consultation,

accused Reclamation of "grossly irregular" actions and of violating the terms of the Tri-Party

Agreement. Reclamation personnel responded that although they were remiss in not notifying

the LARO Superintendent sooner, the site was essential to their operations. Greider told the

Park Service Regional Director, "The Park Service is being definitely told where to head in."

[123]

Although Reclamation was able to withdraw its commitment for the sawmill, the concrete

plant remained an issue. The contest of wills over the concrete mixing plant at the South

Marina was taken to the level of the Directors of the Park Service and Reclamation because it
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7j.htm[2/26/2014 3:36:09 PM]

was seen as a breach of the 1946 Tri-Party Agreement. Park Service personnel felt they

should have been consulted before the contract was signed; Reclamation maintained that

project needs took precedence over recreational needs on all federal lands. By March 1949,

the Park Service acknowledged that their plans for South Marina would have to be either

delayed or modified. [124]

By the summer of 1950, LARO and Regional Office staff decided that the South Marina

should no longer be considered for headquarters or even for major development, mostly

because a geologic report indicated that practically all of the ground could be subject to

sliding and because of the continuing sewage disposal problems. Greider recommended that

the land be returned to Reclamation and that the headquarters building be located in Coulee

Dam proper. The land was returned to the Reclamation Zone in 1951. Then, the Park Service

turned its attention to making Spring Canyon the main developed area at the lower end of the

lake. LARO's Mission 66 prospectus did not even mention South Marina or Crescent Bay.

[125]

In 1961, Reclamation asked whether the Park Service would like to have the South Marina

returned to them. At that point, the sawmill was closed and its permit about to expire, but the

Bureau of Indian Affairs had been told that they could have a log dump site next to the mill

if they so desired. LARO Superintendent Homer Robinson felt the area did not offer much

recreation potential but that it could provide an excellent marina site for a concessionaire. The

Regional Office recommended against the transfer, saying, "From past experience we

question very seriously concessionaire interest in the development of a marina at this site."

[126] In 1963, Robinson decided that LARO would in fact like to administer the "sawmill

site," mostly because the Park Service anticipated increased visitation to the area because of

the construction of the proposed third powerhouse at Grand Coulee Dam. [127]

The sawmill lease of thirteen acres at Crescent Bay expired in 1964. The Grant County Port

District expressed the desire to develop a privately operated marina on the site, but then the

sawmill was leased in 1965 to the Biles-Coleman Lumber Company of Omak for twenty-five

years. [128]

The transfer of 240 acres of land - Crescent Bay Lake and its shore lands not including the

land leased for industrial purposes - back to the Park Service finally occurred in 1968. LARO

Superintendent David Richie noted that the lake had been developed as a fishery by the state,

with a boat ramp and parking area at the southeast end of the lake, but that it had "little to

offer for any other recreational activity," and he hoped to work out an agreement whereby

the State Game Department would continue to manage the lake. Under the agreement,

Reclamation assumed responsibility for controlling the water pollution of Crescent Bay Lake.

[129]

In 1968, Spokane architect Kenneth Brooks was hired by Reclamation to prepare plans for

development of the region as part of the third powerhouse construction project. His proposal

for Crescent Bay was rather imaginative, but it did not fit in at all with Park Service plans. He

suggested building a new high school/convention center on the southeast end of the lake

along with an observatory and planetarium. This proposal was not acted upon. [130]

The state poisoned the "scrap fish" in Crescent Bay Lake in 1960 and restocked it with trout.

In 1969, the state again poisoned the lake with rotenone, followed by a planting of rainbow

trout. Most of these fish died, however, and the state planted more fry in 1971. These, too,

died off because of low dissolved oxygen levels, despite pumping of oxygen into the lake in

the winter. The general public was not much interested in fishing in the lake anyway, partly

because of its known contamination by sewage and because of the "mud-like taste of

Crescent Bay fish." In 1975, after these discouraging losses, the state discontinued its
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7j.htm[2/26/2014 3:36:09 PM]

management of Crescent Bay Lake as a trout fishery. [131]

In the mid-1970s, LARO staff began to find that the Spring Canyon facilities, which could

not be expanded, were often overcrowded. Some 1,500-2,000 people packed into the Spring

Canyon developed area on summer Sundays. LARO also began to consider building a visitor

center on the sawmill site at Crescent Bay, which was on land that was still administered by

Reclamation. In 1976, mill operator Crown Zellerbach decided to close its operations

permanently, and LARO formally requested transfer of the land for use as a recreation site.

They felt this would relieve the pressure on Spring Canyon and would provide boat moorage

that would be "the foundation for concession facilities we have not been able to offer on a

decent scale." [132] A Park Service landscape architect prepared design alternatives for the

site, and the Denver Service Center set aside funds to prepare a more formal conceptual site

plan for the area. As of 1977, LARO was envisioning the following at Crescent Bay: visitor

contact station, picnic and play areas, comfort stations, parking, launch ramp, floating

courtesy docks, moorage for Park Service and Reclamation boats, and fish cleaning station

(but no swim beach). Concession facilities would include a marina that could hold as many as

200 boats, refreshment facility, and perhaps a restaurant. Down the road, LARO would

consider adding a major visitor center and relocating headquarters and the district office and

maintenance shops to the site. The subsequent Development Concept Proposal (DCP) even

suggested a "water feature" shaped like Lake Roosevelt that could be used as an interpretive

tool. The Park Service did not support breaching the Crescent Bay Lake dam and allowing

year-round connection to Lake Roosevelt because of the effects drawdowns would have on

Crescent Bay Lake. [133]

Crescent Bay Lake in background and South Marina site in

foreground, before removal of sawmill, 1977. (File L7617 Env'l

Impact — Crescent Bay, LARO.HQ.ADM.)

Reclamation agreed to turn over approximately twenty acres of land to the Park Service to

facilitate recreational development of the site. The 1978 DCP received much favorable local

reaction. The sawmill facilities were removed, and in 1978 the land was reclassified as

Recreation Zone. The proposed development was incorporated into LARO's construction

schedule, with work to commence in fiscal year 1985. The Park Service portion of the
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7j.htm[2/26/2014 3:36:09 PM]

The National Park Service and

Bureau of Reclamation are

sister agencies to the Bureau of

Indian Affairs and we, at least

development would cost $3.3 million. LARO's 1980 General Management Plan included

plans for the following: visitor contact station, park headquarters, Park Service maintenance

area, two boat launch ramps, non-motorized boats only on the lake, playground, picnic area,

outdoor amphitheater, paved path to Grand Coulee, landscaping, two comfort stations, 300-

vehicle parking area, study of a trail to Spring Canyon, and encouragement of a full-service

marina. [134]

Despite strong support from the Park Service Regional Office for the 1978 DCP for Crescent

Bay, it did not get high national priority and did not receive federal funding. New LARO

Superintendent Gary Kuiper tried again for federal funding in 1981, but this possibility

became more and more remote because the Park Service was being told to seek private

funding sources for projects that would be attractive to private developers. Following the

advice of the Regional Solicitor's office, in 1983 LARO issued a Statement of Requirements

for development of the thirty-five acres at Crescent Bay as a Park Service concession. No

proposals were received by the closing date. [135]

But the Park Service continued to see Crescent Bay, a somewhat sheltered inlet, as a good

place to establish a marina that would service boaters at that end of the reservoir. LARO

reissued the Crescent Bay solicitation in early 1984, and this time five parties expressed an

interest. The two finalists then tried to secure financial backing, and soon only one was seen

to be economically viable. LARO expected to sign a thirty-year concession contract for a $12

million development with that company, Dixon, Carter and Associates of Granby, Colorado

(Crescent Bay Limited Partnership). The proposed facilities at that point included a fiftyroom hotel, small convention facility, one-hundred-unit motel, recreational vehicle park, fastfood franchise, marina complex with houseboat and motor boat rentals, launch ramps, gas

sales, 108 boat slip rentals, swim beach, water slide, and convenience store. Because this and

the other proposals differed from those in the 1980 General Management Plan, presentations

were once again made to local groups. The Park Service completed an Environmental

Assessment for the project in October of 1984, and Dixon/Carter hired a marketing consultant

and an accounting firm to help in the planning process. [136]

The Crescent Bay project began to fall apart in the spring of 1985, however. The Park Service

Associate Director for Park Operations raised questions about the proposed concession

contract, including the waiving of a franchise fee in exchange for building public facilities.

The developer claimed it had spent $100,000 before the Park Service informed it of the need

for a franchise fee, which the developer called "bait and switch advertising." Then, according

to Dixon/Carter, since each new draft contract contained a higher fee requirement, it became

increasingly difficult to interest investors in the project. [137]

In 1985 the CCT also became involved. Their attorney voiced the complaint that plans for

Crescent Bay, which by then were quite large in scale, had "proceeded without so much as a

nod to the Tribes." The CCT formally requested sixty days for the Park Service to address the

tribes' concerns about the effects of the multi-million-dollar development on the tribes and on

the surrounding environment before signing the concession contract. The CCT and the

developer then began negotiations directly with each other on specific concerns. The contract

was signed in October 1985, establishing multiple phased-construction deadlines. Meanwhile,

LARO's relations with the tribes, particularly the CCT, improved when LARO staff began to

deal directly with the tribes rather than going through the Bureau of Indian Affairs. [139]

In 1986, the Park Service extended Dixon/Carter's

contract one year. The developers continued

negotiations with the tribes, but they were still having

trouble raising the necessary funding, which the

developers attributed to the unsettled jurisdictional and
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7j.htm[2/26/2014 3:36:09 PM]

at Colville, feel you share in this

responsibility. However, in our

meetings and negotiations with

you [Reclamation] and the Park

Service your tendency to

overlook this responsibility

frustrates the Tribal and

Agency Personnel. An example

of this oversight is the National

Park Services' [sic] handling of

the Crescent Bay Development

without regard to the Tribes

resources and sovereign powers.

The Colville Business Council

and my staff become very

frustrated when the Tribe is

forced to "end run" to

Washington, D. C. to ensure the

Trust Responsibility in

protecting the Tribes' resources

and sovereign powers. 

-- George M. Davis,

Superintendent, Colville

Agency, 1986 [140]

environmental issues created by the Park Service. Ed

Wimberly of Breckenridge, Colorado, negotiated for

the contract in early 1988 after the developers had

been refused another extension (Wimberly bought the

existing concession at Kettle Falls at this time). The

CCT asked that Wimberly pay 1 percent of the gross

receipts from the Crescent Bay project to help fund the

management of Lake Roosevelt. [141]

Wimberly chose not to discuss concerns about the

effects of his proposed Crescent Bay development on

the natural and cultural resources of the area with the

CCT, so the tribes were forced to file written

comments with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

The CCT continued to emphasize that they supported

construction of a major marina complex at Crescent

Bay, but not without considering the impacts of the

entire project, including off-site impacts. They

believed the 1984 Environmental Assessment was

"inadequate in the extreme." Some of the tribes' broad

concerns included impacts on the reservation, adjacent

archaeological sites, wildlife, fire danger, tribal

management of Lake Roosevelt, and fishery and

planned hatchery programs. On-site concerns included

fuel spillage, sewage, water pollution due to removal

of toxic fill, bald eagles, landslide potential, and traffic

congestion. [142]

By the summer of 1988, the concession contract was in dispute between the seller,

Dixon/Carter, and the prospective buyer, Ed Wimberly. Wimberly was concerned because he

did not have all the permits he needed, particularly one from the Corps of Engineers.

Dixon/Carter still held the contract, which was extended to February 1989. They signed an

agreement with the CCT in December 1988 that required paying a fee to the tribes. Over the

next several months, the Park Service granted several extensions of the contract for the

developers to complete financing. The Park Service terminated their contract in the summer

of 1989, however, when they failed to meet the financial and planning requirements for phase

one. The $19 million project was once again on hold, and the developers were bitter about

the whole process. Dixon/Carter, who claimed to have spent some $450,000 on the project,

requested that a Congressional oversight committee investigate the "misrepresentation and

fraudulent actions" of the Park Service in the offering, negotiation, and administration of the

Crescent Bay contract. This investigation never occurred. [143]

The Park Service planned to put a new Statement of Requirements out for bid in 1990, but

this was delayed because the Secretary of Interior placed a hold on all concession contracts

Servicewide until several concessions-related issues were resolved. In January 1991, the

Crescent Bay solicitation was revised to reflect the Secretary's initiatives. A consultant

prepared financial feasibility studies of five concession projects nationwide, including

Crescent Bay. This feasibility study, which made recommendations on scope of development,

investment required, franchise fee, and length of contract, was completed in 1993 or 1994. In

March 1994, the Park Service issued a prospectus once again. This time two bids were

received, but only the one submitted by the CCT was considered responsive. [144]

In 1995, however, the CCT withdrew their offer when they learned that only limited

modification of the required investment and final project details would be allowed and that
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7j.htm[2/26/2014 3:36:09 PM]

no deviation from standard contract language would be permitted. They felt it was too risky if

they were not guaranteed the right to renew a fifteen-year contract, were granted no

possessory rights, and had to install and pay for the infrastructure. LARO Superintendent

Gerry Tays worked with the Secretary of the Interior's Office and gained approval to

negotiate a contract with the tribes. The tribes envisioned the Crescent Bay development as

primarily a marina with boat-slip rentals, houseboat rentals, a gasoline dock, and other

facilities. Transportation to a proposed development on the reservation side of the lake might

be part of the role of the Crescent Bay marina. The negotiations did not move forward fast

enough, however. In October 1998, Congress changed the concession law to preclude solesource contracts. The process had to start over once again. [145]

Despite all the grand plans that have been drawn up for the Crescent Bay area since the

1940s, there are still only minimal visitor facilities at the site. At the end of the 1990s, Park

Service facilities at Crescent Bay on Lake Roosevelt included a vault toilet, a sixty-foot-wide

concrete launch ramp, and a skid dock. Crescent Bay Lake has a small launch ramp and

dock, and only non-motorized craft are allowed on the lake. During the summer, LARO

personnel lead regular guided canoe trips during which they talk about human impacts on the

area. LARO staff feel that marina facilities are necessary to serve visitors at the south end of

Lake Roosevelt. Both alternatives in the 1998 General Management Plan allow for

construction of a marina at Crescent Bay. [146]

Major recreational development of Crescent Bay has been proposed since the early 1940s.

Over the decades, a wide variety of challenges have prevented this from being accomplished.

The real difficulty lies in the funding of marina facilities. The facilities are very expensive,

and the rate of return is marginal. When you add Park Service concession policies to the mix,

it becomes almost impossible to raise private money to develop marinas. [147] The up-anddown history of Crescent Bay is more complex than that of most other proposed recreational

sites within LARO, but it illustrates the complicated situation facing LARO managers in

planning park facilities.

Conclusion

Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area was chronically short of funds from the 1940s

through the 1960s, the period when plans moved from drawings to reality as the Park Service

constructed many recreational and administrative facilities. Because of the tight budgets,

LARO staff learned to seek out government-surplus materials, equipment, and buildings, and

they came up with ingenious ways to stretch the available dollars. Most of the physical

evidence of these determined efforts to scrounge for needed materials no longer exist, but reuse of government surplus was an important factor in the recreation area's ability to move

forward with its plans for developing the area. It also speaks to the staff's drive, initiative, and

ingenuity in getting things done.

Between the 1960s and the 1990s, the scope of work for LARO's maintenance division

increased dramatically, and staffing levels responded in kind. Fort Spokane, for example, had

one permanent, one long-term seasonal, and two summer seasonal maintenance employees in

1967-1968. In 1999, these numbers had jumped to three full-time, three subject-to-furlough,

and ten seasonals. Long-time maintenance employee Ray Dashiell commented on the "huge

increase in staff and workload and things to do" in the 1980s and 1990s. "A place like Keller

Ferry thirty years ago had a couple of pit toilets and some informal camping — now it has

flush toilets and amphitheaters." Many new facilities have been added in the past few

decades, such as wider and longer boat launch ramps, docks, and new boat-only

campgrounds. [148]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7j.htm[2/26/2014 3:36:09 PM]

Concessions at LARO until the 1980s were generally small-scale operations. Within the past

two decades, however, three marina facilities have become quite extensive. Houseboats were

successfully introduced by concessionaires to Lake Roosevelt visitors in 1987 and have

become increasingly popular. The park has talked about and planned for a major

development of the Crescent Bay area using government and/or private funds since the early

1940s, but this has still not materialized.

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

laro/adhi/adhi7j.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7b.htm[2/26/2014 3:36:11 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 7:

Building and Maintaining the Park:

Administrative and Visitor Facilities (continued)

Roads

When LARO was established in 1946, a number of roads already existed within the NRA. As

is true today, state and county highways paralleled the lakeshore and provided the major

access and approach roads to Lake Roosevelt. LARO employees have been concerned

primarily with the access roads that lead to the park's developed areas. Park Service staff in

the 1940s felt that the construction of approach roads to recreational sites was of primary

importance to developing the NRA, partly because good access roads would allow

concessionaires to develop particular sites. As soon as funding was available for construction,

in 1950, the roads to the Kettle Falls, Fort Spokane, and North Marina recreation areas were

improved. By the late 1950s, LARO had some twenty-seven miles of primary and secondary

roads within the NRA boundaries. Most were graded and graveled to a minimum standard "to

preserve the primeval effect of the shoreline," [16] but those in areas of heavy use were

paved. LARO also maintained many spurs, loops, parking areas, interchanges, and terraces.

[17]

Mission 66 proposals related to LARO's roads involved improving existing roads and

building new roads to provide access to proposed new areas. Some seventy-three new miles

of roads were proposed to be added to the existing twenty-three miles under the roads and

trails budget of $90,000. In some years of the Mission 66 program, road improvements were

the largest item. LARO maintenance crews maintained the roads within the NRA, and local,

state, county, and city crews worked on the roads on an equipment-rental basis. One of the

on-going jobs was making sure that old roads that ran right into the reservoir were well

marked or barricaded. During the 1970s, routine maintenance work continued with resurfacing and grading roads and parking lots. The roads in the NRA have not yet reached the

levels anticipated in the Mission 66 prospectus; as of 1994, the total road mileage was sixty

miles, of which twenty were abandoned roads. [18]

LARO prepared a preliminary inventory and survey of needs for roads within the NRA in

1980 that provided sufficiency ratings compared to national standards. The Surface

Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 authorized the Federal Lands Highway Program to

implement phased improvements of Park Service roads. As a result, the Park Service

conducted Servicewide transportation planning for all public use and administrative park

roads. LARO maintenance staff worked with the Denver Service Center and the Federal

Highway Administration on an updated road inventory and needs study, campground road

classification, and road improvement study. The resulting report concluded that LARO's

roads were generally in fair to good condition, despite some deficiencies, and it made specific

recommendations for construction and maintenance projects. [19]

Road maintenance equipment at LARO in 1980 consisted of three 2-1/2-ton trucks, one
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7b.htm[2/26/2014 3:36:11 PM]

backhoe, and two tractors. Maintenance crews at that time spent 2 to 5 percent of their time

on road maintenance. The work included mowing the roadsides, repainting traffic stripes,

plowing snow, irrigating several locations, and picking up litter along roads. [20]

Increased visitation beginning in the 1970s led to visitors venturing into previously little-used

areas of LARO, many driving off-road vehicles (ORVs). Old farm and logging roads were

opened up, and new trails were created to access the land exposed during the winter

drawdowns. Some visitors destroyed physical barriers in order to access particular spots. This

spread-out use created problems with sanitation, fires, soil erosion and compaction,

disturbance of wildlife, damage to cultural resources, and noise (particularly in the Crescent

Bay Lake area). [21]

Executive Order 11644 (Use of Off-Road Vehicles on Public Lands) issued in 1972 directed

federal land-managing agencies to develop regulations and designate areas of use for ORVs.

In 1974, the Park Service closed all National Park System areas to ORV use except those

specially designated as open by Federal Register notice or special regulation. In 1980, LARO

employees installed about three hundred barrier posts, and the following year LARO rangers

instituted special measures that were only partly successful to control the use of unauthorized

roads by ORVs. LARO's 1982 Resource Management Plan identified ORVs as a major

management problem and recommended a survey, policy development, barricading of

sensitive sites, and restoration of damaged areas. In 1982, a survey recorded over fifteen

kilometers of unauthorized roads in the Fort Spokane district, most accessible by two-wheeldrive vehicles from public road systems and not associated with ORVs. The survey provided

a method for classifying LARO's roads, and it resulted in the closure of many of the

unauthorized roads in that district. [22]

One area that received special attention was Rattlesnake Canyon east of Crescent Bay Lake,

where motorcycles and ORVs were causing erosion and noise pollution. In 1982, LARO and

Reclamation banned ORVs from the area. Although LARO staff prepared draft ORV

regulations in 1982, they proved controversial and were not enacted. Instead, staff

recommended a review of the current status and preparation of a management plan that

would designate ORV routes as required by the 1972 Executive Order. Finally, in 1992,

LARO established a new policy restricting motor vehicles to established roads within the

NRA and specifically prohibiting their use in drawdown areas. This decision was made

primarily to protect archaeological sites. Two years later, the Colville Confederated Tribes

(CCT) also restricted non-member ORV use, including snowmobiles and dirt bikes.

Regulating ORV use is not currently a significant issue for LARO's law-enforcement

personnel; the problems are small in scale and mostly occur during drawdown periods. [23]

Owners of land adjacent to certain roads within the NRA have requested easements for access

roads over the years. One example is the road to the Spring Canyon developed area. In 1952,

the Julius Johnson estate gave land for this road and other purposes to the Park Service, and

the road was constructed a couple of years later. At least one person was given verbal

approval for infrequent access to his land from the road for agricultural purposes. In 1986,

several requests were made for residential access from the road to proposed subdivisions. The

Park Service opposed all these requests because they believed that other practical access

routes existed and because they did not want to grant an easement and set a precedent. In the

early 1990s, LARO formalized its easement policy by stating that no new roads would be

considered for easement recommendation to Reclamation; that any easements had to remain

open to the public; and that adverse impacts to the NRA must be minimal or non-existent.

Some easements were granted on roads predating the acquisition of the lands by the federal

government and in cases where the Park Service had made previous commitments to provide

easements. [24]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7b.htm[2/26/2014 3:36:11 PM]

Due to the large water area and

small land base, we have not

developed a major emphasis on

trails. . . . The southern half of

the lake is quite dry and hot

with limited hiking interest

even though I find spring and

fall very pleasant to kick

around in the sagebrush.

(Snakes are somewhat of a

deterrent!) 

-- Jerry Rumburg, LARO Chief

of Interpretation, 1981 [26]

Until recently, the Park Service was not authorized to participate financially or otherwise in

road maintenance projects on roads outside the NRA boundaries. This has led to some

difficulties at LARO. For example, in the 1980s many residents along the county road

between Laughbon's Landing and Porcupine Bay, built by a developer, complained about the

dust generated along the gravel road. LARO and Lincoln County and the homeowners all

agreed the road should be paved. County commissioners were unwilling to spend money on

the road because a very high percentage of the traffic consisted of Porcupine Bay

campground users. Eventually, however, the county did pave the road. [25]

Trails

LARO has not developed an extensive trail system,

primarily because the NRA consists of a narrow strip

of land along the shores of Lake Roosevelt and is not

particularly conducive to hiking. The Mission 66

prospectus for LARO proposed a lakeshore foot trail

running the entire length of the lake with layover

points and shelters spaced a day's hike apart, but this

has not been constructed. In 1972, LARO had only

one trail more than one mile long: the self-guided

interpretive trail at Fort Spokane. LARO considered

constructing a nine-mile trail between Fort Spokane

and Porcupine Bay in 1979, but this was never built. A

number of trails were constructed in the 1970s, so that

in 1980 LARO had six trails totaling 3.83 miles:

Bunch Grass Prairie Nature Trail, Lava Bluff Trail,

Fort Spokane interpretive trail, Fort Spokane

campground trail, Kettle Falls interpretive trail (connecting campground and beach), and St.

Paul's Mission trail. Of these, the Fort Spokane interpretive trail was the most popular, with

highest daily use in 1979 of sixty-five visitors. By 1987, LARO had nine miles of trails. [27]

Constructing a trail at North Marina, 1963. Photo courtesy of
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7b.htm[2/26/2014 3:36:11 PM]

National Park Service, Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area

(LARO.HQ.MENG).

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

laro/adhi/adhi7b.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi8b.htm[2/26/2014 3:36:20 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 8:

Changing Stories: Interpretation (continued)

Interpretive Facilities

The Park Service museum program did not receive much funding until the Mission 66 years.

The Museum Branch located in Washington, D.C., produced many exhibit plans for western

units of the National Park System between 1956 and 1966, and this helped justify the

reestablishment of the Western Museum Laboratory in San Francisco in 1957.

Mission 66 planners called the buildings that housed these exhibits "visitor centers" rather

than "museums" to reflect their dual functions of providing both visitor orientation and area

information at lobby information desks and traditional exhibits. Most of the exhibits used a

narrative approach, with exhibits arranged to illustrate a series of related ideas. [37]

Information desk at Kettle Falls Ranger Station, 1967. Photo

courtesy of National Park Service, Lake Roosevelt National

Recreation Area (LARO.FS).

LARO's staff of the 1950s had a quite modest vision of interpretive facilities needed at the

recreation area. In fact, the Chief of the Division of Interpretation on the national level

recommended disapproval of LARO's Mission 66 prospectus because its proposed facilities

and staffing were so inadequate. The proposal called for one naturalist and one ranger-
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi8b.htm[2/26/2014 3:36:20 PM]

Park Headquarters serves some

visitor contact function in

Coulee Dam, for those who

stumble across it. Indeed, on

entering the village from the

main highway, one finds two

naturalist through 1966, with no funding budgeted for self-guided trails, wayside exhibits,

interpretive signs, or campfire circles. These deficiencies were corrected in the 1957

Statement for Interpretation. [38]

Mission 66 funded visitor centers, visitor-activated audiovisual devices, and amphitheaters

and campfire circles Servicewide. The three visitor centers proposed for construction at

LARO under Mission 66 were at Fort Spokane (also the proposed site of park headquarters at

this time), North Marina, and Kettle Falls. In general, each was to interpret resources best

suited to its locality, with little overlaps among the three and no overlap with Reclamation

exhibits at the dam. Each would have orientation and information exhibits in a lobby with

additional interpretive exhibits elsewhere. Topics covered would include geology, natural

history, human history, the national park idea, and boating safety. The stories would be

presented through audiovisual programs and static exhibits. The planners believed that most

visitor contacts would be made in the visitor centers and through wayside exhibits rather than

through naturalist programs. [39]

The 1964 Interpretive Prospectus for LARO benefited from the lessons learned from

operating the area's interpretive program for three visitor seasons. It recommended that the

visitor centers have changing exhibits to attract repeat visitors. Campfire programs and

conducted walks, wayside exhibits at boat launch ramps and along highways, and off-site

programs about the recreation area were also recommended. [40]

By 1968, LARO's interpretive program was mostly centered at Fort Spokane and Kettle Falls.

At Fort Spokane, audiovisual programs were supplemented by tours of selected historic

buildings and a self-guided trail. Both areas had campfire circles, as did Porcupine Bay and

Evans, and more were proposed. The district information stations served as both staff offices

and as visitor contact stations, providing area and local information, publications for sale,

first aid, law enforcement, fee collection, and interpretive services. [41]

LARO's interpretive facilities included six amphitheaters in 1989. Four of these were soon

upgraded with new enclosed projection booths, control panels, column speakers, and

improved lighting systems. They seated 60 to 175 people. A 1990s interpretive facilities

project created the Kettle Falls Visitor Contact Station in 1995, which housed the North

District Interpreter and LARO Archeologist. [42]

Beginning in approximately 1970, the LARO Superintendent supervised personnel at the Park

Service's Spokane field office, which was established to support Park Service participation in

Spokane's Expo 74. The personnel based there, generally two employees, provided

information about various national parks; conducted outreach interpretive activities in the

Spokane area; worked with local outdoor recreation groups; worked with the local news

media; and presented teacher workshops. Instead of being phased out after the Expo, in 1975

the Park Service field office in Spokane was combined with that of the U.S. Forest Service.

In 1977, the joint information office moved to the lobby of Spokane's federal courthouse

building in order to provide better public access. Because of Park Service studies of its field

offices Servicewide, the Spokane office was closed in early 1982, although the Forest Service

continued to respond to requests for information on Park Service units. [43]

In 1968, LARO's Master Plan mentioned that a jointagency visitor contact station near Kettle Falls would

be a convenient place for visitors to learn about the

NRA, and this was noted again in the park's 1975

Interpretive Prospectus. Prompted by the imminent

opening of the North Cascades Highway and Spokane

Expo 74, LARO and Colville National Forest
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi8b.htm[2/26/2014 3:36:20 PM]

signs on the same pole, one with

an arrow toward "Visitor

Information" (a local

operation) and another sign

directing a traveler to

"National Park Service" in a

different direction. The

distinction is the more

mystifying in that access to

either is handy by the same

route. 

-- Harpers Ferry Center,

"Draft Interpretive Prospectus,

Coulee Dam National

Recreation Area," 1993 [44]

personnel began planning for a multi-agency visitor

center located where Highway 395 crossed Lake

Roosevelt in the Kettle Falls area. By 1993, the Park

Service, Bonneville Power Administration,

Reclamation, and Washington Department of Wildlife

were also involved in the project. Agency personnel

obtained a design for the building and almost $375,000

in funding, and LARO interpretive personnel drafted

the exhibit text and designed some of the interior

facilities. Park Service and Forest Service personnel

were slated to staff the building during the summers,

although some at LARO saw the project as a potential

drain to park resources. The facility, known as the

Sherman Pass Interagency Visitor Center, was

scheduled to open in 1995. The project "died a slow,

painful death" in 1995, however, because of the lack

of a formal cooperative agreement for leasing the land

from the Washington Department of Wildlife. Neither the Forest Service nor the Park Service

had the time or energy to pick up the ball and bring the project back to life. LARO staff are

willing to partner again, but not to take the lead to revive the project. [45]

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

laro/adhi/adhi8b.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 9)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi9b.htm[2/26/2014 3:36:22 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 9:

From Simple to Complex: Cultural Resource

Management (continued)

Impact of Third Powerhouse Construction

Funding possibilities for archaeological work at LARO improved with Reclamation's

construction of a third powerhouse at Grand Coulee Dam. To facilitate building this project,

the agency needed to dramatically lower the water in Lake Roosevelt each spring, an action

that would expose hundreds of archaeological sites never before recorded. To prepare for this

anticipated archaeological bonanza, the Western Regional Office funded WSU for the 1966

and 1967 seasons to do survey work around much of the reservoir. The Park Service

continued the same funding arrangement for two more years as the lake levels dropped. [18]

Late in 1967, the Park Service initiated discussions with Reclamation about additional

funding for a major archaeological salvage program at Lake Roosevelt during the powerhouse

construction. Regional Archeologist Paul J. F. Schumacher stressed the importance of the

sites that would be exposed and recommended that Reclamation provide $37,000 per year in

1968, 1969, and 1973, the years of the lowest expected drawdowns. He also requested

$17,000 for each of the other three years, bringing the total to $162,000. The expenses were

higher than normal since they would need to hire a field crew on the open market instead of

being able to use low-cost student workers who were available only during the summer

months. [19]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 9)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi9b.htm[2/26/2014 3:36:22 PM]

Aerial view of Kettle Falls, partially exposed during drawdown in

April 1969. The large drawdowns during construction of the third

powerhouse enabled archaeologists to reach previously inundated

sites, including some particularly significant ones at Kettle Falls.

Photo courtesy of U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Grand Coulee (USBR

Archives P1222-142-45-46).

Reclamation initially refused this request, saying that it was not mandated to fund such work

in the Columbia Basin. Schumacher pointed out that the Public Works Act each year

specifically made Reclamation appropriations available to cover costs of archaeological and

paleontological projects. In addition, he said that the Park Service could not afford to do

salvage work for sites threatened by other agencies, but it could offer advice, inspection of

salvage archaeology, and review of technical reports from the salvage projects. Although the

budget for the third powerhouse was "extremely tight," Reclamation managed to find $5,000

for archaeological salvage work in the FY1968 budget and expected it could make similar

adjustments in FY1969. Schumacher stressed the need to have a crew in the field during the

1968 drawdown to show pot hunters that both federal agencies and professionals were

interested in preserving the local heritage. He requested substantially more money for

subsequent years. [20]

The drawdowns for the powerhouse project during the late 1960s and early 1970s spurred

significant archaeological work at Lake Roosevelt. Supervision changed from WSU to the

University of Idaho in 1970, about the time Reclamation assumed responsibility for funding

the work. Projects included extensive surveys around the reservoir and excavations

concentrated in the Kettle Falls area. Archaeologist David Chance provided the primary field

supervision for crews working at several sites connected with the fishery at Kettle Falls.

Analysis of the features recorded there and materials recovered over several years of work

enabled Chance and others to develop a local cultural sequence using artifact assemblages;

develop a dated cultural chronology that indicated use of the site starting ca. 9,000 years ago;

and describe the earliest known subsistence-settlement patterns in the reservoir area. In

addition to prehistoric sites, archaeologists also conducted extensive investigations during the

drawdowns at the site of Fort Colvile, the Hudson's Bay Company trading post near Kettle

Falls. Work during several seasons helped provide information about building design and fort
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 9)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi9b.htm[2/26/2014 3:36:22 PM]

layout as well as details about both Indian and non-Indian life at the fort. [21]

Part of Takumakst (the Fishery), an Indian village at Kettle Falls,

1861. This site was partially excavated during the drawdowns for the

third powerhouse construction. Photo courtesy of National Park

Service, Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area (LARO 3246).

Funding achieved a certain stability by the mid-1970s. Prior to 1976, appropriations from

Reclamation for archaeological work at Lake Roosevelt had been on an annual basis, with the

Bureau funding the Park Service which, in turn, contracted with the University of Idaho for

the salvage work. For instance, the contract in 1971 amounted to $30,000 to be spent

primarily on work at Fort Colvile and five prehistoric sites. In 1976, Reclamation began

contracting directly with the University of Idaho. The first contract covered three years,

providing a financial predictability that aided both field work and analysis. [22]

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

laro/adhi/adhi9b.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/images/fig10-1.jpg[2/26/2014 3:36:23 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/images/fig10-1.jpg[2/26/2014 3:36:23 PM]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 10)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi10b.htm[2/26/2014 3:36:25 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 10:

An Uphill Struggle: Natural Resources

Management (continued)

Efforts to Enhance the Lake Roosevelt Fishery, 1940s-1980s

During the 1940s, fishing at Lake Roosevelt was extremely poor. The Washington

Department of Fish and Wildlife tried to establish kokanee salmon (landlocked sockeye

salmon) by stocking the lake between 1942 and 1945 with almost 7.5 million kokanee and

rainbow fry. This effort was a failure, although some kokanee did migrate into the lake in the

late 1940s from tributary streams and from Arrow Lakes in British Columbia. Many of these

were injured or killed as they went over the dam. As at other new reservoirs, the fish

populations grew quickly after the reservoir was filled but then slowed down after a couple of

years when nutrients were exhausted. A new reservoir generally has far fewer fish species

than its predecessor river did. The most abundant species in the newly formed Lake

Roosevelt were those considered "scrap fish": squawfish, carp, and suckers. [20]

Lake Roosevelt fisherman with rainbow trout, 1943. Photo courtesy

of U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Grand Coulee (USBR Archives 965,

7-30-43).
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 10)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi10b.htm[2/26/2014 3:36:25 PM]

In August of 1961, the Hunters

Chamber of Commerce

organized a one-day fishing

derby. Only one sport fish was

caught that day, a small perch.

It took the prize for game fish. 

-- James A. Todd, LARO

Acting District Ranger, 1961

[24]

LARO personnel firmly believed that the state of the sport fishery would influence much of

the future recreational development of the area. In May 1947, at the request of

Superintendent Claude Greider, representatives of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, OIA,

and Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife met at Coulee Dam to initiate a game-fish

management program at Lake Roosevelt. In 1947 and 1948, the state seined 150 tons of carp

from the Kettle River area in an effort to control that fish species. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service agreed to undertake a preliminary limnological study of Lake Roosevelt to examine

existing fish populations, water conditions, and fish food supplies. LARO provided water

transportation and office space to the cooperating agencies and distributed questionnaires on

game fish catches to key fishermen in the area. [21]

The 1948 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service study found that Lake Roosevelt had high turbidity

and practically no thermal gradient, meaning that its water temperatures were fairly uniform.

The authors recommended further study and a limited stocking program of a fish that would

remain in the lake through the summers. Further investigations were not funded, however.

Experts believed that a significant fishery would not develop because the annual drawdowns

hindered access to tributaries and because the cold, deep lake was not conducive to the

growth of plants and plankton necessary to establish a food chain for sport fish. The few

fishermen on the lake reported catching shiners, whitefish, squawfish, carp, and suckers.

Occasional catches of rainbow trout, brook trout, kokanee salmon, kamloops trout, cutthroat

trout, char (dolly varden trout), and largemouth and smallmouth black bass were also

reported. [22]

In 1952 and 1953, the Public Health Service conducted the next study of Lake Roosevelt's

fishery. The biologist identified several factors hindering the sport fishery: low fertility,

summer water temperatures above or below optimal for various species, drawdowns that hurt

plant production and fish production and reproduction, and large flows during spring floods.

The report recommended planting fingerling kamloops trout and possibly kokanee salmon in

the lake. [23]

Perhaps as a result of this study, in 1956 a new

organization known as Washington Kamloops, Inc.,

began stocking Lake Roosevelt with kamloops

(rainbow trout) raised in hatcheries. The Kettle Fallsbased group worked with the state to plant kamloops.

The success of the various plantings, however, was

very poor, and they ended in 1961. [25]

LARO's 1964 Master Plan noted that all resident

species of fish in Lake Roosevelt had been introduced

except for cutthroat trout and sturgeon. LARO staff

and local fishermen continued to debate the question

of whether or not Lake Roosevelt could ever be a good sport fishing lake. Until a fishery

research program was undertaken, one LARO employee commented, "fishing on the lake will

remain, as it is today, nothing more than something to talk and argue about." [26]

Many local business people felt they were losing tourists who might visit the area if the

fishing were better. The U.S. Bureau of Fisheries planted a test run of sockeye salmon in the

San Poil River. LARO personnel recommended removing "scrap fish" from Lake Roosevelt.

Commercial gillnetting of carp for fertilizer in the north end of the lake was quite successful

for a few years. [27]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 10)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi10b.htm[2/26/2014 3:36:25 PM]

Carl Anderson of Daisy, Washington, ice fishing on Lake

Roosevelt for whitefish and trout, February 1952. Photo courtesy

of U. S. Bureau of Reclamation, Grand Coulee (USBR Archives

1340).

The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife conducted a study of Lake Roosevelt fish

populations and food sources in 1962 and 1963. The biologists concluded that cyprinids such

as carp and squawfish dominated the Lake Roosevelt fishery because they used more plant

material and organic debris than the salmonid species; the impoundment of the reservoir had

increased suitable habitat for these scrap fish and reduced competitive species. The authors

found that zooplankton abundance was only 2-5 percent that of natural lakes. They concluded

that it was unlikely that any of the game fish then in the lake would develop suitable

populations for a sport fishery. This study was soon contradicted by a 1966 Bureau of

Commercial Fisheries study that found that there were, in fact, abundant food resources,

ample spawning areas, and sufficient habitat to support an excellent game fish population and

perhaps a commercial fishery in the reservoir. Turbidity was the most limiting factor, but this

was expected to improve as Canadian dams and reservoirs were built upstream. LARO

agreed to help with further research recommended in this report. [28]

Sport fishing on Lake Roosevelt began to improve noticeably in the early 1960s because of

an increased walleye population. The original source of Lake Roosevelt's walleye is not

known for sure; one plausible theory is that a Minnesota man planted them in the late 1940s.

They tend to do well in the lake because they spawn at times of stable or even rising water

levels. The general air of pessimism about Lake Roosevelt's fishing potential began to shift in

the mid-1960s as walleye began to attract fishermen. This led to a dramatic increase in

boating and fishing, particularly on the Spokane Arm. Local newspapers published articles on
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 10)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi10b.htm[2/26/2014 3:36:25 PM]

this fishery, and in 1969 a LARO park ranger prepared a brochure on walleye fishing. It took

native Washington fishermen a while to get used to walleye, but by 1974 locals were heading

for the lake after work in search of walleye. LARO personnel were concerned about the lack

of a limit on walleye catches until the state imposed a limit of fifteen fish in 1974. [29]

As the fishery improved in the 1960s, the state and the tribes became more interested in the

lake's potential as a sport fishery. In 1972 and 1975, the Washington Department of Fish and

Wildlife planted some 1.8 million chinook salmon in Lake Roosevelt, but the success of these

and later plantings was negligible. These plantings were reportedly done at the request of the

Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT), and the Park Service was not contacted. The Spokane

Tribe of Indians (STI) requested and received a plant of about 300,000 walleye in the

Spokane Arm above the Little Falls dam in 1976. And yet, non-game fish such as squawfish,

carp, sucker, shiner, and chub continued to be well adapted to conditions in Lake Roosevelt

that included drawdowns, low food availability, and siltation resulting from landslides. [30]

LARO personnel recorded increased boating activity on the lake in the 1970s in response to

the improved fishing. A total of some seventy-five thousand people fished on Lake Roosevelt

in 1977, more than half from boats and most in the Fort Spokane district. Over 80 percent

fished for walleye. LARO built temporary fish-cleaning stations in several campgrounds to

handle the increased use. [31]

By the early 1980s, walleye comprised over 90 percent of the catch on Lake Roosevelt, with

rainbow trout and yellow perch about 3 percent each. The Park Service took advantage of the

regional walleye enthusiasm by offering walleye fishing clinics and a small guidebook to the

fishery. Local tribal members began to rely on walleye for subsistence. The walleye

population in Lake Roosevelt, and thus the harvest, began to decline in the early 1980s

because of overharvesting, a declining prey base of yellow perch, and other factors. Stricter

harvest regulations enacted in 1985, combined with the closing of the Spokane Arm during

the spawning season, stabilized the decline. A length limit for walleye was imposed in 1990

to protect spawners, encourage harvesting smaller fish, and allow anglers to keep trophy

walleyes. By 1989, according to a study sponsored by the Bonneville Power Administration,

the Lake Roosevelt fishery was producing an estimated $5.2 million for the regional

economy. [32]

The fishery in Crescent Bay Lake was not established until the late 1980s. Untreated sewage

and then treated sewage had flowed into Crescent Bay Lake from Grand Coulee and later

Electric City since its formation in 1942. Reclamation retained responsibility for the water

quality of Crescent Bay Lake. In 1979, it received permission from the Environmental

Protection Agency to flush the lake by draining and refilling it, and the agency began a multiyear project of bringing in water from the Banks Lake Feeder Canal to shorten the seasonal

algae bloom and reduce the odor problem. The town of Grand Coulee was scheduled to begin

construction of a wastewater treatment plant in 1979, but funding for this necessary piece of

the development puzzle was deferred by the Washington Department of Ecology. By this

time, eutrophication had resulted in several inches of sludge on the bottom of the lake, and it

was unusable for fishing, swimming, or boating. In 1982, LARO staff met with local city,

state, and Reclamation officials about the problem. As LARO Superintendent Gary Kuiper

commented, "We must all agree that today's conditions at Crescent Bay Lake are intolerable.

A lake, beautiful to the eye, now fully merits the only name by which scores of people

recognize it...Poop Lagoon." The Environmental Protection Agency awarded a grant to the

City of Grand Coulee for a new sewage treatment plant; it was completed in 1987, finally

ending discharges of waste into Crescent Bay Lake. Reclamation subsequently improved the

water quality of the lake, and efforts began again to improve the fishery. Rainbow trout were

planted in the lake in 1987, 1988, and 1998, and a small local recreational fishery developed.

[33]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 10)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi10b.htm[2/26/2014 3:36:25 PM]

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

laro/adhi/adhi10b.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 11)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi11b.htm[2/26/2014 3:36:30 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 11:

Regaining Ground: Leases and Special Use

Permits (continued)

Early Recreational Permits

In addition to industrial and agricultural uses, the Park Service hoped to encourage

recreational use of the reservoir lands by allowing leases for summer cabin sites. Although

requests began coming in before the agency had even assumed full administrative authority

for the area, LARO staff did not begin to concentrate on this issue until 1952. There were a

number of concerns that needed resolution before leasing could begin. Among the first of

these were questions about the Park Service policy of clustering cabin sites in groups of ten

or more. R. T. Paine, president of the Colville Chamber of Commerce, understood the

practical reasons for this policy, especially when locating roads and utilities. But he said that

local people did not favor such groupings, claiming "that if a person is primarily interested in

paved roads and utility developments and groups of homes he has them right on the block on

which he lives." The Chamber members suggested instead that LARO set aside all areas

considered for public recreational use and then open the rest to summer homes, accelerating

development of the area. [20]

Park Service reaction to these ideas was mixed. Thomas J. Allen, National Park Service

Assistant Director, explained the agency's policy of arranging the sites to maximize the

attraction to both cabin occupants and visitors to Lake Roosevelt. He assured Paine that the

Park Service would consider applications for specific sites, considering the merits of each

one. Allen told the Regional Director that Paine's ideas had merit, and the agency would like

to see if they would help solve the summer home problem in one recreation area, namely

LARO. Still, he was troubled by the need to formulate policy for summer homes in the new

national recreation areas (NRAs), where he saw the need to balance Park Service planning

standards against demands from users, public relations, and delays engendered by prolonged

periods of planning. Greider realized that he needed to make progress on the summer home

lots at Lake Roosevelt, but he was concerned about a lack of policy, especially since it looked

like Allen was willing to abandon the established policy of grouping homes. [21]

Greider and his staff began looking at potential summer home sites in the summer of 1952.

They were concerned about the possibility of landslides, so they enlisted the help of Fred

Jones, from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), to examine all sites under consideration.

The Park Service also sent Harold Fowler, Landscape Architect from the San Francisco

office, to look over potential sites in the Kettle Falls District. The recommendations included

the North Gorge area (25-30 homes); Nancy Creek (3-4 homes, with crowding); Kettle Falls

(5-6 homes at a bare and hot site); Kettle River; Barstow Flats (40-50 homes); and Colville

River (4-6 homes). In addition, the group recommended an area on the Spokane Indian

Reservation about one mile north of the Spokane River, with access off Highway 25. They

considered this site so desirable that they included it despite the difficulty they anticipated in
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 11)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi11b.htm[2/26/2014 3:36:30 PM]

working out an agreement with the Spokane Tribe. The group also eliminated Marcus Island

from consideration since Jones believed that the island would disappear within a short time.

A few weeks later, LARO Chief Ranger Robert Coombs flew Fowler over the Spokane Arm

where he selected three additional sites suitable for 50-80 homes. Greider, however,

discounted these sites both because of landslide potential and because LARO had not yet

selected areas for recreational development along the Spokane Arm. [22]

Greider added three more areas to the list of potential summer home sites during December

1952 and January 1953. These included the Sherman Creek area, Rickey Point, and

Bossburg. LARO spent considerable time working out the problems connected with the

Sherman Creek sites since interested applicants included eight or nine prominent citizens

from the Colville area. Greider warned that the access road would be costly, but those

interested did not seem concerned about bearing this expense. The LARO Superintendent

initially did not believe that the Park Service should build such roads because he could not

justify the expenditure of public funds to benefit a select few. He later reconsidered and told

a group wanting to use the Sherman Creek area that Park Service policy called for the agency

to build permanent roads to cabin sites. Due to lack of funds, however, this could not be done

for at least a year, and he suggested that the group do rough clearing on the right-of-way to

allow them temporary access. [23]

By the spring of 1953, the summer home list had been considerably revised. All of those sites

considered the previous August were dropped, replaced with Sherman Creek, Rickey Point,

and Bossburg, with a fourth site at Kettle Bridge to be added that summer. Greider expected

that Rickey Point would eventually include seventy sites, while Sherman Creek would have

ten and Bossburg up to fourteen. [24]

As the Park Service worked on developing its policies for summer cabins, LARO personnel

consulted with U.S. Forest Service officials, both locally and regionally, to see how that

agency handled such permits. They found that the Forest Service no longer mandated

standard lot sizes but instead let the size vary according to topography, usually three-quarters

to one acre. The agency provided all access roads to avoid problems with substandard roads

that often ruined scenic values of an area. It also gave permittees assistance with planning

docks and other marine facilities, again to avoid substandard construction. The agency

allowed one residence per lot, along with garages, barns, guest houses, and other structures.

Leases had been reduced to twenty years, but following public complaints the Forest Service

was considering raising the term to ninety-nine years again. [25]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 11)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi11b.htm[2/26/2014 3:36:30 PM]

C. Buddrius family working on their summer cabin at Rickey Point,

1957. Photo courtesy of National Park Service, Lake Roosevelt

National Recreation Area (LARO.HQ.MENG).

LARO guidelines, when finally released, did not follow Forest Service precedent on many

issues. Lot sizes were kept to approximately one-half acre, with annual rents of $25. The

term of the lease was for twenty years, with only one attractive, well-built home allowed on

each lot. Permittees had to clear all building plans through both LARO and the Department

of Health, and all docks, fences, and other structures needed the park's approval. LARO

agreed to locate all access roads, but the permittee had to build these initially. Although the

Forest Service tried to leave a buffer strip between buildings and water to encourage public

use of the beaches, LARO planned to limit such public access at Rickey Point. "It would be

undesirable to have the general public utilizing the subdivision water front and other facilities

which may be provided by the residents for their use," suggested the Regional Landscape

Architect. LARO policy on this point changed dramatically over the next thirty years. [26]

Despite the progress made in summer home development during 1952, Greider was frustrated

by delays the following spring. He needed approval for a special use form for these cabins,

submitted in January, and he needed help from the regional office to stake lots. With the

arrival of spring, local people were expecting approval of permits so they could begin

building, and Greider feared that the Park Service would be embarrassed if there were a

delay. There were further setbacks when USGS geologist Jones condemned nearly one-third

of the Rickey Point development because of landslide potential. Additional problems with

rights-of-way held up access roads. Greider finally received approval for the cabin

developments in April 1953, and he began staking lots immediately. [27]

Greider noted two changes in policy from that originally announced in the fall of 1952: lease

rates had increased to $35 per year and the Park Service had reverted to its old policy of

locating cabin sites in groups of ten or more. Under the policy previously advertised for

LARO, however, several individuals had applied for isolated sites that would accommodate

up to four cabins. Greider believed that the park needed to process these applications as

originally announced to avoid further embarrassment. It is not clear if the Park Service

approved these exceptions or not, but apparently no individuals took up leases on isolated lots

at LARO. Instead, the park confined its plans to Sherman Creek, Rickey Point, and Bossburg,

with developments limited eventually to just the first two locations. [28]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 11)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi11b.htm[2/26/2014 3:36:30 PM]

During the next few years, the public continued to pressure LARO for additional cabin sites,

none of which were approved. The Park Service developed plans for a group of summer

homes at Keller Ferry in 1955, and two years later individuals were asking for sites at Haag

Cove and on the Spokane Arm. Although LARO Superintendent Hugh Peyton supported the

Keller Ferry plans, he resisted increased development elsewhere, fearing that it would

preclude future public use. To prevent just such a situation, he had LARO staff put two small

campgrounds at Haag Cove in April 1957, complete with a sign. Peyton referred to the

installation of these minor developments as "homesteading," and he did this in various places

to keep sites in public hands. He also noted another group that was using political pressure to

secure first choice of cabin locations on the Spokane Arm. This caused him to suggest public

drawings for assigning cabin sites. "By using an impartial method of intermittently allocating

these available sites," he suggested, "we could point to our fair method of taking care of this

situation and be able to distract from the strength of selfish pressure groups which are

springing up like toadstools around the area." The Director's Office approved these proposed

changes, along with rewording of the lease to identify these developments as vacation home

sites rather than residential lots. [29]

Adjacent landowners occasionally trespassed on government lands, knowingly and

unknowingly, when building cabins. In one case, Mr. and Mrs. Paul Moody acquired land at

the mouth of Fifteen Mile Creek around 1940, before the boundary line was clear, and they

began construction four years later on what they thought was their property. They believed

that LARO agreed with their assessment since a ranger never questioned the location of their

cabin when he told them ca.1947 that they needed a permit for their dock. By 1958, however,

it was clear that the building was on federal lands. Reclamation Field Solicitor Paul Lemargie

took a hard line, telling Moody that he could not legally lease the land and asking him how

soon they could move their cabin. This provoked an emotional plea to President Eisenhower

from the now-retired couple who professed to be "heartbroken" at the thought of tearing

down the cabin they had spent fifteen years building. Thus began more than fifteen years of

permits, cancellations, and appeals. [30]

The Moody trespass, along with several similar ones, demonstrates the inconsistencies of

Park Service permits and enforcement, not just at LARO but also at the regional and national

levels. Superintendent Homer Robinson believed that Moody should have known that he was

building on federal land since his cabin sat just twenty-five feet from the water,

approximately one hundred fifty feet inside the boundary. He suggested that LARO could

offer Moody a permit for up to twenty-five years, but he thought that twenty years should be

the maximum. "It must be recognized that such action might establish a precedent

detrimental to our best interests," he warned. Robinson argued that other trespassers should

be given similar consideration, especially since one man was elderly, in poor health, and

living on welfare. The case went to National Park Service Director Conrad Wirth, who

offered the Moodys a five-year permit with the stipulation that the cabin be removed or

revert to the government at the end of the period. [31]

The case did not end that simply. Another emotional plea to the President in 1961 bought the

Moodys an additional five years. When the cabin still stood in 1968, LARO Superintendent

David Richie had lost his patience with the Moodys and a similar case. He questioned

whether these trespasses were "entirely innocent" since the owners should have gotten a

boundary survey before building. Furthermore, if the Park Service believed that the land at

LARO was for the use of the public, the agency should not tolerate such prolonged

trespasses. The regional office overruled Richie, saying that there was no indication that the

Moodys' trespass was deliberate and LARO had no plans for public recreation at the site. The

"further pursuit of cabin removal seems to place the Government in a very arbitrary

position," wrote Raymond O. Mulvany, Acting Regional Director. He asked Richie to keep
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 11)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi11b.htm[2/26/2014 3:36:30 PM]

renewing the special use permits for the lifetime of the tenants, deleting the stipulation that

the cabin be removed. [32] The then-elderly couple moved to a new cabin on their own land

in 1973, but removal of the offending cabin took at least another year. The foundation,

bridge, and outhouse, located on federal land, remained at least several more years. [33]

Since the 1940s, LARO has permitted organizations to secure long-term leases for group

camps. Boy Scouts of the Grand Coulee Dam district were the first to apply, securing a oneyear special use permit in 1944 for a camp on the northern shore of the reservoir across from

Spring Canyon. Four years later, Troop 79 of Wilbur applied for a twenty-year lease for a

permanent youth camp along the lake between Jones Bay and Hanson Harbor. Their plans

included a lodge, dock, campfire circle, sanitation, water supply, and play area. When not

needed by the scouts, the group planned to make the facilities available to other youth groups,

including girls. While Greider encouraged such use of park lands, staffers in the regional

office had mixed reactions. Despite these differences, LARO approved both the special use

permit and the building plans in 1949, in time for the group to pour the foundation before

freezing weather set in. [34]

The following year the Council of Churches in Seattle asked for a long-term lease for a

summer camp at Lake Roosevelt. Greider initially recommended approval of the lease

because of the program's character and statewide nature. The Park Service wanted to see

some preliminary plans before approving the lease, but the Council said that it needed the

lease before it could proceed with fundraising and planning. The agency believed it should

make every effort to help them develop good plans, and the regional office considered having

a landscape architect meet with the camp committee to discuss layout and planning. The

issues were the same in 1952, with LARO still wanting to see some plans before granting the

lease. At some point, the Council dropped the idea and the camp was never built. [35]

LARO permitted another group facility, Camp Na-Bor-Lee, in 1966 when a civic group from

Stevens County leased land fifteen miles north of Fort Spokane. As a gesture of both

goodwill and good public relations, the Park Service assisted the group in preparing initial

plans. The agency stipulated that a substantial part of the development work needed to be

completed within five years. [36]

Many who had vacation cabins, either on federal lands or adjoining private lands, wanted to

build docks to provide mooring for boats as well as enjoyment for swimmers. The permitting

process was easy initially. Reclamation policy in 1943 required a drawing showing the

location of the site in relation to the nearest section line. It is probable that the Park Service

continued this simple policy when it took over special use permits because there was no need

for excessive regulations with very few docks on many miles of undeveloped shoreline.

Permits became more complicated by 1963 when the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

reminded LARO that anyone applying to do work, primarily dock construction, within the

navigable waters of the Columbia River system needed to obtain Corps approval. The Park

Service could not waive this requirement for permittees, nor could the Corps waive the need

for a special use permit from the Park Service. Despite these extra restrictions, LARO

officials recognized by the mid-1960s that individual docks had increased so greatly that they

needed to be consolidated in "unit locations" to keep the shoreline free for public use. The

park began developing policies and standards for community docks in 1967. [37]

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

laro/adhi/adhi11b.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/images/fig1-6.jpg[2/26/2014 3:36:32 PM]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi3e.htm[2/26/2014 3:36:38 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 3:

A Long Road Lies Ahead: Establishing Lake

Roosevelt National Recreation Area (continued)

Rules and Regulations

The push for regulations provided another test for the Park Service as the agency sought to

define its responsibilities and assert control over the lands and water of the newly established

recreation area. The 1946 agreement required the Park Service to make and enforce rules and

regulations concerning recreational use of the area as well as provide for the protection and

conservation of resources. In a memo on July 11, 1947, the Secretary of the Interior set out

departmental policy for the development and administration of recreational areas at reservoir

sites. Greider was told to follow these guidelines while writing rules for LARO, using the

regulations for Shasta Lake Recreational Area, approved in October 1947, as a guide. He

completed his draft by September 1948. [91]

The draft rules and regulations for LARO dealt with all aspects of recreation. There was no

fee for camping or swimming, but these activities were restricted to designated areas and

common-sense rules, such as a prohibition on swimming without proper attire. Visitors could

hunt, fish, and trap in accordance with applicable state and federal laws, but the

superintendent could restrict these activities in areas of concentrated visitor use and could

prohibit guns in certain areas. Boaters came under the most regulations and were the only

ones required to pay a fee for use of the reservoir area. Annual permit costs ranged from $1

for a canoe or rowboat up to $10 for a boat over forty feet long. Boats were allowed to moor

only at public docks or areas designated by the superintendent, and anyone planning a trip of

more than four hours had to report destination and estimated time of return to a dock master.

An initial legal review suggested that the Park Service might not have authority to regulate

boat traffic on navigable waters, but Greider thought they could get around this since they

controlled all the shore land and lake access and could essentially trade use of the land for

reasonable control over boaters. [92]

Release of the draft regulations generated a mixed review. Much of Greider's concern

centered on responses from the Grand Coulee Dam Yacht Club. The membership in 1949

seemed to support the need for some regulation, although a few members questioned the Park

Service's authority to regulate boating on navigable waters. Greider was wary of the Yacht

Club, however, since some of its more vocal members had been challenging other aspects of

Park Service administration at LARO. Director Drury recognized by May 1949 that the

proposed rules and regulations were "a major problem," and he urged that they be issued as

soon as possible. [93] Greider did not want to rush, however, noting that "the importance of

having complete control can not be over emphasized." [94]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi3e.htm[2/26/2014 3:36:38 PM]

Grand Coulee Dam Yacht Club picnic at Plum Point, July 1944.

Photo courtesy of Grant County Historical Society and Museum,

BOR Collection (12292-3).

In the year following the release of Greider's draft regulations for LARO, the Park Service

drafted a set of rules and regulations to govern all three National Recreational Areas: Lake

Mead, Millerton Lake, and Lake Roosevelt. Greider found the new draft "wholly inadequate

for this area" and suggested a rewrite. "Although we have already given the Washington

Office our final advice on these regulations after two years of study of the problem," he

groused, "we will prepare a new draft as soon as possible." [95] One of his particular

criticisms concerned the addition of permit fees for the area, but he was overruled by the

Regional Director who believed that Greider's concerns over collection difficulties and bad

public relations would be overcome eventually. Greider countered that a greater problem was

case law that held that all navigable waters in the country were to be considered common

highways, free for all citizens to use. The Director, however, seemed less concerned with

legal issues than public opinion, and he sided with Greider in ruling against imposition of

fees. Frank A. Banks reviewed the draft regulations for Reclamation and complained that

they did not recognize his agency's paramount rights in connection with the dam. He

maintained that while Reclamation needed to keep the Park Service informed about its

planned activities, its contractors could burn without permits, exceed weight limits on roads,

and land boats wherever they needed. [96]

The new regulations met resistance from users of Lake Roosevelt. Initial comments from the

Yacht Club were restrained. Greider had explained the changes to members and told them

that the regulations would be issued by March 1950. Club members then requested that they

be given a chance to comment prior to the new rules going into effect. The commodore

described the club's divided opinion: some believed that new regulations were unnecessary

since all the usual laws of navigation applied to the lake, while others did not object to

sensible regulations to protect government lands. He stressed that members wanted to be

reasonable and were not criticizing the Park Service. Although Department of Interior (DOI)

officials believed they had fulfilled any need for public input, they decided to publish the

proposed rules in the Federal Register to allow for additional comment. By late March 1950,

Greider believed that the controversy had nearly run its course. He attributed the discord to a

small group within the Yacht Club and suggested that other public groups were anxious to

see the Park Service proceed with the more important work of developing the national

recreation area. Greider emphasized the need to put the regulations into effect as soon as

possible since "undoubtedly the long drawn out process of preparing them has permitted the

dissenters to develop their case far beyond what the circumstances warrant." [97]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi3e.htm[2/26/2014 3:36:38 PM]

Despite Greider's wish for quick resolution, public comments became increasingly nasty. In

general, people viewed negatively any restriction on their free use of the recreation area,

whether it was the requirement for boat permits or the limitation of camping to designated

areas. Congressman Walt Horan listened to his constituents and had harsh words for DOI's

proposed regulations, calling many "unreasonably restrictive, some purely obnoxious and a

few so downright silly as to be unenforceable." He approved proposed congressional

legislation to give statutory authority for such rules, but he wanted to ensure that no

regulation subject to punitive enforcement could be passed without a public hearing. Horan,

interested in the development of the new NRA, warned that "the issuance and attempted

enforcement of some of the regulations proposed in the current draft would raise a storm of

protest so great as to retard indefinitely all hope of making this the first-class resort area it

should become." [98]

The initially cooperative Yacht Club realized that the proposed regulations threatened free

boating, and members began to question the Park Service's authority to restrict their pastime.

The club had formed in February 1939 as the waters began rising behind Grand Coulee Dam.

Its membership was primarily Reclamation employees, which strained relations between that

agency and the Park Service. Greider believed that some Reclamation employees were

unsympathetic toward the Park Service's responsibilities in managing reservoir areas, and he

worried that such attitudes might cause the public to be concerned about cooperation between

the two federal agencies. [99]

The controversy over regulations simmered for another year at LARO as the Park Service

tinkered with the proposed rules and comments continued to trickle in. It heated up by early

summer, following publication of the proposed regulations in the Federal Register on May

19, 1951. The Park Service intended to allow thirty days for comments before putting the new

rules into effect. Once again, things did not go as planned. In an effort to quell the

opposition, Superintendent Greider and "Red" Hill, Assistant Regional Director, held a public

meeting at the Yacht Club on June 1. Approximately thirty-five people attended, representing

a variety of sportsmen's groups. Greider began by giving some general information on the

regulations, assuring the audience that the rules had been developed using suggestions from

local residents as well as people who lived near the other two NRAs. The audience, however,

was suspicious of any governmental control and concerned about what they saw as

unnecessary restrictions. Frank A. Banks proposed a rewording of the camping section from

prohibiting camping outside of campgrounds except in designated areas to permitting

camping in all areas excepted those specifically closed by the superintendent. Greider seemed

to agree. "Some feel it is written backwards," he admitted. "However, these are written by the

best legal talent in the Department. That's the way they want it, to have the proper control

where necessary." When people objected to the need for boat permits, Greider assured them

that they would not be inconvenienced since permits would be readily available at main

boating areas. [100]

Unquestionably, some of the animosity was aimed not just at the Park Service but also at

Superintendent Greider personally. Clifford Koester, a regular critic from Coulee Dam,

worried that "the Superintendent might get out of bed on the wrong side and it would be a

tough day on the part of a lot of boat owners." Greider reminded Koester that the regulations

were standardized and worked smoothly in other National Parks, as they would at LARO.

Mr. Butler, commodore of the Grand Coulee Dam Yacht Club, was even more pointed: "Isn't

it true, Mr. Greider, that any time that a group . . . figured that the Superintendent was getting

out of hand they could get pretty fair recourse through the Regional Office?" he asked. "We

could go to Mr. Hill and he would slap your ears down?" "I wouldn't be surprised," Greider

responded. [101]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi3e.htm[2/26/2014 3:36:38 PM]

Comments increased, continuing to come in well after the June 19th deadline when the

regulations were to take effect. While a few were unopposed, the majority had at least

modest suggestions for change. The Park Service listened to the complaints and held up

implementation to modify the regulations. For instance, it changed the camping section from

a negative to a positive statement, permitting camping except where posted. Hunting and

trapping restrictions were similarly altered. Boat permits were dropped and replaced with

voluntary registration to aid in recovery of lost or stolen craft. The public may not have seen

these changes immediately because protests escalated in the fall of 1951. Organizations began

to call for cancellation of the Tri-Party Agreement and removal of Park Service authority at

Lake Roosevelt. Some took their complaints to the Columbia Basin Commission (CBC)

which, in turn, asked DOI to put the regulations on hold until the CBC and other groups had

a chance to make their views known. Oscar Chapman, Secretary of the Interior, responded

that the process had been going on for two years and he doubted that further public meetings

would be of any benefit. He suggested an early meeting between the CBC and the Park

Service to review the current draft since DOI wanted to issue the regulations soon. Instead,

the CBC passed a resolution in early November asking DOI not to treat the area "as a

national park, but as a sparsely inhabited recreational area," changing the regulations to give

people "the greatest unrestricted use of the region." [102]

Before the end of 1951, Greider went to the regional office to rework the regulations with

Superintendent Hugh Peyton from Millerton Lake NRA in California. National Park Service

Director Conrad L. Wirth recommended approval in mid-May 1952, and several weeks later

the Secretary of Interior issued the final regulations. "We believe . . . that every effort has

been made to simplify them," he wrote, "and that an honest attempt has been made to meet . .

. the objections received from the local people and organized groups interested in the Area."

After living under the rules for a season, the Yacht Club's Commodore Butler, formerly a

vocal critic, reassured Congressman Walt Horan that the regulations had been improved so

that "the people of the area will be able to go along with them without feeling over-regulated

to an irritating degree." [103]

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

laro/adhi/adhi3e.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi3c.htm[2/26/2014 3:36:39 PM]

Reclamation equipment loaned

to the Park Service, October

1947:

1 3-pound boy's hand axe

6 Steel waste paper

baskets

1 Wooden stationery

cabinet

1 Straight back oak chair

1 Oak costumer

1 Electric clock, Telechron

5 Electric heaters

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 3:

A Long Road Lies Ahead: Establishing Lake

Roosevelt National Recreation Area (continued)

Early Budgets and Staffing

Additional Congressional recognition of LARO came through line-item appropriations.

Funding for work at the new reservoir came initially from Reclamation. Following the end of

World War II, the agency increased its usual $10,000 request to $25,000 for FY1947. Greider

hoped to step up the pace of recreation development and planning and requested an increase

in personnel in May 1946 to include a recreation area supervisor, assistant supervisor,

engineer, landscape architect or park ranger, clerk-typist, and clerk-stenographer. Banks

supported the request, calling it a minimum, and suggested that Reclamation might be

criticized if it did not provide sufficient recreation staff. The 1946 Tri-Party Agreement

stipulated that Reclamation fund Park Service work at the reservoir. The agencies continued

with this fiscal relationship through FY1948. All of the initial Reclamation funds came with

strings attached and could be used only for administration and planning work. [66]

Despite the increases in funding, Greider was shorthanded much of the time during the early

years. Following the transfer of Phil Kearney in 1944, Greider had primary responsibility for

Park Service operations until late 1946, when he was joined by an engineer. The staff

increased considerably in 1947 with the addition of a landscape architect, chief ranger, and

clerk, but the work still exceeded available personnel. Greider complained about this

situation, adding that he periodically had been forced to use engineer Robert Waterhouse for

routine administrative matters, which cut into critical mapping and planning projects. "This

staff is barely adequate to properly service the large number of current permits and

applications," he reported. "It is wholly unable to function as an independent office in fiscal

or personnel matters, or to adequately perform all desirable planning work." [67]

The reservoir, known since April 1945 as Franklin D.

Roosevelt Lake, and the adjacent shore lands, became

Coulee Dam Recreational Area (LARO) with the TriParty Agreement. The signatory agencies discussed the

name during negotiations in April 1946. They decided

that the full name, Franklin Delano Roosevelt Lake

National Recreation Area was "cumbersome" so

Herbert Maier, Acting Regional Director, suggested

that the area be named after the dam, which was the

only one in the world while the country had

innumerable Roosevelt lakes. Maier also opposed

using the term "National" in the name since the Park

Service did not have such a category. "We finally

agreed upon 'Coulee Dam Recreational Area,'" Maier
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi3c.htm[2/26/2014 3:36:39 PM]

4 First aid kits

1 Plumb bob and holster

1 13-foot Philadelphia rod

level

1 Swivel drafting stool

2 72-inch oak tables

1 Hamilton #223 drafting

table [68] The projects carried on the

current Coulee Dam

Recreational Area program

total $1,694,200, so you can see

what a long road lies ahead of

us before we can get up full

speed.

--Claude E. Greider, LARO

Superintendent, March 8, 1948

[70]

As you know, there is likely to

be a wide difference between

what we in the field think we

can judiciously spend and what

Congress decides ought to be

spent.

--Claude Greider, explaining

the budget process to an

interested party, 1948. [74]

wrote. "The word 'Grand' was omitted since there is a

Grand Coulee Area some miles below the Dam which

is likely to become a state park." [69] The term

national recreation area was applied to the reservoir by

at least 1951 when the Park Service issued regulations

governing use of the NRAs.

Once freed from

the budget

restrictions

imposed by

Reclamation, the Park Service hoped to proceed with

development of the new recreational area. The agency

completed Master Plans in 1948 that spelled out

development priorities. Greider estimated that it would

take a major investment of nearly $1.7 million to get

LARO up to full operations, ready to attract additional

private investment in concession facilities. Despite the

great need, Greider was a realist, and he hoped that

LARO's small budget, including $30,000 for

administration, protection, and maintenance and $12,500 for development, would not be cut.

It was reduced, however, and LARO got $26,000 total in FY1949, with none for

development — its first Congressional appropriation. [71]

Subsequent appropriations also fell far short of meeting LARO's needs. A similar situation

occurred at other national park units across the country as the Park Service struggled to meet

soaring attendance figures at parks where facilities had been neglected during the war years.

By 1950, the Park Service had a backlog of work estimated at $500 million. Before it could

make a dent in these needs, however, war broke out again, this time in Korea. National Park

Service Director, Arthur E. Demaray, lamented that limited agency funding meant that there

was not enough money to allocate large amounts to any one area, such as LARO, to complete

major development work. "In fact," he wrote, "about all we can do with these limited funds is

to take care of the most urgent needs on a Service-wide priority basis." While the funds spent

at LARO were "not very impressive," they were typical of limited funds appropriated to the

Park Service for several years. [72] Park Service budgets were cut again by 1952 and the

following year the agency was subjected to a reduction in staff. [73]

With federal budgets tight, Congress worked to

balance competing demands. Washington

Congressman Walt Horan was a staunch advocate of

LARO and its plans for the area. He realized, however,

that with large amounts of federal money pouring into

Washington state for power and land development

projects, he could not push for too much. "If we have

to choose between recreational development and

reclamation," he noted, "we would be forced to choose

the latter." [75] He continued to push for funding,

however, and LARO was one of just four areas

nationwide to receive development funds during

FY1950. He was unsure of additional money and explained to LARO supporters,

"Unfortunately, we have a situation in which everybody wants to balance the budget in

somebody else's back yard." [76]

Lack of funds to develop recreational facilities at LARO led to public relations problems for
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi3c.htm[2/26/2014 3:36:39 PM]

Greider and the Park Service. Money was just part of the problem, however. Another issue

was the clash between the local population's desire for immediate development of any type

and the Park Service's preference for orderly planning and development. Greider outlined the

situation in 1947, advocating "a conservative and orderly program" and discouraging most

recreational use until both the public and the resources could be properly protected. He

planned to permit several concessions catering to boaters the following year. [77]

Congressman Horan appreciated Greider's desire for careful planning, but he countered that

"the demand for this development is becoming so strong and the Dam has been under

construction for so many years that many visitors and residents in the area seem to feel this

phase has been either neglected or unduly postponed." He urged looking into using private

capital for some of the work. [78] Greider described Park Service plans for development of

the new area to nearly 375 people at the Colville Chamber of Commerce meeting in

December 1947. Those attending supported the Park Service and planned to lobby Congress

to fund immediate development. [79]

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

laro/adhi/adhi3c.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4h.htm[2/26/2014 3:37:10 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 4:

Agreements and Disagreements: From TriParty Agreement to Multi-Party Agreement

(continued)

Prolonged Negotiations: 1980s

After the initial flurry of activity, the tribes and agencies settled down to work within the

tenuous balance developed at Lake Roosevelt. There was no suggestion of restarting

negotiations for a new agreement until the Park Service drafted its General Management Plan

(GMP) in 1979 and sent it out for review. After receiving comments from the CCT,

Superintendent William Dunmire met with the tribal Fish & Game Committee where the

discussion centered on the need for greater cooperation, especially in law enforcement.

Several committee members recommended beginning negotiations for a new agreement, and

Dunmire promised to pass on their interest to Reclamation, the lead agency. Within a few

weeks, an attorney for the CCT called Dunmire to discuss the GMP and to notify him that the

CCT was preparing to ask the Secretary of the Interior to restart negotiations on the Tri-Party

Agreement, with the tribes to be a formal signatory party. He also planned to request that the

GMP not be implemented until the agreement was finalized, but it is not known if he asked

for this delay. [112]

Despite the CCT's renewed interest in negotiations, the Tri-Party Agreement remained

unchanged and the GMP went into effect as planned. The CCT did not put out feelers again

until late in 1984 when tribal attorney Alan C. Stay asked LARO Superintendent Gary Kuiper

what the Park Service would like to see in an agreement between the agency and the tribes.

Kuiper expressed interest in having some functions returned to the Park Service, such as

administration of campgrounds and all special use permits in the Indian Zones, as well as

safety patrols for the entire reservoir. In addition, he wanted consistent administration of

recreation and shoreline development around the entire lake, with extensive areas remaining

undeveloped; he supported public boating and camping in the Indian Zones while still

maintaining recognized Indian rights; and he was concerned with protection of archaeological

and historical sites. While the tribes were not willing to cede any control over the Indian

Zones, they did express interest in working with the Park Service to develop standards for

selection of recreational sites; consulting with the agency over special use permits; instituting

joint law enforcement efforts; and finding ways to use Park Service personnel and expertise

to help the tribes manage their parks. Attorney Stay suggested that the tribes should negotiate

with the Park Service while also starting negotiations with Reclamation over the return of all

freeboard lands, hoping to put pressure on the agencies to reach an acceptable agreement.

[113]

Meanwhile, the Park Service was exploring a variety of options to resolve the long-standing

uncertainty at LARO. At a high-level meeting in January 1985, National Park Service Deputy

Director Mary Lou Grier met with Reclamation officials to discuss management options for
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4h.htm[2/26/2014 3:37:10 PM]

the recreation areas operated jointly by the two agencies. Grier asked Reclamation for help in

determining the feasibility of having either state or local recreation agencies take over the

management functions currently handled by the Park Service at three areas: LARO, Curecanti

NRA, and Lake Meredith on the Canadian River Project. Superintendent Kuiper had other

ideas, with his preference being legislation authorizing Park Service operations at Lake

Roosevelt. This seemed unlikely, however, given the current political climate, so he

recommended instead negotiation of a five-party agreement to include the tribes. Failing this,

the Park Service could always negotiate a separate agreement with Reclamation to manage all

the freeboard lands outside the Indian Zones. [114]

Actual negotiations for a multi-party agreement began October 30, 1985, following an

invitation from Reclamation. Both tribes sent delegations, as did the BIA, Reclamation and

the Park Service; the LARO team included Superintendent Kuiper and Assistant

Superintendent Kelly Cash. At the first meeting, representatives agreed on procedural matters

and briefly probed into potential issues including Park Service funding for tribal

campgrounds, tribal management of the entire recreation area, and lake-level fluctuations.

The mood soured by the second meeting when both tribal and BIA representatives expressed

displeasure with the Park Service, claiming that the agency did nothing in the Indian Zones

and allowed Indians no input in its operations. Cash reminded participants that, following the

1974 Opinion, the tribes had asked LARO to cease all activities on the Indian side of the lake

and the Park Service had respected this request. Unmollified, one tribal member suggested

working on a four-party agreement "because we don't need the National Park Service." On a

more positive note, both agencies expressed interest in the issue of Indian preference for jobs

at LARO. [115]

Following the meeting, George M. Davis, Superintendent of the Colville Agency, elaborated

on the expressed tribal concerns. He reminded both Reclamation and the Park Service that

they shared trust responsibilities with the BIA for the trust assets of tribal lands and

resources, and he accused them of overlooking these. Jobs were an important issue, and with

unemployment running as high as 70 percent on the Colville Reservation, Indian preference

was vital to the tribes. They also were concerned about the damaging effect of the annual

drawdown on archaeological resources and were upset that the agencies gave visitors no

information about Indians living next to the NRA. [116]

The CCT provided a focus for the negotiations when it set out a list of seven principles in

January 1986 and asked Reclamation and the Park Service to respond. These included 1)

adoption of Indian preference in hiring policies; 2) acceptance of the tribes' exclusive rights

to manage and control development in the Indian Zones, with the right to be included in

operations and maintenance funding from the federal government; 3) recognition that

development in the non-Indian areas of Lake Roosevelt affects the reservations and thus must

be subject to tribal concurrence and/or input; 4) restrictions on development outside the

Indian Zones that would limit the ability of tribes to develop recreation on the reservations; 5)

agreement from Reclamation to consider alternatives to having the Park Service manage

recreation at Lake Roosevelt; 6) agreement from both Reclamation and the Park Service that

tribes would have equal voice in any new agreement; and 7) agreement to work together on

concessions management and shoreline management plans that would identify particular

Indian lands suitable for recreational development. [117]

Little progress was made on any of these issues at the January 1986 negotiations, and

following the March session the tribes called a halt to any future meetings. While they

wanted to keep doors open at the local and regional levels, they believed they needed to take

their case to Washington, D.C. Despite this withdrawal, all three federal agencies followed up

on the issue of Indian preference. Research by the Park Service's regional office found that

the agency's system of hiring and promotion, with the need for career status, formed a barrier
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4h.htm[2/26/2014 3:37:10 PM]

for minorities, especially since seasonal positions did not carry career status. The BIA, under

the authority of the 1934 Indian Reorganization Act, was the only agency allowed to exercise

Indian Preference Hiring Authority, so the Park Service came up with a plan of its own to

increase Indian employment at LARO. The agency committed itself to developing a new

Affirmative Action Plan that would include seasonal employees and meaningful goals based

on the local population of Indians. The staff would work with local Indian organizations to

help those interested in applying for work, and the Superintendent or his designee would

review and approve all seasonal hiring to ensure that goals were met. In addition, the regional

office looked into other non-competitive hiring authorities, such as Vietnam Era Veteran,

Contiguous Area, and Summer Aid, that might be used to hire Indians. The Park Service also

agreed to work with the BIA to provide training programs to help Indians qualify for Park

Service jobs, and it promised to consider using non-competitive hiring authorities to find

qualified American Indians for permanent positions before filling them with normal merit

promotion. [118]

The agencies also considered using Excepted Service Appointing Authority to provide Indian

preference. The BIA was convinced that this could be used by Reclamation and the Park

Service for any position "directly and primarily related to the providing of service to

Indians." [119] The Park Service asked permission to use this authority and worked out a

formula, based on estimated number of Indian visits to LARO, to justify three seasonals for

six pay periods each, hired under this special authority. "This request is particularly critical to

the situation here in the Grand Coulee Dam area where the nearby Indian tribes suffer from

acute unemployment," wrote Acting Regional Director, William J. Briggle in 1986. [120] The

BIA encouraged the Park Service on the hiring issue, adding that tribal members would be a

valuable asset to the agency in dealing with the public at the NRA. Reclamation, however,

did not see how it could use the Excepted Service Appointing Authority since there were no

positions at Grand Coulee that pertained strictly to service to Indians. Its workforce at the

dam was already 6.6 percent Indian, and the agency aggressively advertised any openings

with the BIA and the tribes. [121]

While there was virtually no progress toward a new agreement, the Park Service and the

tribes did begin work on a Concession Management Plan (CMP) in 1986. Park Service

officials saw negotiations for the CMP as helping to pave the way for the final approval of

the new agreement governing overall management of Lake Roosevelt. The agency delayed

the start of the CMP process to allow inclusion of the tribes as co-producers of the document,

beyond the normal consultation role under the National Environmental Policy Act. By early

1987, two LARO concessions were tribally owned and operated, and the tribes were working

jointly with the agency on the lakewide CMP that they hoped would be "a model for

cooperation on the reservoir." [122]

Negotiations for a new management agreement remained on hold at the local level as the

tribes took their case to the Secretary of the Interior. In mid-1987, Regional Director Charles

Odegaard noted that the tribes were trying to negotiate unilaterally to reach an agreement that

would be binding on both Reclamation and the Park Service, and he asked that the agency be

allowed to participate in anything that might affect Park Service operations at Lake

Roosevelt. Odegaard and others had good reason for concern since the agreement proposed

by the tribes greatly reduced Park Service influence. They recommended that five parties

manage the lake, with Reclamation having jurisdiction over the Reclamation Zone, the Park

Service over the Recreation Zone, and the tribes over the Reservation Zone. All five parties

would participate on a coordinating committee to manage the area, but only Reclamation and

the tribes would be allowed to vote. The tribes would receive 100 percent of all fees collected

in the Reservation Zone, supplemented by one-third of the fees from the other zones. The

Park Service would work with the tribes to manage recreation; Indian preference would be

required; and archaeological resources would receive special protection. [123]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4h.htm[2/26/2014 3:37:10 PM]

The Park Service, needless to say, took a dim view of the proposed 1987 agreement that

allowed the tribes to dictate future management at Lake Roosevelt since they would have a

two-to-one voting majority. The agency believed that the funding proposal had no basis "in

law or logic." More importantly, one Park Service official objected to the power given the

coordinating committee, which could even vote to "reduce the authority of the NPS to

administer any and all phases of its recreation responsibilities on the lake. This is

preposterous!" The Park Service believed that such a committee should have no power of its

own and should only advise signatory parties of interpretations of the basic agreement.

Instead, "the 'power' should be vested in the agreement itself which should clearly outline the

role and function of each entity." [124] The Solicitor's Office also found fault with the tribal

proposal, noting that exclusive tribal rights did not include matters of policy and management

that legally remained the responsibility of the Secretary. Committees could advise but not

implement policy. In addition, user fees by law had to go into the Land and Water

Conservation Fund while concession fees went to the government; thus none could go

directly to the tribes. Besides these legal problems, the Park Service believed that non-Indians

opposed what they perceived as an Indian "takeover" of parts of Lake Roosevelt. [125]

The tribes remained encouraged by the process, which included a working committee of three

Assistant Secretaries to help resolve certain policy concerns. Among these were the

acceptance of the tribes as co-managers at Lake Roosevelt, with funding to carry out all

management responsibilities; implementation of Indian preference with Reclamation and the

Park Service; return of archaeological and historical resources to the tribes, who would

participate substantially in any future cultural resources management; return of all lands taken

for the project but no longer needed; and mitigation of fish and wildlife losses. [126]

The agencies were asked to respond to these issues when negotiations reopened in November

1987. The Park Service took a hard line against the tribal demands and argued against

designating the tribes as co-managers. It wanted tribal rights limited to those specifically

outlined in the 1940 Act and applied to only 25 percent of the reservoir water and freeboard

lands instead of the more than 40 percent claimed by the tribes. The Park Service believed

that all management responsibilities rested with the Secretary, not the tribes, but if they were

able to conclude a successful management agreement, Congress might provide funding to the

tribes through the normal budgetary process. Neither the Park Service nor Reclamation

believed that they were required to give Indian preference in hiring, although the Park

Service continued "to aggressively seek equal opportunities in the job market." [127]

The BIA, on the other hand, supported tribal claims. In a strong statement, one official urged

the DOI to negotiate a new management agreement that included the tribes "as resource comanagers . . . consistent with the Tribes' governmental and proprietary interests in Lake

Roosevelt resources." She warned that failure to do this would essentially revoke the 1974

mandate to negotiate a new management agreement that included the tribes. She offered to

have the BIA work with the other agencies to revise and implement affirmative action plans

in relation to local tribes, in addition to providing technical job placement help to the tribes.

Such actions could, she suggested, satisfy the tribes' Indian preference objectives in addition

to helping the agencies meet their federal minority hiring obligations. [128] Locally, the

Colville Agency Superintendent urged the Park Service to share funding with the tribes and

encouraged the agency to contract with the tribes in FY1988 for services in the Indian Zones.

[129]

The tribes began gaining ground in the negotiation process. Park Service officials hoped to

keep Reclamation in charge of the working committee and worried that the BIA was trying to

take over leadership. Their concerns were well founded because early in 1988, Patricia Keyes,

from the BIA, was appointed to facilitate negotiations as a representative of the Secretary and

all three Assistant Secretaries. She met with the tribes briefly in March and then spent five
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4h.htm[2/26/2014 3:37:10 PM]

days in May for intensive government-to-government meetings with them. During this

period, she held two breakfast meetings with LARO representatives but did not discuss Park

Service concerns about the new agreement. At the end of her May visit, Keyes was pleased

with the results and suggested that a new agreement would be finalized in July. Shortly after

this, Keyes dropped out of the complex negotiating process. [130]

When negotiations did not proceed as rapidly as Keyes had predicted, the tribes asked

Congress to step into the fray by including a requirement in the House Appropriations Bill

that the Secretary of the Interior provide a progress report explaining the lack of agreement

after nearly fifteen years of negotiations. The Park Service was concerned that the language in

the bill used the 1974 Solicitor's Opinion as the basis for agreement, despite subsequent case

law that invalidated many key conclusions of the opinion. This would provide credibility for

Indian claims to 45 percent of the NRA lands and waters, all of which lay within the original

reservation boundaries. The bill was modified, at the request of the Park Service, so that it

merely require a new agreement along with a progress report. [131]

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

laro/adhi/adhi4h.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/images/fig4-1.jpg[2/26/2014 3:37:27 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/images/fig4-1.jpg[2/26/2014 3:37:27 PM]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4c.htm[2/26/2014 3:37:29 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 4:

Agreements and Disagreements: From TriParty Agreement to Multi-Party Agreement

(continued)

Termination and Relocation

While Reclamation and the Park Service worried about budgets for the newly formed Coulee

Dam Recreational Area, Indian tribes had much larger issues confronting them. Faced with

their very survival as federally recognized tribes, the Colville and Spokane tribal

governments did not have much time during the 1950s and 1960s for issues at the adjoining

recreation area. Federal Indian policy changed following World War II and bureaucrats were

joined by many Indians, particularly returning war veterans, in favoring full integration of

native people into mainstream American society. This led to federal policies of termination

(ending federal trust status) and relocation throughout the United States, as well as the work

of the Indian Claims Commission.

The push for termination began during President Harry Truman's term and accelerated

following the election of Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1952. It started with the Zimmerman Plan

in 1947 that ranked tribes according to their perceived ability to survive withdrawal of federal

trust status. Truman's 1950 appointment of Dillon S. Myer to be Commissioner for the

Bureau of Indian Affairs ( BIA, formerly Office of Indian Affairs) put pressure on both the

tribes and the agency. Myer proposed training and job placement assistance for those who

wanted to leave the reservation, and he offered help in developing industrial programs for

those who chose to remain. Both programs shared the same goal, that of making Indians

independent of the federal government. Although Myer urged BIA officials to help tribes

understand the effects of termination, he insisted on proceeding even without tribal

cooperation. Myer also reorganized the BIA, and there was talk of eventually terminating the

agency along with the tribes. In 1953, the Republican Congress passed House Concurrent

Resolution 108 with little discussion. Supported by the Department of the Interior, the bill

established the policy of termination, ending the tribes' status as wards of the government and

moving to withdraw all federal responsibilities to Indian tribes. Bills targeting specific tribes

followed. [37]

Under termination, tribes were given two options to dispose of their tribally owned lands:

either they could form a corporation to manage the properties under a trustee of their choice,

or they could liquidate their assets and distribute the proceeds among tribal members. Should

a tribe choose neither option, the Secretary of the Interior was authorized to transfer titles to a

trustee who would then liquidate the holdings. Once targeted for termination, tribes had two

to five years to complete the process. The push to terminate tribes weakened by the late

1950s, especially as states and local governments began to realize that the costs of taking

over social services on former reservation lands far exceeded any benefits from taxing these

lands. Before the effort ended, only 3 percent of all federally-recognized Indians were
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4c.htm[2/26/2014 3:37:29 PM]

[The word "termination"

spread] like a prairie fire of a

pestilence through Indian

country. It stirred conflicting

reactions among my people; to

some it meant the severing of

ties already loose and

ineffective; others welcomed it

as a promise of early sharing in

tribal patrimony. Many

outsiders realized that it

provided a first step towards

acquiring Indian resources. The

great majority of my people,

however, feared the

consequences. The action of

Congress, accompanied by the

phrase "as rapidly as possible,"

sounded to them like the stroke

of doom.

-- George Pierre, former CCT

leader[39]

terminated. [38]

As a corollary to termination, the federal government

pushed a policy of relocation to encourage Indians to

move from reservations to urban areas where there

were more job opportunities and the potential for a

higher standard of living. The BIA believed that once

tribal members adjusted to their new lives in the cities,

there would be no need for reservations. Some Indians

volunteered to move and in the decade following

World War II, approximately 100,000 left reservations

throughout the country. The change proved disastrous

for many, however, who suffered profound culture

shock and lacked basic urban skills such as knowing

how to use a telephone. By the late 1950s, the BIA

changed the focus from relocation to employment

assistance, attracting interest from Indians wanting

vocational training. Indian centers opened in cities to

help relocated Indians. Ultimately, the failure of both

termination and relocation helped fuel the Red Power

movement of the 1960s. [40]

In 1954, a congressional report rated both the Spokane

and the Colville Indians as able to handle their own

affairs and thus ready for termination. The STI,

however, moved quickly to squelch this idea. In a

strong statement made to the Commissioner of Indian

Affairs in 1955, the tribe said that it was neglected by the federal government. When the

Agency had moved from the Spokane to the Colville Reservation nearly thirty years earlier,

the tribe had lost many services to which they were entitled. During these years, the STI had

only a sub-agency and consequently the tribe had received essentially only what was left

after the Colville Agency took first choice. The STI blamed the BIA for this and went on to

suggest that the federal government improve services to tribal members instead of

withdrawing support. The STI refused to consider termination until their long-standing land

claim was settled by the Indian Claims Commission. The tribe later asked to be separated

administratively from the CCT in 1966, due to "widely divergent" ideologies. [41]

The CCT was not able to escape the termination effort without a difficult fight that caused

great dissension within the tribes. The BIA informed the Colville Business Council in

February 1953 that it would assign technical staff to help them work on termination, which

the Council had already been studying. The process began in earnest, however, with the

passage of Public Law 772 on July 24, 1956. This law returned to tribal ownership over

800,000 acres of former tribal lands that had not been disposed of under the Homestead Act.

A condition of this land return was that the Colville Business Council had to propose

legislation to terminate federal supervision within five years. Ironically, had the CCT voted in

favor of the Indian Reorganization Act twenty years earlier, the Secretary of the Interior

could have returned these lands to the tribe without any termination provision, but he was not

allowed to do this for a non-IRA tribe. A group within the CCT that favored termination

drafted legislation that was introduced in Congress in 1962, but the bill died in committee.

Similar legislation was introduced but not passed in each Congress through 1970. The Park

Service fully expected termination to pass and planned to assume responsibility for fire

protection for lands on the west side of the lake. The movement for Colville termination came

as the country was shifting away from this program and tribes across the nation fought

against these CCT bills. On the Colville Reservation, however, there were many who
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4c.htm[2/26/2014 3:37:29 PM]

supported the move, and some of these supporters were elected to the Colville Business

Council. Although termination plans were eventually dropped, hard feelings persisted among

pro- and anti-termination factions on the reservation. [42]

Indian Claims Commission

The work of the Indian Claims Commission (ICC) provided a partial counterbalance to the

post-war federal programs of termination and relocation. The 1946 legislation that established

the ICC set a five-year period during which tribes could file claims, followed by another five

years during which the three-person commission would reach decisions. The Commission

heard 852 cases in the first 5 years. To accommodate the large number of claims, Congress

allowed extensions until it finally dissolved the ICC in 1978. The STI, through the law firm

of Wilkinson, Boyden & Cragun (later Wilkinson, Cragun & Barker), filed a claim in August

1951, asking for additional compensation for lands taken in 1887. The tribe asserted that the

amount paid, totaling thirty-two cents per acre for 3.14 million acres, was too low and the

ICC agreed, awarding the tribe an additional $6.7 million in 1967. In addition, the Spokane

Tribal Council asked the Secretary of the Interior in 1949 for compensation for the flooding

of nearly 3,000 acres of land following completion of Grand Coulee Dam. They waited too

long to file this claim with the ICC, however. At the time of the large CCT settlement in the

1990s, the STI asked the House of Representatives to waive the statute of limitations and

allow similar compensation to the tribe for its fishery loss and share of power revenue, noting

that to compensate the CCT but not the STI "would be an egregious miscarriage of justice."

This case is still pending. [43]

The CCT also filed a number of claims with the ICC. Various tribes of the CCT claimed

millions of acres had been taken unfairly. After the Secretary of the Interior initially opposed

these claims, the CCT finally agreed in 1956 to a settlement of $1 million for a total of 1.7

million acres. Tribal members received a payment of $350 per capita in 1961. The tribes filed

another claim in 1973 that dealt primarily with the loss of their fishery due to Grand Coulee

and Chief Joseph dams; this claim was settled for $3.257 million in 1978. An even more

important case concerned the CCT claim to power revenue from Grand Coulee based on their

claim to Columbia River waters. The tribes began negotiating with the government in the

mid-1970s, but a special task force found the tribal legal claims without merit in 1980. The

tribes sued and eventually won a settlement in 1994 in the Court of Appeals that included a

lump sum of $53 million and annual payments of at least $15.25 million. [44]

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

laro/adhi/adhi4c.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5g.htm[2/26/2014 3:37:31 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 5:

Charting the Course: Managers and

Management Issues (continued)

NRA Name Change

The move to change the name of Coulee Dam NRA was under way by 1968. Chief Ranger

Charles Woodbury complained about the confusion among tourists over a name shared by the

recreation area, dam, and town. Although he thought that a change in brochure design might

help, he believed that the best solution was a change in name. The regional office, however,

turned down the request, noting that the reasons were not "sufficiently compelling to justify

the name change." [102] Woodbury's suggestion was echoed later by two separate university

studies of the park. Among their many conclusions were the recommendations that the NRA

be renamed. One suggested Roosevelt Lake NRA while the other liked Upper Columbia

NRA. Superintendent David Richie agreed with the need to change the name, saying that

people, including local residents, saw the name "Coulee Dam" as referring only to the area

immediately around the dam. He suggested either Roosevelt Lake or Lake Roosevelt NRA

but worried that these might encounter political problems with the Republican administration.

He offered Columbia or Upper Columbia NRA as alternatives. [103]

Nothing further was done to change the name until the late 1980s, when those supporting a

change included not only LARO staff but also local civic groups and regional counties. By

then, they recognized the problem of tourists who drove all the way to the Coulee Dam only

to find that their campground was one hundred miles upriver. Superintendent Kuiper

convinced the Regional Director to commit in writing to renaming the park, but still the

change remained elusive. Superintendent Gerald Tays took on the cause when he arrived in

1993. He worked with the Washington and regional offices as well as the local managing

partners, area Chambers of Commerce, and mayors. All agreed with the change, so he

submitted it to the Secretary of the Interior for approval. [104]

Vaughn Baker carried on the effort after being appointed Superintendent in 1996. In talks

with the Secretary's office, Tays had already determined that the change did not require

approval from either Congress or the U.S. Board of Geographic Names, as some had thought.

The CCT stalled the process for a brief period by suggesting changing the name of the lake to

reflect the area's Indian heritage, but the Park Service declined to be a part of such a

complicated process. Baker reminded the tribes that their own concessionaire, Roosevelt

Recreation Enterprises, used that name, and he told them that the Park Service just wanted to

change the name of the NRA to reflect that used by the public. As objections faded, Baker

approached the Regional Director and suggested that they just go ahead with the change.

They had hoped to have the process completed by October 1996 to coincide with the fiftieth

anniversary of the park, but instead the change did not become official until January 1, 1997.

The park began using the new name before that, however, changing the brochures three years

earlier and some signs by 1996. [105]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5g.htm[2/26/2014 3:37:31 PM]

Boundary Adjustments

The initial boundaries of the area that became LARO were not drawn with recreation in mind.

Instead, they encompassed the land that Reclamation deemed necessary for the protection of

the Grand Coulee Dam project. Within the Indian reservations, this was a narrow strip of

ground between the high-water level of 1,290 feet and an unmarked boundary twenty feet

higher in elevation. The boundary in other areas was often more irregular, reflecting either the

initial purchase of whole parcels instead of a narrow strip below the 1,310 level, or purchase

of additional lands in later years. Differences in terrain provided a wider strip of land in

relatively flat areas and a narrower band in steeper ones. Reclamation initially was allowed to

purchase additional lands only in areas of potential landslides — not useful additions for

recreational development. The Park Service, on the other hand, had no authority to buy any

land, considerably reducing possibilities for expansion of the park. [106]

This lack of authority did not stop the Park Service from coveting its neighbors' lands during

the initial development stage of the NRA. As soon as LARO staff had identified the areas

with greatest potential for recreational development, the agency hoped to acquire land

adjacent to eleven of these to protect them from encroachments. The initial request for

approximately 750 acres in 1944 had more than doubled two years later with the addition of

nearly 370 acres at Fort Spokane and another 60 acres proposed for donation at Spring

Canyon. In addition, LARO Superintendent Greider was especially concerned about the

potential for unsightly development on private land along Highway 25 between Bissell and

Evans. He asked Reclamation to purchase approximately 325 acres there to protect the park

from "''shacky' roadside-lakeside developments." This request was supported by the National

Park Service Director's office, which appealed to the Commissioner of Reclamation in

September 1947. The Park Service considered these small tracts a nuisance because "if

'improved' with hot-dog stands, gas stations, and the like," they would negate the

effectiveness of the recreational development at the park. [107]

Despite the requests for land, the Regional Counsel for Reclamation determined in October

1947 that the agency had no authority to acquire the lands listed by the Park Service. The

agencies nonetheless continued to pursue the issue. By early 1948, Reclamation noted that it

could purchase these lands if it could justify the procurement in connection with project

operations. In addition, if any of the lands were within three hundred feet of the high-water

mark, there could be funds available to acquire them. Greider immediately prepared maps

showing lands that fell within this limit. The Park Service's Washington Office continued its

involvement since the issue extended to other reservoirs where the agency had recreational

responsibilities. Conrad Wirth, then Chief of Lands, noted that there was considerable

variance in how the different Reclamation Regions applied the criteria for land acquisitions,

with some able to help recreational needs more than others. Persistence paid off, and Greider

reported in August 1949 that Reclamation was acquiring thirteen small tracts for a total of

513 acres. Classified by Reclamation as "control areas," these were lands requested by the

Park Service to protect important recreation sites as well as preserve roadside strips from

"unsympathetic uses." In addition, Reclamation was trying to purchase another 966 acres of

potential slide areas. [108]

This acquisition program continued into at least the 1960s as Reclamation attempted to get

title to lands that were up to three hundred feet above high water, in potential slide areas, or

extended to the nearest subdivision line. The agency got funding for such purchases in

FY1961 and FY1962, allowing it to obtain 1,200 acres of Indian lands, about half the land it

intended to acquire. These tracts cost a total of $80,000, but private lots were starting to sell

for even higher prices and Reclamation worried that if it had to pay similar prices, Indians

and others who had been compensated at lower rates might complain. The Park Service
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5g.htm[2/26/2014 3:37:31 PM]

continued to look into ways it could acquire land on its own at LARO. Superintendent Wayne

Howe suggested in 1971 that Congressional legislation to establish the NRA might provide

specific authority to acquire lands. This would help the park purchase available lands to

expand facilities, protect against encroachments, and improve the alignment of the

boundaries. This has not happened to date. [109]

Land issues have continued to challenge LARO management. After more than a decade of

trying to resolve some difficult situations with neighboring landowners, the Park Service

announced a modification of its land policy in the 1998 draft GMP. LARO acknowledged

that the phase-out of special use permits had created serious problems for some landowners,

who had depended on permitted use of federal lands to access and utilize their property.

Some wanted to continue using lands formerly under special use permit and asked for ways

to obtain title to the land in question. The Park Service and Reclamation agreed that in areas

where there was little recreational potential, the agencies would consider an exchange, sale,

or grant of easement, on a case-by-case basis. [110]

Acquisition of Land at Spring Canyon

The Park Service began negotiating for additional land at Spring Canyon as early as 1943.

The agency proposed putting a recreational area there but owned only thirty-five acres of

suitable land. The large tract of land surrounding the government's holdings was owned by a

group of local men who had formed the Columbia City Development Company to promote a

new town on the site, designed to replace the town of Grand Coulee. They saw Park Service

plans as favorable to their own since Spring Canyon would enhance their development. In

July 1943, Reclamation, the Park Service, and the Development Company discussed a gift of

approximately seventy acres to Reclamation to allow sufficient land for a recreation area.

Because the Park Service could not assure the men of a timetable for developing facilities

there, the company decided to make its gift contingent on future development by LARO. The

agreement proved more challenging to work out than anticipated since the federal

government was not able to accept a gift predicated on potential development. Despite this,

the government signed a five-year agreement in January 1944 with Julius and Mable Johnson

(principals in the company) and the Columbia City Development Company. Herbert Maier of

the regional office described it as "a clever five-year-option-to-accept-a-donation — if it

works out!" [111]

The five-year limit passed and the Johnsons died before LARO was able to fund any

development at Spring Canyon. Johnsons' heirs, however, deeded eighty-eight acres to the

U.S. in July 1952, allowing a right-of-way for a two-mile road as well as approximately

sixty acres to provide enough land to develop the campground, picnic area, and swimming

beach. When the Park Service announced the donation of land, it acknowledged that the gift

now made it possible to ask Congress to fund the development of Spring Canyon, the most

important area at the south end of the lake. Later donations allowed LARO to build a road

into a boat launch area. [112]

Land Issues at St. Paul's Mission

Washington State Parks acquired St. Paul's Mission in 1951 but soon found it difficult to

monitor the remote site. The Park Service began informal administration in 1973, and the

following year State Parks transferred the building and 3.25 acres of land to Reclamation for

administration by the Park Service as part of LARO. About the same time, the Park Service

began talks with Washington Water Power Company (WWP) over a possible donation of part

of the company's land next to St. Paul's Mission. After considering various ideas, the
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5g.htm[2/26/2014 3:37:31 PM]

company donated between three and five acres of land to Stevens County around 1978 for the

site of an historical center. The Park Service initiated discussions with WWP, starting in

1983, to see if the company would be willing to trade some of its land surrounding the

mission to Reclamation. The first proposal fell through in 1984, but two years later

negotiations for another exchange looked like a better possibility. By 1987, however, WWP

had determined that the lands proposed for exchange were not suitable, and it withdrew its

offer. The company stated that it was not interested in exchanging lands per se but was

concerned with the long-term management of the property in connection with the mission. It

agreed to grant a license or easement to the Park Service for an access road, satisfying the

immediate needs of the NRA. [113]

Boise Cascade Mill Land Exchange

Early LARO managers had to contend with a variety of industrial and agricultural uses on

federal lands, allowed first by Reclamation, the initial land manager, and later by the 1946

Tri-Party Agreement. There were four sawmills along the lakeshore by the early 1940s, but

only the Boise Cascade mill at Kettle Falls remained in 1990, permitted under the only

industrial special use permit at the NRA. At that time, LARO's Special Park Use

Management Plan determined that such industrial operations could not be justified under the

1986 NPS-53 policies. It recommended that the log storage area in the lake be terminated

immediately, with additional storage on federal lands phased out over the next ten years.

[114]

Boise Cascade officials were alarmed by the proposed cancellation of their log-storage area

and told the Park Service in October 1990 that they would be unable to continue operations

of their plywood mill without retaining some of the federal land then in use. They proposed a

land exchange to allow them to retain a minimum of 6.7 acres of land. Four of the twelve

potential parcels were of interest to the Park Service; two were next to or near the NRA

boundary in the Kettle River valley, while two others adjoined the Summer Island

Campground. The Park Service quickly narrowed the list down to two seventy-acre pieces

along the Kettle River containing good wildlife habitat and offering potential for mitigation

efforts. If the exchange were to fail, the Park Service remained willing to offer Boise

Cascade a long-term lease on approximately seven acres to help the company remain a viable

business with an impact on close to five hundred jobs. [115]

While the parties involved favored the exchange, they soon found that they lacked legal

authority to complete it. By September 1991, Reclamation learned that it was not allowed to

negotiate independently with Boise Cascade. Other exchange options through the Bureau of

Land Management or General Services Administration would be lengthy, so officials decided

their best option was pursuit of congressional support for a special authority. Boise Cascade,

the Park Service, and Reclamation discussed the issue with Senator Slade Gorton in 1991,

and by late October Reclamation agreed to forward proposed legislation for his consideration.

[116]

The potential exchange caught the attention of a local environmental group, Citizens for a

Clean Columbia. It ran a facetious advertisement in two local papers announcing that parcels

on the Lake Roosevelt shore were available for exchange with land elsewhere, at the going

rate of "about ten acres to one." It claimed that environmental contamination of the land was

not an obstacle to the exchange and suggested that those interested should call various Park

Service employees at LARO. At least two individuals called to see about an exchange, but

the Park Service quickly squelched the hoax. The man who placed the ads continued to

protest the Boise Cascade exchange through more conventional means, asserting that the mill

was a major source of pollution. [117]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5g.htm[2/26/2014 3:37:31 PM]

Senators Slade Gorton and Patty Murray introduced Senate Bill 1324 in the U.S. Senate on

July 30, 1993. The bill authorized the exchange of approximately 7 acres of federal land for

close to 136 acres of land belonging to Boise Cascade Corporation. At a hearing on the bill in

March 1994, John Keys, Pacific Northwest Regional Director for the Bureau of Reclamation,

stated that the Department of the Interior would ensure that all cultural resource surveys and

documentation under the National Environmental Policy Act would be completed after the

bill passed Congress but prior to the actual exchange. He urged that an amendment be added

to protect the government from assuming liability for any hazardous waste on either piece of

land. The bill eventually passed, and the exchange was completed by late 1996. [118]

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

laro/adhi/adhi5g.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5c.htm[2/26/2014 3:37:36 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 5:

Charting the Course: Managers and

Management Issues (continued)

Signs

Unlike many other National Park units, there is no main entrance to LARO. Park Service

lands there are confined to a narrow strip on either side of the river, extending roughly 150

miles upriver from Grand Coulee Dam. Visitors reach campgrounds and boat launches on

multiple access roads from nearby state highways and county roads. This configuration has

made signs particularly important at LARO. The park began working with the Washington

Department of Highways in 1974 to erect brown-and-white highway signs to direct tourists

to Park Service areas from state highways; installation of these signs was completed the

following year, but two years later the state installed another fifty directional signs.

Superintendent Gary Kuiper asked for a waiver of rules for highway signs in 1985 to allow

listing the full name of the NRA on the Spring Canyon sign, the first one seen by northbound tourists. He believed this was important because it would alert visitors to the change

from Banks Lake, administered under State Parks regulations, to Lake Roosevelt,

administered under Park Service regulations. [53]

Initially, all signs within LARO boundaries were traditional wooden ones with routed and/or

painted lettering. The park had a sign committee at least by the mid-1960s that inspected all

park signs in May. They ensured that the sign was still needed, provided adequate

information, and retained an attractive appearance. Any that were deemed unnecessary were

removed. Maintenance and repairs were done during the winter months to be ready for the

summer season. New signs had to be approved by the committee. [54]

LARO began to switch to metal signs with standardized Park Service symbols in the 1970s at

the instigation of Maintenance Supervisor Bill Schieber. The committee completed a Sign

Survey and Inventory of existing signs in 1972-1973 and then ordered new signs, made by

Federal Prison Industries, through the regional office. Installation of the metal signs did not

begin until the spring of 1975, so the park continued to use and maintain wooden signs. In

1976, Superintendent William Burgen complained about excessive delays on sign orders

placed through the regional office. When LARO installed new fish cleaning stations that year,

the park decided to make routed wooden signs instead of waiting at least five or six months

for a sign request to be filled. Burgen noted that if they had sent in a request, they would not

have received the signs for the summer season and, moreover, they probably would not have

received them in time for the following season. LARO was still waiting for approximately

two hundred metal signs in 1977, but it had decided to keep the wooden signs in historic

areas to help maintain integrity. [55]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5c.htm[2/26/2014 3:37:36 PM]

Al Drysdale and James Todd installing new headquarters sign,

February 1959. Photo courtesy of National Park Service, Lake

Roosevelt National Recreation Area (LARO.HQ.MENG).

There were no major changes to the LARO sign program until the mid-1980s when the park's

Maintenance Division photographed and categorized all park signs and entered the

information into a computer. LARO approved a Sign Plan in March 1990 to codify the park's

approach to signage. It emphasized the need to give entrance signs a friendly, instead of

authoritative, tone to welcome visitors. In addition, the plan stressed the need to present a

distinct visual image for the NRA within the overall Park Service identity. [56]

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

laro/adhi/adhi5c.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6i.htm[2/26/2014 3:37:42 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 6:

Family Vacation Lake: Recreation Planning

and Management (continued)

Recreation Management in the Reservation Zone

The 1974 Solicitor's Opinion gave each of the two tribes, the CCT and STI, the legal

authority to regulate hunting, fishing, and boating by non-Indians in its own Indian Zone.

After that decision, the two tribes agreed to leave regulation of boating, water skiing, and

swimming to the Park Service. Some LARO rangers had difficulty with this situation; in

1988, for example, several Park Service rangers chose to stay on the "NPS side" during their

boat patrols simply to avoid causing problems. Today, LARO has Law Enforcement

Memoranda of Agreement with both the STI and the CCT. If an emergency arises on the

tribes' side of the reservoir and the NPS is contacted, LARO responds and then contacts the

tribes for their follow-up. If a situation is not an emergency, LARO contacts the tribes and

they handle it. The tribes do the same in reverse. [128]

Beginning in 1975, each tribe enacted separate but similar ordinances to regulate the Indian

Zones that asserted exclusive tribal jurisdiction over hunting, fishing, and camping from the

center line of Lake Roosevelt to the 1,310-foot elevation line and required non-tribal

members to obtain fishing, hunting, and camping permits. This confusing situation was

modified in 1980 when the CCT agreed with the state that the tribes would recognize a state

fishing license on Lake Roosevelt. In that same year, LARO proposed to implement a visitor

education and cooperative law enforcement program to eliminate any visitor activities on the

Indian Zones that conflicted with tribal regulations. A 1993 supplement to the 1980

agreement provided that each would recognize the fishing license of the other. This meant

that either a state or tribal license was sufficient for fishing on Lake Roosevelt, except for the

waters within the Spokane reservation. The STI began enforcing the requirement that

fishermen have a tribal fishing permit on Spokane reservation waters in 1990. In 1993, when

the rights of non-Indians to fish the Spokane Arm was tested in the federal court located in

Spokane, the judge ruled that non-Indians do not need tribal licenses to fish the lower

Spokane River. Today, non-tribal members may fish from a boat on the STI and CCT

reservations with a state license, but as soon as they step onto land they have to have a tribal

permit. [129]

Throughout this period of some twenty years of contested jurisdiction over fishing

regulations enforcement, LARO personnel tried to remain separate from the controversy.

Earlier, the policy had been not to enforce state fishing rules and regulations except in the

case of an obvious gross violation, in which case the matter would be turned over to the

Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. As LARO Superintendent William Dunmire

commented in 1979:

If we were to begin an enforcement program or accept and use State

deputizations, we probably would be obligated to take on the same role in
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6i.htm[2/26/2014 3:37:42 PM]

enforcing the Colville and Spokane Indian tribal fishing regulations for that

quarter of the lake which is in the Indian Zone. We would prefer not to get into

the issue of fishing regulation enforcement in these complicated waters. [130]

LARO's current policy is to enforce state fishing rules and regulations.

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

laro/adhi/adhi6i.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6c.htm[2/26/2014 3:37:57 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 6:

Family Vacation Lake: Recreation Planning

and Management (continued)

Development of Regulations to Govern the Use of LARO

During World War II, the Coast Guard established a patrol base on Lake Roosevelt in order

to enforce motorboat and navigation regulations and to aid the federal guard in protecting the

dam and other government property. By the end of 1942, the Coast Guard's forty men and

four motorboats were doing regular patrols upriver to the mouth of the Spokane River, with

occasional trips to Marcus and Northport (National Guard personnel did boat patrols for a

few years after the war). The Coast Guard also installed directional lights as navigation aids.

In 1949, the U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey completed a standard navigation chart of Lake

Roosevelt. No markings, however, were placed on the water to designate the Indian Zones

established by the 1945 Solicitor's Opinion. [50]

Coast Guard patrol base about half a mile upstream from Grand

Coulee Dam, December 1942. The former Camp Ferry barge served

as quarters. Reclamation later leased this facility to the Grand

Coulee Dam Yacht Club. Photo courtesy of U.S. Bureau of

Reclamation, Grand Coulee (USBR Archives 559).

In 1946, when the National Park Service was finally selected to manage recreation on Lake

Roosevelt, no regulations had yet been established to govern the use of the lake. The only
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6c.htm[2/26/2014 3:37:57 PM]

restrictions on small boats were those that normally applied on navigable inland rivers and

lakes. Of particular concern to Superintendent Greider and his staff was the need for more

stringent boating regulations. By the spring of 1946, before the Tri-Party Agreement had

been approved, the office of the Park Service Director had asked the Regional Office to

submit a draft of the rules and regulations for public use of the reservoir. On the national

level, the Park Service started working on legislation that would give the Department of

Interior authority to regulate recreational use of both navigable and non-navigable waters

within recreation areas. [51]

Many public comments on the proposed regulations focused on particular aspects of

recreational use of the reservoir. One of the questions most debated within the Park Service

was whether or not to charge a fee for private boat permits. Greider supported permits but not

an accompanying fee, partly because of the "difficult public relations situation" locally and

because of the lack of rangers to enforce fee collection. The September 1948 draft regulations

stated that a permit issued by the Superintendent, with a fee, would be required; the 1951

regulations mentioned a required free permit; the final regulations said that boat operators

may register their boats with the Superintendent to aid in recovery of lost or stolen boats.

This progression from quite restrictive to much less restrictive also occurred with other

recreational issues, such as camping (from being allowed only in designated areas to

anywhere except areas posted by Superintendent), and swimming (from being allowed only

in designated areas to anywhere except in areas prohibited). The regulations were amended

many times between 1948 and 1952. The Department of Interior finally approved and issued

them on June 27, 1952. Claude Greider was transferred a year later. Hugh Peyton, former

superintendent of the Millerton Lake NRA, replaced Greider at LARO. [52]

Boaters from Wenatchee and Ellensburg starting off on a trip to the

Arrow Lakes in British Columbia, June 1947. Photo courtesy of

Grant County Historical Society and Museum, BOR Collection.

During the sometimes acrimonious debate over the proposed regulations for LARO, the Park

Service was also maneuvering to be selected as the managing agency for the twenty-sevenmile-long equalizing reservoir south of Grand Coulee Dam now known as Banks Lake. The

Park Service proposed constructing recreation facilities and administering the recreational

uses of the Upper Grand Coulee as an extension of LARO. The plan, predictably, met with

strong opposition. Despite what Greider called a "propaganda campaign," until 1953 LARO

staff assumed that the equalizing reservoir would become either a fourth ranger district of
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6c.htm[2/26/2014 3:37:57 PM]

LARO or a separate NRA under Park Service administration. District headquarters were

planned for the town of Coulee City. These plans were cancelled, however, in the spring of

1953. [53]

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

laro/adhi/adhi6c.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7i.htm[2/26/2014 3:37:59 PM]

As if I had so much money I

didn't need to dress for it, I

boarded a houseboat at Seven

Bays Marina to look around.

The back deck was a low

platform for swimming or

skiing. The vessel had a full

galley with casket-sized ice

chest, a bar, flush toilets, and

mirror lighting in the head. It

had a spacious middle for

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 7:

Building and Maintaining the Park:

Administrative and Visitor Facilities (continued)

Concessions at LARO, 1987-1998

In 1987, concession operations on Lake Roosevelt began to move from small-scale to largescale as a result of aggressive advertising and increasing numbers of users. Gross receipts of

even the small concessions grew tremendously. For example, the Spring Canyon food stand's

receipts rose from $490 in 1987 to $10,500 in 1988, and Keller Ferry's gross receipts climbed

from $147,700 in 1987 to over $1,100,000 in 1990. Concession franchise fees paid to the

Park Service remained low throughout the decade, however ($5,500 in 1989). As concession

operations grew, LARO personnel spent more and more of their time on the issue. In 1985,

the equivalent of almost two staff members was devoted to concession management, and

eventually a full-time Concession Specialist position for LARO was funded. [109]

Houseboats came onto Lake Roosevelt in force beginning in 1987, when the CCT established

Roosevelt Recreational Enterprises (RRE) to operate recreational facilities on the lake. In the

spring of that year, the CCT acquired two small marina concessions at Keller Ferry

(Lakeview) and Seven Bays, neither of which borders one of the two reservations. RRE hired

an experienced marina manager, accomplished extensive facility improvements, and obtained

ten houseboats. The CCT reported that one reason they established RRE was because they

knew they could hold their own business accountable to mitigate any adverse consequences

resulting from their part in the increased visitation to Lake Roosevelt. Perhaps most

significantly for LARO, RRE initiated an aggressive marketing campaign to promote Lake

Roosevelt and houseboat rentals, particularly to the Seattle market. The first-year efforts were

successful; RRE booked nearly 80 percent of its houseboats during the 1987 prime season,

and the following year 60 percent of the houseboat renters were repeat users. In 1988, the

company added twenty more houseboats to its fleet. By August 1988, RRE had invested

some $3 million in the two concessions, including money from a Housing and Urban

Development grant. [110]

Soon, the RRE houseboat operation at Keller Ferry

expanded to thirty-three boats and was changed from

permit to contract status. By 1990, the concessionaire

planned to have a new store/restaurant, maintenance

building, boat rental office, expanded parking, and

grading of the harbor area. RRE also planned

improvements at Seven Bays, including a new

store/restaurant and additional docks. The gross

receipts at both these marinas increased greatly

between 1987 and 1988 to over $1 million. The CCT

paid 3 percent of its gross receipts for the two marinas
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7i.htm[2/26/2014 3:37:59 PM]

dining and playing cards, a

shaded front deck, and a roof

laid out for sun bathing. A

water slide curled to the

Columbia from the upper deck. 

-- Robin Cody (canoeing the

length of the Columbia River),

Voyage of a Summer Son, 1995

[111]

to the Park Service. By 1988, it was employing twenty

people year-round, with over twenty seasonals. Both

marinas, as well as LARO's other concessions,

continued to expand rapidly in the early 1990s, and

marketing efforts began to focus on promoting the

spring and fall months. [112]

Because of the success with houseboats on Lake

Roosevelt in 1987, concession operators asked the

Park Service to be allowed to provide additional rental

boats at several marinas. In 1988, LARO prepared an

environmental assessment of rental houseboats on

Lake Roosevelt. The plan (later included in the 1991 Concession Management Plan)

established a lake-wide limit of 200 rental houseboats and 250 other rental motorized boats,

distributed to marinas throughout the lake. Ten years later, the houseboat fleet had expanded

to 40 out of Keller Ferry and 13 out of Kettle Falls. Some members of the public were

concerned about impacts on the shoreline from large parties and about the visual impacts of

the houseboats themselves. [113]

In the late 1980s, the STI also began to get into the business of providing concessions on

Lake Roosevelt. The tribe hired a consulting firm to recommend alternatives for lakefront

development sites within the reservation. The confluence of the Spokane and Columbia rivers

was determined to have the most immediate potential, followed by McCoy's Marina, an

existing small store and gas station. The firm recommended that the confluence site be

developed with an RV campground, rental houseboats, docks, rental fishing and speedboats,

store, picnic areas, beach area, viewpoint with interpretive information, bingo/gaming parlor,

cultural center, and motel. In 1995, the STI completed a one-hundred-slip marina, store, and

fuel and pump-out facilities at its Two Rivers Casino and Marina at the confluence site.

Spokane was the major market for this new facility. By 1998, the complex also had a launch

ramp, rental boat slips, campground, RV sites, and large pavilion. The STI now also contracts

with a company that provides a few rental houseboats at this location. [114]

In 1986, the tribes and Park Service personnel began to work together to prepare a

Concession Management Plan for Lake Roosevelt even though a new multi-party agreement

for lake management had not yet been negotiated. The CCT had protested Park Service plans

to sign a concession agreement with a concessionaire in the fall of 1985, and this may have

prompted the start of the discussions. Denver Service Center staff and the Bureau of Indian

Affairs also helped with the planning efforts, and a draft plan was produced in 1987. [115]

The Park Service, STI, CCT, Reclamation, and Bureau of Indian Affairs signed the Lake

Roosevelt Concession Management Plan in January 1991. LARO and tribal personnel saw the

plan as key to keeping the lake and its shoreline uncrowded, as visitors preferred. The plan

restricts development to the four existing areas and five additional sites distributed along the

lakeshore (Moonbeam Bay, confluence zone, Upper Spokane Arm, Inchelium, and Crescent

Bay). Under the plan, 45 percent of the concession facilities will be within the reservations.

The total number of houseboats is limited to 200. Each development zone defined in the plan

can have a general store, snack bar and/or restaurant, lodging, RV sites, boat service and

repair, and dry storage for boats (except Spring Canyon, which is limited to food service

only). The actual development will be in response to public demand, and proposals for new

services will not be approved until economic feasibility studies have been completed. [116]

In the early 1990s, the CCT began evaluating sites along Lake Roosevelt for a major new

resort. A survey of tribal members found that the Inchelium area was the most popular site.

The tribes hired the same architectural firm that had designed Idaho's Coeur d'Alene Resort to
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7i.htm[2/26/2014 3:37:59 PM]

design their resort on Bissel Flats near Inchelium. It would include houseboat rentals through

Roosevelt Recreational Enterprises, golf course, log cabins, interpretive center, lodge,

campground, marina, and perhaps a casino. In 1994, the CCT began looking at the possibility

of building a motel-restaurant-gaming complex at North Marina, on land it would trade with

Reclamation. So far, nothing has been built on the reservation side between the dam and

Keller Ferry. [117]

The 1992 Vail Agenda made several recommendations concerning Park Service concessions

Servicewide: establish a more coherent concession policy, improve accounting procedures;

introduce more competition into the process; realize higher returns from concessionaires; and

recognize creative contributions to the Park Service mission by concessionaires. In 1991, the

renewal of concession permits and contracts at LARO that expired at the end of 1990 was

delayed because of new Servicewide concession policy. The following year, both the Keller

Ferry and Seven Bays concessionaires were issued new fifteen-year contracts. [118]

By the 1990s, with the increasing visitation to LARO, Park Service staff was expressing the

need for additional concession operations besides the existing Spring Canyon snack bar and

the three marinas at Keller Ferry, Seven Bays, and Kettle Falls. They also recognized the

need for a plan that would assess cumulative effects before much more new development was

undertaken. Putting fishing guides and other commercial users such as boat rentals and

parasailing businesses under permit, consistent with Park Service regulations, was also

proposed. LARO's Concession Analyst, George Phillips, began developing concession

policies for the NRA. A new concession building was constructed at Spring Canyon and

opened for operation by RRE in 1998. LARO's other concessions in 1998 were Keller Ferry

and Seven Bays (both also operated by RRE), Kettle Falls (Lake Roosevelt Resort and

Marina), and Daisy Station (under a Park Service incidental business permit). [119]

The Park Service has long wanted a deep-water marina at the northern end of Lake Roosevelt

that could be open year-round. Problems with the Kettle Falls marina, particularly with the

shallow harbor, have been a management issue at LARO since at least the 1950s. Although

the harbor was dredged in 1951, 1985, and 1990, the concessionaire has had to relocate his

facilities each winter in anticipation of spring drawdowns. In the late 1980s, alternatives were

examined and management objectives were drawn up for Kettle Falls. The Park Service

considered the concessionaire's plan to expand his marina operations to Lions Island, but this

location was found to be too exposed. A 1993 Environmental Assessment proposed

developing a marina in the Colville Flats area (on the south bank of the Colville River, at its

confluence with Lake Roosevelt), about one mile downstream from the existing marina. This

site was also found unsuitable because of wetlands, wildlife, and cultural resources

considerations. [120]

Once LARO had determined that a full-service marina could not be located at Colville Flats,

a downsized proposal was first put out for public review but then shelved until the General

Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement were produced. Meanwhile, a

drawdown in July 1994 caused the concessionaire to move his rental docks out of the harbor

during the visitor season for the first time. Ed Wimberly, owner of Lake Roosevelt Vacations,

requested permission to move certain docks to an area east of Colville Flats, but this was

denied. In the end, the Park Service prepared a Design Concept Plan for Kettle Falls in

conjunction with the new General Management Plan. Besides the shallow harbor limiting use

of the facilities, other problems included overcrowding, the need to haul sewage to Kettle

Falls, and the lack of an overall design theme for facilities. Alternative 1 proposed that the

concessionaire would fund new deep-water moorage facilities at the Kettle Falls north marina

site where some of the operations would be relocated. [121]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7i.htm[2/26/2014 3:37:59 PM]

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

laro/adhi/adhi7i.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7c.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:01 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 7:

Building and Maintaining the Park:

Administrative and Visitor Facilities (continued)

Sewage Disposal and Electric Lines

In 1943, when Park Service personnel were preparing the layouts for various recreation sites

along Lake Roosevelt, the Regional Engineer commented that sewage disposal was probably

the greatest technical problem the Park Service would face. He recommended locating

comfort stations high enough so that the necessary drop in elevation to disposal fields could

be provided. The initial sewage facilities at LARO were septic tanks/leach fields for

buildings and pit toilets. [28]

A good example of LARO's creative re-use of surplus materials was the conversion of shortterm air-base runway landing mats into liners for outhouse pits. Maintenance workers stored

"tons and tons" of these 14-inch-wide interlocking mats at the yard at headquarters,

according to former LARO employee Don Everts. They welded them together to form boxes.

The mats were pierced with holes that were "about the size of a coffee cup. There was

enough to keep the solids in and the fluids would run out." Everts noted, "It made a real good

pit. . . . .You just dropped them in the hole with a backhoe and backfilled it and there you had

it." Unlike wooden pit liners, which rotted quickly, these steel liners lasted virtually forever.

The recycled mats worked well in LARO's many outhouse pits until the Mission 66 program

called for the replacement of pit privies with vault toilets. [29]

As visitation to LARO increased in the 1970s and 1980s, so did problems associated with

sanitation. Assistant Superintendent Kelly Cash quipped in 1989, "People are camping on

beaches. Human waste is a problem. On some of the beaches, it looks like a Kleenex factory

has exploded." [30] By the 1980s, most of LARO's pit toilets had been replaced with vault

toilets, and several comfort stations had running water.

Campers on beaches without sewage disposal facilities are required to bring portable toilets

with them. Today, sewage is not a significant problem at LARO. [31]

In the early 1970s, LARO used Regional Reserve funding to convert some of its overhead

power lines in developed sites to underground, in accordance with Park Service policy on

utilities for recreation areas. This costly project to improve the appearance of the sites was

mostly done by contractors. LARO's 1990 Special Park Use Management Plan required all

existing electric lines to be underground within the NRA. This raised concerns with local

electrical utilities. All or almost all the lines are now underground within the recreational area

boundaries. [32]

Trash and Hazardous Materials Disposal
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7c.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:01 PM]

Trash disposal by visitors, both on water and on land, was another important concern at

LARO in the early years. The general practice in the 1950s was to put garbage in a sack and

toss it into the deep waters of Lake Roosevelt (LARO Superintendent Greider recommended

taking the trash ashore and burying it). By 1963, LARO employees were collecting some

26.5 tons of garbage per week from the various campgrounds. Trash was disposed of by

burning in incinerators or disposal in landfills. Some campgrounds had sunken-barrel trash

containers in which the garbage was periodically burned. In 1976, a Park Service directive

instructed all units to attempt to have all solid waste disposed of outside the park by private

contractors, giving preference to sanitary landfills over incineration. LARO's maintenance

personnel then began collecting the trash and hauling it to landfills in Coulee Dam,

Davenport, and Kettle Falls in plastic bags. [33]

Installation of privy at Tiffany campground, 1961. This was one of

many privies that were constructed out of prefabricated panels by

crews living and working on a Reclamation barge that traveled from

one campground to another. Photo courtesy of National Park

Service, Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area

(LARO.HQ.MENG).

LARO began annual park-wide hazardous waste surveys in 1987 in response to increased

state and federal regulations and awareness of the human health hazards associated with toxic

wastes. In cooperation with Reclamation, LARO maintenance personnel developed

procedures for identifying and disposing of hazardous substances and containers, based on

national guidelines. Hazardous wastes hauled away as part of LARO's ongoing safety

program include unused pesticides, lead-based paints, and automotive shop oils and solvents.

The 1997 Resource Management Plan acknowledged that LARO needed to identify

hazardous materials used in the park, clean up hazardous waste sites, and train Park Service

and concession employees on the issues. LARO staff is currently preparing a Hazardous

Materials Management plan. [34]

Gasoline and chemicals are shipped by railroad, trucks, and ferries around and through the

NRA. Park Service staff responds to accidental spills of hazardous and/or toxic substances

from commercial or private sources throughout the Lake Roosevelt area. The park developed

an Oil and Hazardous Substance Spill Plan in 1989. The park has spill containment supplies
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7c.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:01 PM]

that are available at various sites. In the 1990s, park staff worked with the Lake Roosevelt

Forum's emergency services committee to develop a regional spill response plan. [35]

LARO's underground storage tanks became an issue in the late 1980s because of new

Environmental Protection Agency standards. The park began phasing out its gasoline

operations in many areas of the park and instead provided vehicles, boats, and equipment

with credit cards for use at service stations. The park prepared a Storage Tank Management

Plan in 1991 for the nineteen regulated tanks used by park and concession staff and for the

four unregulated tanks at Park Service headquarters. By 1993, LARO had only three

underground storage tanks. [36]

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

laro/adhi/adhi7c.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi8c.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:04 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 8:

Changing Stories: Interpretation (continued)

Interpretive Programs

LARO's first Statement for Interpretation, prepared in 1957, declared that "the interpretive

program must be taken to the visitor." [46] LARO personnel of the 1950s recommended

several types of naturalist programs to serve visitors to the recreation area. These included

conducted boat trips, auto caravans to pictographs and geological formations, and evening

campfire programs. The first interpretive services were provided in 1962. The 1964

Interpretive Prospectus for LARO emphasized campfire programs as the basic tool for

interpretation, supplemented by conducted walks and boat trips. Daytime programs such as

naturalist walks, however, had low attendance. Evening programs were more popular, but the

Park Naturalist emphasized that visitors were tired by evening and the programs needed to be

entertaining, relaxing, enthusiastic, and no longer than forty-five minutes. The 1964 plans

called for campfire circles at Fort Spokane, Porcupine Bay, and Evans campgrounds to

supplement the amphitheater already in use at Kettle Falls. [47]

When a formal interpretation program began at LARO in 1962, it emphasized personal

contact. This worked relatively well when funding allowed and when the visitation was not

too high. Personal contact programs in the 1970s included evening campfire programs, nature

and history walks (some specifically for children), historic building tours, living history,

guided canoe trips at Kettle Falls, and visitor center and informal contacts by LARO staff,

VIPs, and tribal members. Interpretation was a hard sell to many recreationists, and LARO

staff had to be inventive in encouraging people to come to programs. Topics of programs

during the 1970s included wildlife, plants, geology, fire safety, astronomy, insects, history,

energy conservation, and recreation. The ever-popular living history program at Fort Spokane

began in 1973. According to a 1981 report, about 15 percent of LARO's summer visitors

attended interpretive programs. Because most visitors were repeat visitors who came on

weekends, most programs were given on weekend evenings, and films provided variety. [48]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi8c.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:04 PM]

The recreational programs of

basket weaving, building

sandcastles, scuba diving

lessons and showing Disney

films, have been replaced with

programs that interpret the

cultural and natural resources

of the park. The small-type,

text-only information sheets

have been replaced with NPS

format site bulletins with

attractive graphics and layout. .

. . The foundation is now in

place for a strong interpretive

program. 

-- CODA, "Operations

Program being given at Fort Spokane amphitheater, 1968. Photo

courtesy of National Park Service, Lake Roosevelt National

Recreation Area (LARO.FS).

The interpretive program of the 1980s was much the same, with continued emphasis on water

recreation and safety and on living history. Guest interpreters presented a number of special

programs, including popular clinics on fishing for walleye. The annual Old Fashioned

Community Christmas at Coulee Dam, sponsored by LARO, was instituted in 1985. Another

new and popular program was weekly guided canoe trips on Crescent Bay Lake. LARO

personnel found that roving through campgrounds and day-use areas an hour before an

interpretive program greatly increased attendance. The assumption that more diverse

programs were needed to serve repeat visitors was called into question by a 1990 survey that

found that only 12.8 percent of visitors had decided not to attend a program because they had

seen it before. [49]

A survey of LARO visitors was done in 1990 to

document the existing situation and make

recommendations to management to improve

attendance at interpretive programs. The consultant

noted that interpretive desires of visitors to recreation

areas differed from those visiting traditional national

parks, noting that many have said that a national

recreation area is "just a place to get wet." The survey

found that although visitor preferences tended to vary

with location, wildlife was the favorite topic.

Recommendations included emphasizing different

subjects at different locations, offering evening

programs between 8 and 9 p.m., and making more

effort to let people know about programs through

improved bulletin boards, newsletters, and program

flyers. Program attendance did increase in 1991, even

though programs decreased by one-third, probably
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi8c.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:04 PM]

Evaluation Executive

Summary," 1994-1995 [50]

Today, if one visits the Coulee

Dam Recreational Areas that

are administered by the NPS or

the Bureau of Reclamations'

Visitor Center at Coulee Dam,

there is a void of information,

exhibits, and displays to the

visitor to enlighten him that

there is a Colville Indian

Reservation not only boarding

[sic] the Coulee Dam project

but Indian resources are an

integral part of the total

project. The rich culture and

history of the Colvilles' [sic] is

inundated with information and

recordings of how much

because LARO implemented the recommendations of

the 1990 study. A popular new children's program was

initiated in 1991 to teach children how to fish. Because

almost one-quarter of LARO visitors were children,

children's programming was expanded to include the new Junior Ranger program.

Recreational skills demonstrations were greatly de-emphasized in 1993 and were replaced

with additional environmental education activities. [51]

Members of Spokane Tribe of Indians dancing at Fort Spokane for a

cultural demonstration program, ca. 1971. Photo courtesy of

National Park Service, Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area

(LARO 3165).

LARO reports from the 1940s through the 1960s

sometimes mentioned the importance of interpreting

American Indian use of the Columbia River, often

focusing on the pre-contact era. LARO's first

Statement for Interpretation suggested that local tribal

members could set up displays and give talks on Indian

villages in the area, fishing at Kettle Falls, and other

topics. In 1971, LARO received funding from the

Regional Office to promote cultural demonstrations,

and members of the Colville Confederated Tribes

(CCT) and Spokane Tribe of Indians (STI) put on

programs at several campgrounds that were well

received. LARO's operating budget financed a number

of cultural programs, but soon the Mount Rainier

Natural History Association (LARO's cooperating

association was an affiliate of this group) began to

fund the programs. Art Hathaway, LARO's Assistant
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi8c.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:04 PM]

concrete is in the dam, kilowatt

production, increased revenues

to the government, the rich flow

of electrical power and water

away from the Reservation to

the large urban areas and the

rich farming areas of the

Columbia Basin, respectively.

The visitor is then given the

opportunity to visit and utilize

one of the many neat, clean,

recreation areas within the

Coulee Dam Project area

administered by the NPS. These

oasis's [sic] of clean cut grass,

picnic tables, barbeque areas,

overnight facilities, electricity,

running water and picturesque

picnic sites are naked to any

sensitivity or recognition of the

Colville Culture, History and

Tradition that formerly

occupied these beautiful

historical Indian areas on the

Columbia River. 

-- George M. Davis,

Superintendent, Colville

Agency, 1986 [55]

Chief, Interpretation and Resource Management, set up

the cultural demonstrations with the tribes. He stated

that the purpose of these programs was to inform

visitors about local and other tribes and their cultures.

CCT tribal member and LARO seasonal ranger

Howard "Doodle" Stewart made contacts with many

tribal members and arranged for these programs. One

program featured a CCT woman beading the Park

Service arrowhead symbol. Other programs, however,

consisted of dancing, drumming, chanting, stories and

legends, leather crafts, art, and tepee raising. The tribal

participants also sold food and craft items. These

special programs were presented only 1971-1973; they

were discontinued after Hathaway transferred to the

Spokane field office in 1974. [52]

In keeping with a 1973 Park Service directive to show

greater sensitivity to cultural diversity in interpretation,

LARO's 1980 General Management Plan stated that

the park would support programs concerning American

Indians whose lives were closely associated with the

recreation area and its general vicinity. Besides the

1970s cultural demonstrations mentioned above,

another such program, starting in 1980, invited Indian

artists to interpret the park. A 1981 LARO document,

however, reported only limited interest in joint

tribal/Park Service program development. In 1987, the

Park Service made an official commitment to respect

and actively promote tribal cultures as a component of

the parks themselves. Under this policy, Park Service

personnel were urged to actively consult with American Indians on interpretive programs

relating to particular tribes, develop cooperative programs with tribes, and provide for

presentation of tribal perspectives of their lifeways and resources. [53]

In 1990, LARO began bringing in guest speakers from the CCT to present campfire

programs on local Indian culture. LARO's 1993 Statement for Interpretation specifically

mentioned that the park would pursue hiring a tribal member through the Job Training

Partnership Act to present craft demonstrations, staff the Visitor Arrival Center information

desk, and provide information on tribal culture and the Reservation Zone of Lake Roosevelt.

The 1998 Draft General Management Plan also stated that the park would try to improve the

blend of all themes, including stories of the aboriginal inhabitants of the area. Two examples

of these efforts are American Indian cultural programs at Spring Canyon and the 1999 exhibit

at Fort Spokane on the Indian Boarding School era. Experts in subjects such as Indian history

and culture currently provide specialized training for park interpretive staff. [54]

Meanwhile, since the 1970s the CCT and the STI have worked to establish tribal museums of

their own. The Colville Tribal Museum and Gift Shop opened by 1991 in the town of Coulee

Dam, and the Spokanes opened a museum in Wellpinit in approximately 1975 (this is no

longer operating). [56]

<<< Previous <<< Contents >>> Next >>>
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi8c.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:04 PM]

laro/adhi/adhi8c.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 9)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi9c.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:09 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 9:

From Simple to Complex: Cultural Resource

Management (continued)

Pot Hunting and Inadvertent Site Destruction, 1960s-1970s

Major drawdowns during the powerhouse construction enabled archaeologists to reach

previously inundated sites, but they also provided access for local pot hunters whose interest

was stimulated by the professional excavations. Monitoring the shoreline for violations

became a concern for both field archaeologists and the Park Service. Archaeologists Edward

Larrabee and Susan Kardas, who conducted a survey in 1966, found pot hunters "very active"

during low water and warned that continued drawdowns posed an emergency situation. "It is

very much going to be a case of [archaeologists] getting there before the pot hunters do and

staying until the floodwater comes up," warned Larrabee, "because I think it will be almost

impossible for the Park Service to patrol this area." He suggested concentrating work in 1967

on the most threatened sites. [23]

The Park Service tackled the problem head-on the following spring by apprehending

violators, especially at Fort Spokane, and by alerting the public to provisions of the

Antiquities Act through press releases distributed to local television and radio stations and

seventeen newspapers. LARO began to work with the U.S. Attorney's office to develop

procedures to deal with repeat offenders. The education campaign continued in 1968 with the

Park Service and regional archaeologists cooperating on a series of articles dealing with both

legal and scientific issues surrounding archaeology. Carl Anderson, Kettle Falls District

Ranger, suggested using the educational approach to the pot hunting problem, but he warned,

"It's going to take a lot of effort on our part to educate the public because of our indifferent

attitude in the past." [24] Active participation by LARO staff, including citing flagrant

violators, reduced the problem with vandalism by 1970. "This was all quite different from the

rather depressing situation I encountered three years ago," wrote David Chance, expressing

his gratitude to the Park Service. By 1976 Chance believed the problem had dropped to an

insignificant level due to active patrolling of sites by LARO rangers. [25]

LARO staff had to adjust to the increase in archaeological activity. While early patrolling

was far from perfect, their response to the problem of pot hunters showed a determined and

creative effort to meet their new responsibilities of identifying and protecting sites. Not

everything went smoothly, however. Superintendent David Richie appealed to WSU

archaeologist Lester Ross in 1969 for help in preventing destruction of archaeological sites.

That spring, bulldozer crews working on the Reclamation log boom at China Bend

inadvertently destroyed four sites. Both Richie and Ross attributed this to a lack of

communication between contracting archaeologists at WSU and the staff of the federal

agencies at Lake Roosevelt. Ross offered three suggestions to improve the situation:

archaeologists needed to inform the agencies of sites being considered for further study;

agencies needed to tell the archaeologists about any potential activities that would alter the
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 9)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi9c.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:09 PM]

land; and finally, the archaeologists needed to investigate these areas prior to making

recommendations for mitigation or avoidance. Richie believed that Ross's recommendations

would place an undue burden on all parties, and he proposed basically that all known sites be

mapped, allowing the agencies to see if proposed activities might cause any destruction. If

there were potential for harm, the university would investigate prior to clearance; if no

potential, the agency could proceed. The Park Service would advise anyone working along

the lake, whether federal or private, that all work had to cease if they found "obvious

evidence of archaeological remains." [26] It is not known what protocols were adopted, if

any.

Excavation of site at Kettle Falls. Photo courtesy of National Park

Service, Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area (LARO.FS).

LARO staff did not always follow proper procedures concerning archaeological resources.

Park Service Regional Archeologist Charles Bohannon went to LARO in 1978 to provide

archaeological clearance for a new access road, only to find the rough grading already

completed. The following spring, the Regional Director took LARO Superintendent William

Dunmire to task for providing clearance for another small project without the benefit of an

archaeologist. While the particular situation appeared relatively unimportant to the Regional

Director, he reminded Dunmire that "the archeological community and the State Historic

Preservation Officer have shown no hesitation in raking Federal agencies over the coals for

even minor projects such as this." He was concerned that many such instances over the years

could have "a drastic accumulative effect." [27]

National Register of Historic Places

The 1966 NHPA helped the Park Service create a formal program for the management of

cultural resources. By early 1969, the agency began to push all park units to identify historic

resources and prepare forms to nominate sites to the recently created National Register of

Historic Places, as called for in the federal legislation. President Richard Nixon strengthened
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 9)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi9c.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:09 PM]

this movement with Executive Order 11593 on May 13, 1971, mandating federal agencies to

begin preservation of historic properties under their jurisdiction and to nominate these to the

National Register by July 1, 1973. The deadline was a year earlier for the Park Service so it

could provide an example for other agencies. In addition, its early response would reduce the

anticipated heavy workload for the National Register staff. [28]

LARO staff did not meet the July 1972 deadline for this major project. Their work was

complicated by a controversy over including the inundated sites of Fort Colvile and Kettle

Falls. While state and federal officials did not think that any sites lost to the reservoir were

eligible for the National Register, Park Naturalist Art Hathaway believed they should be

included. He asked archaeologist Roderick Sprague for guidelines for nominating

archaeological sites or alternative means of protecting them. State officials then evidently

changed their minds on this point and the Kettle Falls Archaeological District, including

seventeen prehistoric sites as well as the site of Fort Colvile and St. Paul's Mission, was

added to the National Register in 1974. Its listing caused controversy, this time with the Park

Service objecting to state actions. The Washington State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO)

had nominated the district without any review by either the Park Service or Reclamation.

Acting Regional Director Wayne Howe recognized the SHPO's authority in this matter but

suggested that this type of unilateral action would worsen relations between state and federal

agencies. He requested procedures to ensure that federal agencies be allowed to comment on

state-initiated nominations in the future. Fort Spokane's nomination generated less

controversy. The form, drafted in 1972, was later extensively revised before the district was

listed in November 1988. [29]

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

laro/adhi/adhi9c.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 10)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi10c.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:10 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 10:

An Uphill Struggle: Natural Resources

Management (continued)

Mitigation for the Loss of the Salmon Fishery

The most important development for the Lake Roosevelt fishery in the 1970s was initiated by

the CCT and the STI as a result of the 1974 Solicitor's Opinion and the Senate

Appropriations Committee directing the Secretaries of the Army and of the Interior to discuss

with the tribes their interest in production of power from Grand Coulee Dam. In 1976, the

CCT and STI stated that the destruction of the anadromous fishery and other sport fishing as

a result of the construction of Grand Coulee and Chief Joseph dams should be compensated

by power revenues or by new hatchery facilities. The tribes noted that the federal government

built a number of fish hatcheries to aid the anadromous fisheries but had taken only token

steps to replace the inland (upper Columbia River) fisheries destroyed by dams on the

Columbia. In other words, the mitigation occurred downriver for losses that occurred behind

the dam. A Spokane/Colville Task Force recommended in 1980 that a fish hatchery be built

on the Colville Reservation and turned over to the tribes to manage, but Congress did not

fund this. [34]

In March 1976, the CCT and the STI recommended to Congress the initiation of a four-year

comprehensive study of the fish and wildlife resources of Lake Roosevelt. They proposed

compiling all existing information, conducting comprehensive fishery evaluations, and

determining the best management programs based on the findings. In September, a committee

of representatives of a number of agencies, including the Park Service, was formed to

determine the merit and scope of such a study. In the end, Reclamation funded a study

conducted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service during the years 1980-1983. An Interagency

Technical Committee that included the Park Service was formed to make recommendations

on managing the fishery. LARO staff felt that the resulting fishery management plan would

provide a basis for planning recreational developments in the NRA. [35]

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service study found that the fishery could be improved by

keeping water levels in April and May as high as possible to maximize water retention time

(the time it takes a particle of water to travel from the upstream to the downstream end of the

lake) and minimize bottom sediment exposure. In addition, keeping maximum water level

elevation three to four meters below full pool every other year would allow terrestrial

vegetation to establish in the freeboard zone. The authors recommended waiting to establish

kokanee salmon or rainbow trout populations until completion of an evaluation of the effects

of reduced creel and minimum size limits on walleye and new water management practices.

They cautioned that the new water budget (enacted in 1984) that required hydropower

operators to provide increased flows from April 15 to June 15 to improve downstream

passage of juvenile salmonids could result in fewer nutrients available in Lake Roosevelt and

lower reproductive success of yellow perch, the main forage for walleye. [36]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 10)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi10c.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:10 PM]

Each time a crisis in salmon

abundance has occurred in the

last hundred years, the response

of society has been to ignore the

long-term natural remedies to

the crisis and opt for shortterm technological fixes. That

preference has resulted in the

endangered species alarm of the

1990s. Whether populations of

native salmon will ultimately

fare any better now depends

upon society's ability to

overcome the legacy of failed

salmon management. 

-- Bill M. Bakke and Joseph

The study also determined that kokanee were the best suited for coexisting with walleye. The

recommendation to provide a dual kokanee/walleye fishery was repeated in several

subsequent studies. For example, the authors of a 1986 study recommended improving the

fishery by introducing kokanee in the Kettle River, improving habitat and spawning channels,

building a hatchery, or rearing in net pens. They emphasized that artificial reproduction

should be started soon, rather than waiting to see the effects of new harvest regulations on

walleye and new water management practices. Establishing a kokanee fishery in the lake had

the additional potential advantage of increasing bald eagle and osprey use of the reservoir.

[37]

The Northwest Power Act of 1980 created the Northwest Power Planning Council (NPPC),

which was charged with developing a program to protect, mitigate, and enhance Columbia

Basin fish and wildlife. This provided a funding mechanism for the desired hatcheries. In

consideration of comments from the Park Service and others, the NPPC amended its

mitigation goals to allow improvements to the resident fishery of areas such as Lake

Roosevelt, where reestablishment of anadromous fish would be impractical as mitigation for

the loss of this fishery caused by the construction of Grand Coulee Dam. [38]

The Lake Roosevelt fishery enhancement amendment proposal contained measures to

develop a kokanee fishery through hatchery supplementation, improve existing rainbow trout

spawning and rearing habitat, and establish a fishery monitoring program. The Park Service,

Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, and Upper Columbia United Tribes (four

tribes) sponsored the proposal. It was designed to increase harvest opportunities and develop

resident fisheries adapted to the altered ecosystems above Grand Coulee Dam. After public

review, the NPPC accepted the amendment proposal in 1987. The Bonneville Power

Administration (BPA) provided funding for two kokanee salmon hatcheries, one at Galbraith

Springs managed by the STI and one at Sherman Creek managed by the Washington

Department of Fish and Wildlife. [39]

The changes in the annual drawdown regime since 1968 had dramatically reduced the

kokanee population by exposing their spawning areas. The water retention time was also

reduced, leading to increased losses due to the drawing of young fish through the dam. In

1988 and 1989, kokanee composed only about 1 percent of the gillnet catch. Yellow perch

also declined because of increased reservoir fluctuations. Since both kokanee and yellow

perch are a food source for walleye, their decline limited the walleye fishery. [40]

The regular stocking of Lake Roosevelt based on the

fishery enhancement amendment began in 1988, before

the two hatcheries were completed in the early 1990s.

These hatcheries stock both Lake Roosevelt and Banks

Lake with kokanee and provide rainbow trout for the

Lake Roosevelt net-pen program. They were expected

to release up to six million kokanee into the lake each

year when operating at full capacity. Harvest rates of

kokanee and rainbow trout soared from about 3,000

fish per year in 1980-1982 to over 130,000 fish in

1992. [42]

The BPA funded a monitoring program as part of the

resident fisheries enhancement project that evaluates

hatchery effectiveness. The monitoring includes yearround creel surveys; assessment of kokanee, rainbow,

and walleye feeding habits; and a mark-and-recapture

study of release locations of hatchery-raised fish. The
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 10)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi10c.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:10 PM]

Cone, The Northwest Salmon

Crisis, 1996 [41]

monitoring program is conducted by several tribes,

Eastern Washington University, and the Washington

Department of Fish and Wildlife. [43]

The hatchery program is generally considered successful, but many may agree with Mike

Someday, head of the CCT fish and wildlife committee. He commented that although the

tribes appreciate the new hatchery, "If we had our druthers, there would be no dams. We'd

rather have salmon than resident trout." [44]

One aspect of the fisheries enhancement program conducted by the tribes and the Washington

Department of Fish and Wildlife is the Lake Roosevelt Rainbow Trout Habitat/Passage

Improvement Project, which aims to increase the natural production of rainbow trout in

tributaries to Lake Roosevelt through habitat and fish passage improvements in the tributaries.

The first two phases of this project were completed in 1992 and 1995, and phase three was

scheduled to end in 2000. [45]

The NPPC established the water budget as one aspect of its program to protect Columbia

River fish and wildlife. The water budget is a block of water released from reservoirs that

flushes anadromous fish downriver in the spring, imitating the natural spring runoff that has

ended because of numerous dams. LARO, in comments made to the NPPC in 1985 and

subsequent years, expressed concern that spring water budget releases from Lake Roosevelt

might conflict with the spawning needs of reservoir walleye. [46]

Both the net-pen and hatchery programs suffered setbacks due to entrainment of fish over the

dam. Lower water retention times lead to increased flow rates and increased entrainment,

plus decreased lake productivity. Since 1984, three million acre-feet of Lake Roosevelt water

has been dedicated each year to spring and early summer salmon flushes, depending on

yearly water conditions. When Snake River chinook, sockeye, and coho salmon were added

to the Endangered Species list in 1991-1992, an additional 3.5 million acre-feet were

dedicated to the flushing project. This meant in practice that as much as ten feet of water

could be drafted from Lake Roosevelt, mostly in August, to augment flows for downstream

fisheries. The tribes, the Park Service, and others were concerned that the impacts of this

decision on resident fish of Lake Roosevelt were not being considered. The Natural

Resources Committee of the Lake Roosevelt Forum, a group of governmental and private

entities and individuals interested in the management of Lake Roosevelt, agreed that thirty

days was the minimum water retention time needed to maintain viable populations of

zooplankton for Lake Roosevelt fish to eat. The water retention time has increased slightly

since 1991, reaching an average of forty days, due to an increased awareness of its

importance to reservoir ecology. The BPA funded a study in 1997 to determine methods to

prevent entrainment. [47]

LARO Superintendent Gerald Tays submitted comments to the NPPC on proposed

amendments to the Resident Fish and Wildlife provisions in 1995. He suggested establishing

firm water retention time standards and reservoir elevations for Lake Roosevelt; installing

screens at water diversions to prevent resident fish from being transported to agricultural

areas; coordinating watershed planning efforts; and coordinating a study sponsored by the

five signatory parties of the 1990 Multi-Party Agreement to assess the feasibility of

vegetative plantings to enhance the production of several resident game fish species. Tays

wrote this letter in support of larger regional concerns of various tribes in Washington and

Oregon. [48]

Fisheries biologists have raised several concerns about the hatchery program on Lake

Roosevelt. These included disease, impacts on other species, and the genetic impacts of

hatchery-raised fish on wild stocks. Because it was found that releases of yearlings did better
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 10)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi10c.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:10 PM]

than releases of fry, in 1995 the hatcheries began to shift from producing fry to yearlings.

Fishermen are currently allowed to keep two kokanee (either hatchery or wild). [49]

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

laro/adhi/adhi10c.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 11)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi11c.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:12 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 11:

Regaining Ground: Leases and Special Use

Permits (continued)

Attempts to Gain Control of Special Park Uses, 1960s and 1970s

The somewhat lax approach to special use permits and leases at LARO began to change in

the 1960s, followed by increasing restrictions in subsequent decades. After an extensive

comment period, the Department of the Interior adopted new regulations in 1966 governing

cabins on federal lands. Under the new rules, federal agencies could not cancel leases prior to

the termination date. They could, however, renew such leases if this appeared to be in the

public interest. [38]

Passage of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 led to a dramatic increase

in cabin lease fees at LARO. Under the new requirements, fees for private uses of public

lands had to be based on current market value and determined using competitive commercial

practices. LARO's $35 annual fee obviously did not meet these standards, so the park staff

worked with the Stevens County assessor to arrive at an appraisal of $7500 per lot. Using a 6

percent rate of return, the staff then determined the new fee to be $450 per year, effective

May 1977. They realized the hardship of such a large increase, however, and phased it in

over a three-year period. Thus, the first year cost $150, the second $300, and the third full

price. The Park Service agreed to renew leases for five-year periods, but with the entire lease

program under review, the agency cautioned lessees not to expect lease extensions to

continue indefinitely. Lessee reaction to the increased fees was not documented. [39]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 11)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi11c.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:12 PM]

Map showing uses of lands along Lake Roosevelt, 1968. (U.S.

Department of the Interior, "Master Plan of the Coulee Dam

National Recreation Area," 1968: 17.)

(click on image for an enlargement in a new window)

Under the Tri-Party Agreement of 1946, leases and special use permits for reservation lands

were administered by two different agencies: OIA (later the Bureau of Indian Affairs, or

BIA) was in charge of all agricultural, grazing, and log dump permits, while the Park Service

administered all other uses. This began to change with the Solicitor's Opinion in 1974 that

directed the three agencies to negotiate a new management agreement to include both the

Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) and Spokane Tribe of Indians (STI). Initial negotiations

produced no results, so the three agencies met in March 1977 to determine jurisdiction for

special use permits for freeboard lands in the Indian Zones. They agreed that BIA would

continue with its previous responsibilities, but Reclamation took over all other Indian Zone

permits from the Park Service. The Bureau and Park Service then drew up another agreement

giving the Park Service administration of all permits outside the Indian Zones. [40]

By the early 1970s, LARO staff realized the need to get control of special use permits and,

even more importantly, associated encroachments. Previous administrations had tried to

correct the difficult situation. In 1957, for instance, the superintendent reported that, with 172

permits, his staff had spent considerable time that year locating boundaries for citizens who

questioned lines. Superintendent Homer Robinson knew that marking the boundary would
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 11)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi11c.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:12 PM]

help but recognized the futility of such a proposition given the total project cost of nearly $1

million. The park staff made progress in 1972 inventorying permits and checking status and

transgressions, but they soon realized the need for a Land Management Specialist to work at

this full-time. [41]

Daniel J. Farrell arrived in June 1974 to fill this new position. He found approximately three

hundred permits, many of which had not been adjusted since the 1940s. Kettle Falls District

Ranger Don Carney gave Farrell his views of the situation that summer. "We are facing an

immediate problem which could run completely out of control over the near term: that of

people using government lands as if they owned them privately," he warned. He traced the

source to adjacent owners and developers rather than visitors. He suggested that press

releases discussing the problem and potential consequences would help, along with publicity

surrounding a few notable citations. Some areas might need fencing, while others might have

to be closed to grazing. Another improvement, in Carney's view, would be the simplification

of the dock permitting process. All in all, "the quality of the water experience people have

here will depend increasingly on how we manage our lands." [42] LARO adopted a new fee

schedule in July 1977. Farrell managed to reduce the permits to 182 by combining several on

a single permit, and revenues increased from $8,600 in 1976 to $10,500 a year later. He

continued to work on the issue until he left the park in 1982. [43]

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

laro/adhi/adhi11c.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi3d.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:13 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 3:

A Long Road Lies Ahead: Establishing Lake

Roosevelt National Recreation Area (continued)

Park Service Critics

After another year with little to show at the recreation area, the local mood turned angrier, fed

by a small group of men in the Grand Coulee area who opposed the Park Service not only for

its lack of development work but also for its attempt to restrict their use of the lake and shore

lands. They charged that the Park Service was restricting permits on the lake and imposing

such strict conditions on permittees that one man would have had to spend $20,000 for a

dock, including $15,000 for surveys. Greider, who was seen as belligerent, needed to "get out

from behind his miles and miles of plans and come down to earth" before the complainers

would back his quest for funding. [80] Park Service officials defended their superintendent,

and Greider decried "the aggressive campaign being staged by the Grand Coulee people to

discredit the National Park Service program." [81]

The critics challenged both the lack of funding and how the Park Service spent what little

money it received. The Spokane Chamber of Commerce urged rapid development to benefit

private capital that was ready to invest in the region. It claimed that Lake Roosevelt's

wonderful recreation potential was being held back by "the snail-like pace of development."

[82] Another man looked at the three new houses built for Park Service employees and

fumed at money being spent on administrative needs instead of public recreation. [83]

Many of the complaints centered around the perceived lack of industrial use of the reservoir

area, even though all planning thus far had considered the needs of industries and agriculture.

Indeed, Reclamation initially emphasized these non-recreational uses as an important part of

the war effort and asked the Park Service to administer their permits, coordinating them with

recreational plans for post-war development. The 1944 "General Report and Development

Outline" provided guidelines for two categories of non-recreational development: essential

public service utilities, such as municipal water systems and public ferries; and private

industries including agriculture, logging, and mining. The report recommended that such uses

be permitted where practical but never at the expense of the area's recreational values. By

1944, four sawmills and twenty log dumps operated along the lake shore, in addition to

eighteen grazing leases, a passenger boat line, two freight lines, and two ferries. The 1946

Tri-Party Agreement gave further support to industrial uses by assigning the Park Service the

function of issuing permits "for legitimate industrial and recreational purposes" along with

agricultural and grazing leases on lands within the recreation area. As industrial use expanded

after World War II, Greider and the LARO staff tried to satisfy demands for permits while

protecting areas designated most important for future recreational use. For example, they

redirected loggers away from the strip along Highway 25 as much as possible and tried to

keep the Gifford area (across the river from Inchelium) entirely free of log dumps. By 1948,

there were twenty-seven permitted uses related to logging, but the number of sites actually in
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi3d.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:13 PM]

use was probably much higher; Greider noted approximately forty log dumps used by fifteen

companies or individuals. [84]

Despite these permitted industrial uses, a small vocal group continued to complain about the

restrictive policies of the Park Service as well as what some saw as the uncooperative attitude

of Superintendent Greider. One man suggested that the Park Service opposed private

development in what was supposed to be a jointly operated area with 20 percent of the land

set aside for industrial use. "If we are going to have those kind of regulations," he asked,

"why not just call it a National Park?" [85] Greider defended his record, saying that by mid1949 there were more than one hundred permits covering industrial uses on the lake, from log

dumps and three sawmills to grazing and other agricultural uses. In addition, there was a

tugboat transportation service and two railroad docks. Through his cooperation with industry,

its value had grown to exceed several million dollars a year. Park Service planners continued

to include industrial uses, such as sawmills, at LARO into the 1990s. The 1963 Master Plan

even viewed such operations, especially tug boats, in a positive light: "We think these

commercial uses add to the interest and enjoyment of the visitors and are to be considered an

asset rather than an objectionable feature." [86]

Industrial uses eventually caused conflict between the Park Service and Reclamation at Lake

Roosevelt. Reclamation, through all of its construction work at the dam, was inextricably

bound with industry, and the dam itself was a major industrial site. In 1948, however, other

Reclamation operations connected with the dam caused a serious inter-agency rift.

Reclamation had closed its sawmill near the dam about a year earlier and planned to

dismantle it, freeing the site for the long-awaited Park Service development of the South

Marina. Then, without consulting the Park Service, Reclamation let a four-year contract for

work on the pumping plant and feeder canal that included not only use of the sawmill but also

construction of a concrete plant to be located at the proposed entrance to the South Marina,

on the site of a planned Park Service headquarters building. A dismayed Greider told

Reclamation officials that the contractor's use of this site would jeopardize Park Service plans

for the whole area and would force the agency to revamp its six-year program. Frank A.

Banks admitted his error and apologized to Greider. "It is regrettable that a misunderstanding

has developed because our relations with you have been on such an amicable plane," he

wrote, "largely due to your very cooperative and sympathetic efforts in discharging your

responsibilities." He hoped that this incident would not delay plans for the South Marina.

[87]

The issue was not easily resolved, however, and soon escalated to the regional level with

both agencies. Park Service Regional Director Owen A. Tomlinson wrote to R. J. Newell, his

Reclamation counterpart in Boise, to express concern for the situation and hope that it could

be worked out without having to go higher. Within a short time, Newell telephoned

Tomlinson and admitted "frankly" that the matter had been badly handled and vowed that

there would be no such mistakes in the future. Despite this assurance, Tomlinson planned to

ask the Director to talk with the Commissioner of Reclamation "so that definite instructions

can be issued and every Bureau official will know [to] respect interbureau agreements with

the Park Service." [88] Director Drury expressed his "regret and chagrin" that Reclamation

did not follow the 1946 agreement but added, "Apparently the cement plant is now a fait

accompli and nothing will be accomplished by crying over spilt milk." He asked if he could

assure Tomlinson that the agreement would be followed in the future. The response from

Michael W. Straus, Commissioner of Reclamation, was emphatic: "I can assure you that the

Bureau of Reclamation will at all times attempt to carry out both the letter and the spirit of

our inter-bureau agreement." [89]

Ironically, the Park Service gained some benefit from retaining industrial use at the South

Marina site. Reclamation opened a rock quarry nearby as a source for riprap. In giving Park
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi3d.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:13 PM]

Service concurrence for this use, Greider asked Reclamation to set aside waste rock since

LARO was looking for twenty thousand yards of material to improve the future boat dock

area of the South Marina. Banks agreed to stockpile such material at the quarry site.

Reclamation also agreed to locate the haul road so that it could eventually become an integral

part of the proposed recreational plans. [90] The South Marina was not developed, however,

and this was just the first of several cancellations or postponements of work at the site. Now

known as Crescent Bay, the area still awaits development.

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

laro/adhi/adhi3d.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4g.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:14 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 4:

Agreements and Disagreements: From TriParty Agreement to Multi-Party Agreement

(continued)

1974 Solicitor's Opinion

Release of the Solicitor's draft "Opinion on the boundary and status of title to certain lands of

the Colville Indian Reservation" in the summer of 1973 injected a measure of calm into the

situation at Lake Roosevelt. This draft, which ruled that the CCT had the right to regulate

and license hunting and fishing in its portion of the Indian Zones, was followed a year later

by the Solicitor's opinion that brought an end to the Tri-Party Agreement. On June 3, 1974,

Kent Frizzell, DOI Solicitor, reversed much of the 1945 opinion that formed the basis of the

1946 agreement. His key conclusion was that

the Indians' rights to "paramount use" of the Indian zone are reserved rights held

by the United States in trust for them, and that those rights are therefore

exclusive (except as limited by the prohibition against interference with project

operations and by the Secretary's explicitly conferred power to prescribe

conservation regulations). Those rights are a condition to and a burden upon

whatever title the United States received pursuant to the 1940 Act. [103]

Thus, in addition to exclusive rights to hunt, fish, and boat in the Indian Zones, the tribes also

had the authority to regulate use of the area by others.

The impact of Frizzell's opinion was so profound that Secretary Morton immediately directed

that the agencies take all appropriate steps to implement his conclusions, including

nullification of the 1946 Tri-Party Agreement and negotiation of a new agreement that

included the tribes. Despite this directive, the status of the Tri-Party Agreement was in

question for the next sixteen years. The tribes acted as if the agreement had been nullified

while the Park Service and Reclamation maintained that the agreement was in effect until

replaced by another. The result was years of disagreement, with the tribes probing the limits

of the Solicitor's 1974 Opinion and the agencies, especially the Park Service, struggling to

find a balance. (One later LARO official, frustrated by years of attempting to make sense of

Frizzell's ruling, described the 1974 opinion as "a political decision dressed in legal

clothing.") [104]

Efforts to negotiate a new agreement hit a dead end immediately. At a high-level meeting on

July 2, 1974, tribal representatives said that they were not prepared to discuss a new

agreement at that time, but they assured the other attendees that they would call a meeting

when they were ready. Despite the lack of negotiations during 1974, both Reclamation and

the Park Service remained anxious to reach a new agreement that winter to facilitate future

management of the NRA. [105]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4g.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:14 PM]

While the agencies hoped that a new agreement would clarify jurisdictional issues, both

tribes continued to resist negotiations. When the tribes passed resolutions concerning

jurisdiction in the Indian Zones, LARO Superintendent Burgen realized that the councils

intended to continue adopting ordinances until they effectively replaced the Tri-Party

Agreement. Thus the tribes would assume responsibility over the Indian Zones without

negotiating a new agreement with the Park Service or Reclamation, an option essentially

available to them under the 1974 opinion. STI attorney Dellwo confirmed this assessment. He

believed that while the 1974 opinion was a step forward, it left participants with many

unanswered questions. Dellwo discouraged consideration of a new agreement at that point,

fearing continual disagreements during negotiations. "The Tribes need a period of testing," he

suggested. "What the Tribe is doing is probing the limits of the Solicitor's opinion and

implementing it step by step. Each item is a controversy in itself." [106]

The issue of Park Service campgrounds in the Indian Zones was a relatively simple issue to

resolve. Because the Solicitor's Opinion came right at the beginning of the summer recreation

season, all parties recognized the need to work out temporary solutions for the summer

months. At a meeting on June 25, 1974, representatives from both the CCT and STI agreed

not to regulate boating, water skiing, or swimming that summer; they discussed permit prices

and agreed to recognize both tribal permits; and they came up with a solution for

campground operations: the tribes would encourage the Park Service to operate the

campgrounds during 1974 only, as long as the agency was willing to recognize the rights of

the tribes to assume control of these areas. When the tribes met later with the Park Service,

the agency agreed to continue operations in the Indian Zones for the remainder of the

recreation season. LARO officials asked about the problem of Indians harassing non-Indians

in the parks as well as acts of Indian vandalism, and tribal council members assured the Park

Service that they would tell their people that the agency was operating "at the invitation of

the Councils" to prevent further incidents. [107] The tribes planned to prepare handouts to

inform the public that the Indian Zones were for exclusive Indian use except where permitted

by tribes. The actual transfer of the campgrounds to tribal ownership took place in May 1975,

after Reclamation and the BIA concurred with the Park Service. [108]

Throughout the next years, the tribes tested a variety of tougher issues as a way of

establishing their rights as well as proving their status as equal players at Lake Roosevelt.

The CCT viewed its effort to enforce regulations through the tribal court system as a way for

it to demonstrate that it was a viable sovereign government that could assert its jurisdiction

like other governmental units as well as protect the rights of its members. The STI and the

Assistant Regional Solicitor argued late in 1974 about the tribe's need to get permits from the

Park Service before operating concessions in the Indian Zone. C. Richard Neely, the

government attorney, argued that the area was still under Park Service jurisdiction, as

stipulated in the Tri-Party Agreement. He said that the recent opinion gave tribes exclusive

rights to hunting, fishing, and boating in the Indian Zones, but not the right to manage the

area. STI attorney Dellwo challenged Neely's interpretation of the June 3, 1974, opinion. He

claimed that the Solicitor's opinion had confirmed the existence of both exclusive rights and

the authority to regulate, and the tribes did not need to wait for a new agreement before

implementing these. Neely realized that the tribes essentially were claiming ownership of

freeboard lands, with no intention of negotiating a new agreement. Instead, they planned to

"assert what jurisdiction they wish to take, which will leave the balance of the management

for the freeboard lands under a cloud of uncertainty," he claimed. He believed that these

circumstances made it nearly impossible for the Park Service to manage the shore lands

adjacent to both reservations. [109]

Codification of tribal policies began early in 1975 when the STI, followed later that spring by

the CCT, passed nearly identical resolutions pertaining to hunting, fishing, and camping in

the Indian Zones. While the STI believed that it would eventually have exclusive jurisdiction
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4g.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:14 PM]

over an enlarged Indian Zone, they chose to move forward slowly and carefully, continuing

to work with the Park Service and other federal agencies in areas where the tribe was not yet

ready to assume jurisdiction. Under the resolution, tribal permits were needed for camping,

picnicking, and fishing, although additional shoreline areas would be set aside for casual

picnicking with no permit needed. The tribes took exclusive jurisdiction and control over

Indian boaters within the Indian Zones but acknowledged concurrent jurisdiction with the

Coast Guard, Park Service, and the state over non-Indian boaters. In addition, the tribes took

exclusive jurisdiction over permits for concessions, docks, pumps, and other structures in the

Indian Zones. They assumed control of Park Service campsites in their areas and set these

aside for use by non-tribal members, but they also designated certain other areas for the

exclusive use of Indians. [110]

LARO Superintendent William Burgen seemed wary of these changes and their implications.

He wondered what the tribes meant by suggesting that the Indian Zones be enlarged. He

pointed out that they could not have it both ways on jurisdictional issues. If the tribes indeed

had exclusive jurisdiction in the Indian Zones, then they had to accept responsibility for these

areas since no other agency had a legal right to operate there. As the tribes moved to take

control of Park Service campgrounds, he grumbled, "It would be nice if they could at least

ask that we relinquish our delegated responsibility." He saw a number of problems with the

proposed resolutions and asked the regional office to respond soon because silence could be

construed by the tribes as acceptance of their terms. [111]

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

laro/adhi/adhi4g.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4d.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:15 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 4:

Agreements and Disagreements: From TriParty Agreement to Multi-Party Agreement

(continued)

Testing the Waters: Indian Rights, 1949-1960

As the federal government was looking into ways to end its trust responsibility to the tribes,

the Spokane Tribe quietly began to test the limits of Indian rights at Lake Roosevelt. The first

target was lands on the Fort Spokane Military Reservation, administered by the OIA (and

later by the BIA). Department of the Interior (DOI) Solicitor Nathan R. Margold had ruled in

December 1939 that the government did not need to compensate any tribe for lands flooded

at Fort Spokane, reasoning that there was never any treaty concerning these lands.

Furthermore, he wrote, when the President set aside lands for a potential reservation in

November 1873, the government assumed that the tribe's acceptance of the reservation meant

that they had relinquished title to any lands outside of its boundaries. Local Reclamation and

Park Service staff eyed the remaining Fort Spokane lands above the 1,310 line as early as

1943 because of the location's recreation potential, but departmental officials cautioned

against trying to withdraw the remainder of the military reservation, noting that the land was

not required for the purposes of the Columbia Basin Project. Superintendent Greider raised

the subject again in 1947 and noted that he had the support of Wade Head, Superintendent of

the Colville and Spokane reservations. While the Commissioner of Reclamation still opposed

the idea, Reclamation's Regional Director enthusiastically supported withdrawal of these

lands for recreational development as part of the new national recreation area (NRA). [45]

While Reclamation and the Park Service discussed the propriety of adding Fort Spokane

lands to LARO, the Spokane Business Council passed a resolution on March 17, 1949, asking

for confirmation of their title to these same lands. This claim distressed Park Service officials

who believed that the STI was trying to get Margold's 1939 decision reversed. "It is

unfortunate that this somewhat belated assertion of rights in the land by the Indians will

delay, if not entirely block, the addition of the lands to the recreational area," wrote Paul R.

Franke, Acting Director of the National Park Service, in October 1950. He realized, however,

that the agency could do nothing until the BIA had completed its study and the Department

of the Interior made a decision. [46] Due to the uncertain situation, the Park Service decided

to forego any plans for the main fort grounds and instead planned to confine its concession

developments there to the lower bench area that it already controlled. BIA Commissioner

Myer sided with the STI early in 1951, noting that the 1873 agreement to relinquish lands,

including the fort grounds, had never been ratified and there had been no compensation for

the loss of this land. He said that the Indians believed that they had never given up their

claims to these lands and thus still had "valid rights in and to the lands based on their

aboriginal use and occupancy thereof." The BIA agreed that the Indians at least had a "strong

moral claim to the land." [47] The Solicitor concurred with this moral claim and went further

to say that even though aboriginal title had been extinguished, the STI might be entitled to
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4d.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:15 PM]

compensation. He also suggested that the lands could not be withdrawn for recreation

purposes unless Congress authorized such action. [48]

Faced with these opinions and tribal opposition, the Park Service attempted to reach a

compromise on Fort Spokane lands. The agency realized that it might not need all of the

331.31 acres and decided to propose a division of the lands designed to achieve legislative

approval. They hoped to secure a water supply for recreation development and in return were

willing to offer the Indians a concession there for the sale of arts and crafts. BIA

representatives supported this proposal as long as the United States agreed to recognize tribal

ownership of the fort lands outside the recreation area. They believed that the Indians might

support the settlement once they recognized the advantages of federal money used for

recreation development, along with a display for local handicrafts. The STI refused to

capitulate, however. At a meeting in April 1952, Council members reiterated that they still

were not sure of their rights to the Fort Spokane lands and until this was cleared up, "they

could do no horse trading without horses to trade." [49]

Despite this setback, Park Service officials continued unilaterally to make plans for the

development of the Fort Spokane lands during the next few years; these plans covered not

only the strip of land owned by the Park Service, but also the entire fort grounds administered

by the BIA. Their concern increased in 1957 when they discovered that the BIA recently had

abandoned the old fort buildings. LARO Superintendent Hugh Peyton pointed out the

historical significance of the area and warned that removal of any part would be tragic. He

asked the BIA to hold off any disposal until the Park Service could assess the site and its

preservation possibilities. Because the public was increasingly interested in historic sites,

Peyton believed that tourists to the fort would benefit the reservation's economy. [50]

While the STI was hoping to negotiate an agreement with the Park Service over Fort Spokane

lands, some tribal members continued to push for an expansion of their rights on the

reservoir. William Kieffer, a Spokane Indian who operated a small gas station on Highway

25, wanted to install a dock with gas pump on the Spokane Arm in 1958. LARO officials

discouraged this and viewed the action as an indication that the STI was questioning the Park

Service's authority to regulate and administer concessions within the Indian Zones. BIA

representatives warned the Park Service that the Spokane Tribal Council was "considerably

agitated" by the ruling against Kieffer. They had changed their thinking on Fort Spokane and

now wanted to trade these lands for shore lands bordering the Spokane Reservation. LARO

Superintendent Homer Robinson referred Kieffer's request to the Field Solicitor who ruled in

favor of the Park Service, saying that the 1946 agreement gave the agency sole responsibility

for approving and supervising concessions catering to the general public on any site in the

recreation area. [51]

Attorneys for the STI issued a lengthy opinion strongly disagreeing with the Solicitor's

conclusions. They argued that before construction of the dam, Indians had exclusive rights to

license non-Indians for hunting and fishing on reservation lands, and the 1940 Act did not

terminate these rights. They also had the right to exclude non-Indians from such activities,

and "if the Indians could exclude, they could license." They concluded that Congress did not

intend to limit Indian rights further with the 1940 Act since this

would not be fair in light of the rights previously enjoyed by the Indians. . . .

Thus, we say the public should be excluded from the land portions of the Indian

Zone, and that the Indians can use the land portions to set up concessions or

make such other ordinary uses as they previously could. If they cannot do at least

this, then they are entitled to compensation for loss of valuable rights . . . .

Actually, the Indians do not want further compensation; they want to share to
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4d.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:15 PM]

some small extent in the economic opportunities made available by the vast lake

created by Coulee Dam. The river bank land and access to the water was

formerly one of their most important assets; it would be a most serious loss for

them — not only of revenue but of opportunities for employment and selfenterprise — if they were to lose all benefits in this asset. The Act clearly

contemplates that this asset was to be an "Indian Zone," and that the Indians

were to have special rights in it. The Field Solicitor's opinion would deprive them

of those special rights. [52]

The attorneys concluded that the Park Service could neither prohibit nor regulate concessions

in the Indian Zones. Although such control would be advantageous, the agency must not

trample Indian rights to gain it. The Indians were willing to cooperate and negotiate

agreements with the Park Service, but until then, "they resist any attempted abridgments of

their rights." Soon after this, tribal representatives met with Department of Interior (DOI)

officials, and all agreed to have the Solicitor consider the issues. [53]

Superintendent Homer Robinson downplayed this disagreement, saying that he did not know

of any actual plans that Indians had for concessions on the lake. Instead, he believed that they

only wanted to establish a policy allowing them to provide services to the general public.

Nonetheless, he worried that the Park Service might have to give Indians "preferential

contracts to protect them from marginal operations intended only to skim the cream from the

available business." [54]

The STI's request for a Solicitor's determination of their rights languished for nearly a year,

during which time the Park Service was moving closer to acquiring the Fort Spokane lands

from the BIA. A tribal attorney complained about this, saying that the Indians wanted to be

part of any recreation plans for the area near their reservation and they hoped to work out an

agreement with the Park Service. They were unable to proceed with this, however, without a

determination of their rights. Because the STI was so poorly compensated for the loss of their

lands, the attorney believed it was only fair for the Park Service to share the economic

potential of the new recreation area. When the Solicitor's opinion finally arrived in May 1960,

however, once again it went against the tribe. Deputy Solicitor Edmund T. Fritz concurred

with the Field Solicitor's 1958 opinion that Indians, "like anyone else," needed to get a Park

Service permit before developing or operating public concessions in the Indian Zones. [55]

In the spring of 1960, the Park Service not only prevailed with the Solicitor's office but also

acquired the entire 331.31 acres of Fort Spokane. Public Land Order No. 2087 of May

9,1960, revoked the 1882 Executive Order that had established the military reservation, along

with the Executive Order of November 17, 1887, that modified the boundaries, and turned the

lands over to the jurisdiction of the Park Service "for use as an administrative, museum and

historic site in connection with the Coulee Dam National Recreation Area." [56]

Turning Up the Heat: Indian Rights, 1960s

The CCT briefly raised the issue of fishing rights in 1963 when a tribal game officer stopped

a non-tribal member who was fishing within the Indian Zones without a reservation permit.

The officer did not prohibit the man, who had a state fishing license, from fishing, but he told

him to purchase a tribal permit and forward the information to the tribe or risk having his

case turned over to the U.S. Attorney. When Superintendent Robinson heard about the

incident, he asked the Field Solicitor if the tribes had the right to require special permits

within the Indian Zones so the Park Service could inform visitors to prevent such

misunderstandings. The Solicitor replied that although the BIA required a special permit to

fish on any waters within the reservation, he did not believe that it had yet been decided if
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4d.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:15 PM]

this applied to the waters of Lake Roosevelt. He thought that this was probably an isolated

incident brought on by a tribal game officer who was unclear about his authority. He offered

to write an opinion if there were a repeat incident, but the issue remained dormant for several

years. [57]

Despite its loss over Fort Spokane lands, the STI continued to push for both definition and

expansion of Indian rights at Lake Roosevelt. The tribe hired a consulting firm in 1967 to

complete a land-use study of reservation lands, including shore lands. According to the tribal

attorney, the consultants needed to know what rights tribal members had to shore lands and if

there were additional rights that they could negotiate with the Park Service. Tribal attorney

Robert D. Dellwo met with LARO Superintendent David Richie in August 1968 to discuss

mutual rights and responsibilities in the freeboard lands within the Indian Zones. During the

evidently cordial meeting, they worked out an agreement under which Park Service rangers

would issue permits on the spot to tribal members camping on freeboard lands, allowing them

to have campfires except when fire danger was high. Dellwo explained that the tribe did not

intend to provoke a controversy over Indian rights at this time and instead assumed that the

Park Service would recognize these rights and cooperate with the tribe as it went ahead with

its plans. The tribe understood "that the best safeguard of its rights is in cooperation and in

the ultimate exercise of the tribe's responsibilities in regard to them." [58] Richie responded

that he believed that the interests of the Park Service and the tribe were "in essential

harmony" and that they would be able to reach mutual understandings. [59]

The issues became more difficult, however, as the STI moved from campfire permits to water

rights in 1969. Dellwo complained to Richie that the Park Service had charged tribal member

William Wynecoop $25 for a water pump permit to withdraw water from the lake. He

believed that tribal members retained the right of free access across freeboard lands to use the

water and thus should not be charged. In addition, he warned that such actions were "a real

irritant" to both the tribe and the Business Council and should be left dormant until a

decision was reached on water rights. [60] Superintendent Wayne Howe compounded the

problem two years later when he informed Wynecoop that he needed a pump permit from the

Army Corps of Engineers in addition to his Park Service permit. Dellwo complained again

that it had been difficult enough for the STI to develop a consensus of operation with both

the Park Service and Reclamation, and he believed that it should not be forced to work with

the Corps as well. He asked the Corps to reconsider this requirement to avoid a legal

confrontation over Spokane tribal water rights at Lake Roosevelt. The STI was concerned that

if the Corps had the right to grant permits, it also had authority to refuse them, causing a

clash with tribal property rights. Dellwo suggested that the Corps delegate its regulatory

authority at Lake Roosevelt to the Park Service. The Corps at first reiterated its authority in

this situation but subsequently deferred such permits to the Park Service. [61]

While the debate over permitting Wynecoop's pump was irritating to the STI, the more

serious water rights debate centered on a proposed withdrawal for a uranium mill on the

reservation. Western Nuclear, Inc., conducted a feasibility study for a processing plant in

1969, which included a daily requirement of 17,500 tons of water or 45,000 acre feet/year,

with most coming from Lake Roosevelt. The STI, which was leasing land to the company,

argued that there should be no charge for this water since the tribe believed it retained water

rights to the Columbia River. Dellwo said that the "unconscionably low" financial

compensation paid to the STI in 1940 for lands taken for reservoir construction indicated that

the government intended the tribe to be compensated instead with liberal rights, including the

same water rights as before the Act of June 29, 1940. [62]

In making his case, Dellwo cited the Winters Doctrine, a precedent quoted in most Indian

water rights cases. The doctrine stemmed from a 1906 decision, upheld by the Supreme Court

two years later, in a case brought by the government against a group of Montana farmers who
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4d.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:15 PM]

had appropriated so much water from the Milk River that there was not enough left for Indian

use downstream on the Fort Belknap Reservation. The court ruled that establishment of a

reservation implied that sufficient unappropriated water was reserved for the tribe to

accomplish the purposes for which the reservation was established. These rights began the

day the reservation was established and continued in perpetuity. The Indians could use the

water in any way that fulfilled the purposes of the reservation, and they could not lose these

rights if they did not use the water. Thus, tribal water rights usually superceded those of

farmers since the reservations were established before most western waters were

appropriated. Despite this powerful precedent, the federal government generally did not assert

tribal rights under the Winters Doctrine for over fifty years. The 1963 Arizona v. California

case reaffirmed the doctrine, and both the STI and CCT soon recognized its applicability to

Lake Roosevelt. [63]

The STI's request drew a mixed response from Reclamation officials. One of them took

exception to the tribe's claim that it had not been fairly compensated for lands lost to the

reservoir and suggested that it could take its case to the Indian Claims Commission. He noted

that these waters, raised "at great expense," were now available for irrigation and were "no

longer in or being maintained in their former less advantageous natural state." [64] Grand

Coulee Project Manager W. E. Rawlings pointed out that water users were not charged for

water withdrawal, and he asked for advice on whether or not to continue this policy.

Reclamation Regional Director Harold T. Nelson reassured him that there was plenty of water

to meet project needs, and he saw no conflict between Reclamation interests and the

proposed mining development. More important to him was the need to avoid application of

the Winters Doctrine, which was being invoked at other federal reclamation reservoirs. "We

see no need to involve this large-scale battle of 'principles' in this situation," he wrote, since

there was plenty of water for both Indian and non-Indian uses. [65]

After Reclamation officials appeared to approve a free water withdrawal for Western Nuclear,

the STI upped the ante. In its proposed lease to the mining firm, the tribe included a

statement that "the tribe will make no charge for these waters and asks that lessee not make

any payment for them to any department or agency of the United States Government or to

any one else." This concerned Field Solicitor Paul Lemargie, who believed it might create a

precedent that was inconsistent with the views of the Solicitor. [66] Assistant Solicitor J.

Lane Morthland met with tribal attorney Dellwo in February 1971, and assured him that there

would be no charge for water used by Western Nuclear as long as either the company or the

tribe obtained a valid state water right along with a special use permit from the Park Service.

But Dellwo informed him that the "Indians do not want to recognize the need for securing a

state water right in their own name." Morthland then suggested the alternative - and

circuitous - solution of having the tribe work out an agreement with Reclamation for water to

irrigate a selected tract of land; once approved, the water could be used by either the tribe or

a lessee for uses other than agriculture, at no charge. This "would in effect be a recognition

by the Department of a Winters Doctrine right without adjudication," noted Morthland.

Dellwo agreed, "provided it would not jeopardize or prejudice the Indians' claim to additional

waters under a Winters Doctrine adjudication." [67] Later, however, a Reclamation official

granted the STI the right to divert 646 acre feet of water annually, but added that Western

Nuclear still would need to get permits from the Park Service and the Corps and pay required

fees. It is not known how the STI reacted to this requirement. [68]

Bringing Things to a Boil: Indian Rights, 1970s

While the STI was pursuing its claims with the assistance of tribal attorneys, unrest was

starting to sweep through reservations across the country. In Washington, state officials did

not recognize many Indian treaty rights and attempted to tightly control Indian fishing.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4d.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:15 PM]

Indians began to protest in the 1950s, staging "fish-ins" on the lower Columbia as a form of

civil disobedience. Arrests led to test cases in court and finally to what became known as the

Boldt Decision in 1973, in which the federal government represented fourteen tribes in a suit

against Washington state, defended by Attorney General Slade Gorton. Judge George H.

Boldt ruled in favor of the tribes, saying that they were entitled to half of the catch that

migrated through their usual and accustomed fishing sites. This meant that the government

had to limit ocean fishing to prevent decimation of river runs. In addition, Boldt affirmed

tribal rights to regulate and manage their share of the fishery. [69]

Nationally, the civil rights movement began to resonate with American Indians, especially

the younger generation. Discontent increased as spending cuts diminished popular antipoverty programs that had benefited many young Indians. The American Indian Movement

(AIM) formed in Minneapolis in 1968 and urban Indians soon began to rally to the cry of

"Red Power!" Three major incidents galvanized Indians across the country and drew

worldwide attention to Indian demands. These included the takeover of Alcatraz Island in

San Francisco Bay in November 1969; the Trail of Broken Treaties Caravan to Washington,

D.C., in 1972 and the subsequent takeover of the Department of the Interior building; and the

bloody occupation of Wounded Knee that began in February 1973, lasted seventy-two days,

and resulted in the deaths of two Indian men and the paralysis of a federal agent. [70]

During this time, the push for Indian rights at Lake Roosevelt took on an active dimension to

counterbalance the previous legal approach. The CCT joined the fray in August 1971 when

the tribal council banned all hunting on reservation lands, complaining of trespassing by nontribal members along with a basic lack of respect shown to tribal members and their lands by

these uninvited visitors. CCT Game Officer, Howard "Doodle" Stewart did not favor such a

closure but noted, "We are sitting on a powder keg." [71] The hunting ban expanded in

November to include the requirement for a tribal fishing license, first for waters within

reservation lands and later for Lake Roosevelt. Stewart followed guidelines from the tribal

Fish and Wildlife Committee but kept local Park Service officials informed of the changes.

LARO Superintendent Wayne R. Howe appreciated the information since he wanted to keep

the public informed of the new requirements to avoid inadvertent violations, but he knew that

the issue would have to be resolved in court eventually. The Washington Department of

Game reacted more vigorously and claimed that the state owned the waters of Lake Roosevelt

and thus there was no special license required. The CCT disagreed, however, and believed

that all of the waters adjoining the reservation belonged to the tribes. "Let someone else prove

they're not [ours]," challenged CCT Chairman Mel Tonasket. He noted that although they

would have to fight for their rights, "we're not going to back up any more. We're not going to

stop making waves." [72] BIA Superintendent Sherwin Broadhead supported the CCT claim

while other officials went so far as to imply that the agency believed that the purchase of

Indian lands for the Grand Coulee Dam had been "accomplished illegally." [73] During this

time of confusion, Howe appealed for help. "I hope that some statement can be forthcoming

from the Director's office or Secretary's office before too long," he wrote, "as this whole

thing can get a bit sticky by next summer." [74]

The situation had already become sticky, however, as trouble erupted at Sanpoil campground

during the summer of 1971. Apparently a contingent of Indians from outside the area spent

time there and hosted loud parties that lasted so late that others no longer enjoyed camping at

Sanpoil. Campers had to be evacuated after one incident, which may have involved threats

with guns. Prominent CCT members, backed by BIA officials, aired their concerns at a

November meeting with Park Service officials. At that time, the CCT expressed interest in

taking over operations at Sanpoil campground. Howe agreed that this was possible under the

Tri-Party Agreement, and he said he would send any formal request through channels to see

if it could be accomplished. [75]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4d.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:15 PM]

In an effort to stave off further trouble, LARO staff met with members of the Colville

Business Council, a CCT Game Officer, and BIA officials in April 1972. Superintendent

Howe acknowledged that he wanted to avoid any trouble like the recent Sanpoil campground

incidents and he asked for cooperation from the CCT to avoid responding with Park Service

law enforcement. CCT members suggested several solutions: turn the campground over to the

tribes to run, provide full-time staffing to keep tourists from trespassing on Indian lands, or

shut it down. Underlying these suggestions were long-standing grievances, including a belief

that the lands had been taken illegally and resentment over exclusion of the tribes from the

Tri-Party Agreement. BIA officials supported the CCT claims and fanned the embers of

resentment. George Davis, Programs Officer with the BIA, suggested that Sanpoil

campground should be closed to see if "we can get the issue hot enough to get it settled."

LARO Chief Ranger Paul Larson countered that such an action would generate negative

publicity and might "build up so much . . . resentment that you would never be able to take it

over." Despite the tensions, the meeting ended on a positive note with discussions about

establishing a program of cultural demonstrations. [76]

With the campground controversy still unresolved, the CCT renewed its push for control of

fishing by passing an ordinance to require all non-Indians to purchase a tribal license before

fishing in waters claimed by the tribes. These included all of the Okanogan River and half of

each reservoir, including Lake Roosevelt, bordering the Colville Reservation. Despite the

Regional Solicitor's opinion that there was no basis for this action, the CCT threatened to

arrest anyone caught fishing without a tribal permit. Local LARO staff felt caught "on the

horns of a dilemma: Responsible for keeping the public informed, but unable to sanction, or

dispute the issue." [77]

The public did not take kindly to CCT demands. In March 1972, Superintendent Howe

warned of the possibility of violence against any tribal game warden who arrested a nonIndian. Some non-Indians felt strongly about what they saw as high-handed actions by the

CCT, causing Howe concern that Lake Roosevelt had "the potential of becoming a

battleground with the Service in the middle." After CCT's Law and Order Committee asked if

the Park Service would allow CCT officers to sell and enforce tribal licenses within the

Sanpoil campground, Howe again appealed to the regional office for guidance on

ramifications of enforcing tribal law in the Indian Zones and emphasized that he needed

answers as soon as possible. [78]

Problems at Sanpoil were not easily resolved, however. Incoming Superintendent William N.

Burgen described the campground as a "festering thorn in the side" of both the Park Service

and the CCT and he noted that "only close coordination with the Council and mutual respect

have prevented an unpleasant showdown at the site." In 1972, the site required three people

per day to prevent weekend disturbances, more staffing than any other LARO area. [79] As

rumors of tribal takeovers spread to neighboring towns, the Wilbur Chamber of Commerce

came out in opposition to control by any ethnic group. The dam, lake, and recreation

facilities had been built with taxpayers' money "and the combined efforts of all citizens

regardless of race, color, or creed," the Chamber wrote. "By the same token, these facilities

should be for the equal and non-discriminatory use of all citizens." [80]

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

laro/adhi/adhi4d.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5f.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:16 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 5:

Charting the Course: Managers and

Management Issues (continued)

Geographic Information System

Geographic Information System (GIS) technology makes possible very detailed and accurate

mapping by using data from satellites. The Park Service tried the new technology about 1974

in both the Great Smokey Mountains and Yosemite. GIS spread slowly, with fewer than five

National Park units using the systems by 1986. The next five years brought a rapid expansion,

however, raising the total to more than ninety parks in 1991. The Cooperative Park Studies

Unit at the University of Idaho undertook most of the data development for all but the three

largest parks within the region, offering workshops and technical support. [99]

LARO was working with the University of Idaho by 1991 to develop a small-scale system.

Superintendent Kuiper announced that the park had decided to utilize GIS on a priority need

basis, targeting parts of the lake that needed immediate, detailed analysis. LARO

concentrated on the Kettle River corridor in 1991 to assist in its assessment of habitat for

wildlife mitigation. Under the Regional GIS Plan, approved in November 1994, a Regional

GIS Coordinator would oversee development of GIS systems in all the parks. Each park, in

turn, was to have its own coordinator, with larger units like LARO having a full-time,

permanent position by the end of the first phase. The Coordinator would be assisted by the

Regional GIS Steering Committee. The first priority was to help each park develop at least

minimal GIS capability through development of primary databases to use for basic GIS

applications. The Field Technical Support Center, initially at the University of Idaho,

provided help mostly over the telephone or through email contact. The Regional GIS

facilities helped replace those at the university, which were phased out during FY1994-1995.

[100]

The Park Service was not alone in using GIS at Lake Roosevelt. Both the CCT and the STI

purchased GIS technology ca. 1989 to enable them to conduct mapping within the reservoir

area. Other federal and state agencies who worked on the lake also had GIS systems by 1993,

and LARO worked to develop its system in coordination with the others to facilitate sharing

of data. The tribes and agencies planned to use GIS primarily to inventory and monitor

wildlife and vegetation, encroachments, and cultural resources. In 1994, LARO pooled

funding with BPA to purchase GIS hardware and software. In addition, BPA provided money

for a GIS Specialist position to support BPA-funded projects at Lake Roosevelt; the agency

withdrew this funding in 1995. Loss of this position slowed down the GIS program at LARO.

The park received some funding in FY1996 to help support an ongoing Reclamation project

to digitize all the topographical maps for Lake Roosevelt, with data to be available for

mapping archaeological and burial sites. LARO submitted a Project Proposal in September

1997 for funding to develop a predictive model for archaeological sites based on the

geomorphologic position of known sites, using information from more than three hundred
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5f.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:16 PM]

recorded sites. A second project was designed to map features of cultural sites on digitized

campground facility maps to assist in future compliance projects. [101]

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

laro/adhi/adhi5f.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5d.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:17 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 5:

Charting the Course: Managers and

Management Issues (continued)

Fluctuating Lake Levels

When Grand Coulee Dam created Lake Roosevelt, the United States signed a treaty with

Canada confirming that the level of Lake Roosevelt would never rise above the elevation of

1,290 feet. Each year, however, the lake level drops well below full pool, principally during

winter and spring drawdowns. This fluctuation in the lake level has presented significant

challenges to LARO staff over the years, particularly since the 1980s when drawdowns

sometimes have occurred during the summer season. Fluctuating lake levels affect recreation,

industry, water quality, aquatic ecology, shoreline erosion, cultural resources, and water

supplies.

Many competing interests are factors in determining the reservoir's water level. These include

power generation, irrigation, flood control, and, more recently, recreation, fish, and wildlife.

In 1948, after extensive regional flooding, the official purposes of Grand Coulee Dam

expanded to include flood control. This enabled water managers to draw the lake level down

in anticipation of flooding; until the 1960s, however, only the upper thirty feet could be used

for this purpose. Reclamation prefers to keep the reservoir full to maximize power production

and irrigation potential. The filling and release of Lake Roosevelt is controlled by the Bureau

of Reclamation (irrigation), the Corps of Engineers (flood control), the Bonneville Power

Administration (power generation), and several other interests (fisheries mitigation). These

agencies base decisions on the various authorized uses of the reservoir, annual weather

conditions, and thermal plant operations. The National Park Service has no decision-making

power over the level of Lake Roosevelt. LARO prefers an elevation of 1,288 feet during the

recreation season because this slight drawdown from full pool leaves a small band for

retaining stranded debris on shore. It also makes it easier to beach boats and reach the shore

from the water. [57]

Current firm constraints on the level of Lake Roosevelt stipulate certain conditions. First, the

lake's maximum level is always 1,290 feet, while the minimum level is 1,208 feet except

under exceptional circumstances. Second, the maximum draft in twenty-four hours is 1.5 feet

to reduce landslide potential. Third, the minimum pool elevation by May 31 is 1,240 feet to

provide safe and efficient irrigation pumping to Banks Lake. The Corps and Reclamation

signed formal flood-control rule curves in 1978 as part of the Columbia River Treaty. These

are used in determining the lake level to store water to meet power generation demands;

prevent downstream flooding; and protect anadromous fish by limiting downstream spills that

raise nitrogen levels in the water and lead to gas-bubble disease. Increased flows are required

April 15 to June 15 for smolt out-migration (this is known as the water budget), which can

delay filling the lake until late June or early July. [58]

During the 1940s, when the Problem No. 26 committee was putting together the preliminary
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5d.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:17 PM]

Annual drawdown of the lake

plans for recreation on the new reservoir, the various agencies were confident that the

reservoir would consistently be at full pool, 1,290 feet, from June to October of each year.

All special use permits included a clause stating that the water level of Lake Roosevelt could

fluctuate a maximum of eighty feet. The winter drawdown was expected to be to 1,240 feet,

perhaps occasionally down as low as 1,210 feet. In fact, from 1941-1951 the drawdown did

not exceed thirty feet, and from 1952-1965 it stayed close to forty feet each winter. [59]

Kettle Falls Marina during drawdown, May 1983. Photo courtesy of

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Grand Coulee (USBR Archives P222

117 61732, 5-11-83).

In 1950 and 1951, the Roosevelt Lake Log Owners Association complained to politicians and

agencies about the difficulties that fluctuating lake levels caused its members. The thirteen

firms depending on Lake Roosevelt for log storage and transportation employed over two

thousand workers. The drawdowns, which the association believed were due to

"experimental" flood control, affected the Kettle Falls water supply, the few LARO beaches

that had been established, log dumping sites, transportation and storage facilities, fire

protection, transportation of logs on the lake, and docking facilities. The association reported

that 70 percent of all operations on the lake required an elevation of 1,274 feet or higher. It

was agreed that either the Park Service (on weekdays) or the Corps of Engineers (on

weekends) would notify the association of any anticipated drawdowns that might seriously

affect their operations. [60]

Under the terms of the Columbia River Treaty signed in 1961, Canada agreed to provide

reservoir storage in exchange for a share of the resulting power benefits at the eleven

downstream U.S. power-generating plants. The U.S. also agreed to pay Canada for water

storage that helped with flood control in the United States. Canada then built three storage

dams and reservoirs to hold flooding spring waters for gradual release later in the year. The

new upstream reservoirs were expected to reduce the need for seasonal drawdowns at Lake

Roosevelt, but this did not materialize because of the construction of the third powerhouse at

Grand Coulee Dam that began in the 1960s. [61]

The third powerhouse affected the elevation of Lake
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5d.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:17 PM]

from October through April

leaves a wide desolated band of

discolored rock between the

shoreline plant communities

and low water. An average

draft of 40 to 60 feet exposes

either vast expanses of sand or

steeply eroding banks at most

development sites.

-- NPS, A Master Plan for

Coulee Dam National Recreation

Area, 1968 [62]

Roosevelt on both a temporary and long-term basis.

During the construction of the new plant, Reclamation

drew the level of Lake Roosevelt down 130 feet in

1969 and 133 feet in 1974 to allow for dry

excavations. Crowds came to view the re-emerged

Kettle Falls each time. Since completion of the third

powerhouse, Grand Coulee Dam has been used to

cover peak loads rather than base loads. This

"peaking" caused the reservoir levels to fluctuate more

than in previous years. The normal maximum

fluctuation in water level each year is now eighty-two

feet, although the average is lower. In a typical year,

the reservoir is drawn down from January through June

in preparation for spring runoff and peak seasonal

power demand. It reaches its lowest level during April,

and it is generally at full pool between July and December. The Kettle Falls Chamber of

Commerce initiated a campaign in the 1960s to maintain high summer lake levels on behalf

of recreation on Lake Roosevelt, but this was a losing battle. The drawdowns met complex

needs throughout the Columbia River Basin, making their modification unlikely to meet the

recreational requirements of one reservoir in the system. [63]

LARO's original recreation facilities were not designed for the large drawdowns that began in

the late 1960s. By 1971, however, LARO staff had modified management objectives to

include the goal of making launch ramps and docks at selected sites useable during

drawdowns of up to fifty feet below full pool. Park staff regularly submitted Project

Construction Proposals for extending or building new launch ramps that would be useable at

lower elevations. Two new low-water ramps were built in 1974, but few others were funded

in the 1970s. LARO staff planned that eventually all the docks would be floating. Until then,

drawdowns of just three feet had serious negative impacts on recreation. In 1975, for

example, only the floating docks at Spring Canyon were useable between 1,285.5 and 1,288

feet. At that elevation, only four launch ramps were functional, many swim areas could not be

used, and none of the fuel docks could be reached by boat. After a public meeting in 1976,

Reclamation and the Park Service worked together on a plan to build additional boat ramps

and floating gas facilities at various places within LARO. [64]

In the mid-1980s, most of LARO's facilities still had not been adapted to lower summer lake

levels. At 1,270 feet, about half the launch ramps were not operational. Below about 1,235

feet, no ramps were useable and most water recreation stopped. Designated swim beaches

could not be easily used, and some became dangerous. Some campground water systems

were left high and dry, and boat-in campgrounds became unusable. Courtesy docks were

stranded on dry land at elevations below 1,280 feet, and many boat harbors could not be

reached. Log booms for swim beaches, mooring buoys, and navigational aids had to be

moved. Concessionaires' marinas had to be repositioned, making them inconvenient to use

and operate. [65]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5d.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:17 PM]

Typical water levels of Lake Roosevelt over the course of an average

year in the 1990s. (Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake, Southern Part, map

prepared by Northwest Map Service, Spokane, 1996.)

An unexpected drawdown during the recreation season sometimes damages boats and other

facilities. Visitation drops, particularly when the media report on the drawdown, and

concessionaires suffer economic hardship. This happened in the summers of 1984 and 1985.

In July 1984, the lake level dropped to 1,277 feet despite continuing predictions of stable or

rising lake levels. This unexpected drawdown was caused by a combination of high power

demand, weekend shutdowns of Hanford Nuclear Plant, and poor forecasting. In 1985, the

lake was at 1,267 feet in mid-June and it did not reach a pool elevation of 1,288 feet until

after September. The concessionaires at Kettle Falls and Keller Ferry were severely

impacted, suffering both damaged boats and lowered visitation. [66]

LARO tried to deal with the 1984 and 1985 extreme drawdowns in several ways. Park

Service staff established a toll-free telephone number that provided daily lake levels and

predictions. They also produced a video with Reclamation illustrating how lake fluctuations

impair their ability to serve the public; this led to meetings with BPA in 1986 and the start of

an information project. Maintenance staff did extensive work parkwide in 1985 to keep

facilities operational, moving swimming areas, adding protective log booms, relocating

courtesy docks, installing additional steps and ramps, and moving buoys. LARO also

installed elevation markers at various locations around the lake to aid boaters. [67]

Reclamation made some changes in the early 1990s that somewhat improved the fluctuating

lake level situation on Lake Roosevelt. In 1990, a new minimum-lake-level limit of 1,220

feet replaced the earlier limit of 1,208 feet, effective except in critical flood-control

situations. In addition, Reclamation instituted a costly hard constraint of 1,285 feet by July 1.

The agency followed this in 1991 by listing recreation as an "A" priority for the first time

ever. [68]

In 1986, the DSC did a full engineering and cost study of the extensive modifications

required to make LARO's facilities at twenty-eight developed areas usable by the public at

elevations down to 1,270 feet. The DSC found items most affected by the new design level

were swim areas and marine access to developed areas. The one-time retrofitting and

redesign cost was estimated to be approximately $1.3 million, primarily for labor and

materials for new boom floats, extended launch ramps, and revised anchorages. In addition,

annual maintenance costs would increase. LARO Assistant Superintendent Kelly Cash put
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5d.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:17 PM]

together a project proposal for congressional funding. Then, because BPA was identified as

the agency responsible for the drawdowns necessitating the retrofit, the BPA congressional

liaison in Washington, D.C., took the proposal to Rep. Tom Foley and others. The resulting

funding helped widen and extend seven launch ramps (generally down to 1,267 feet), and

built six new ramps in 1993. By 1997, all LARO launch ramps were useable down to 1,282

feet, and some went as low as 1,229 feet. [69]

One of the causes of low summer elevations since 1984 has been the use of water from Lake

Roosevelt to help flush anadromous smolt (salmon and steelhead) toward the Pacific Ocean.

Starting in 1984, three million acre-feet of Lake Roosevelt water was dedicated annually for

spring and early summer salmon flushes. Following the passage of the Endangered Species

Act and the 1993 inclusion of Snake River chinook, sockeye, and coho salmon on the

endangered species list, an additional 3.5 million acre-feet was dedicated to the flushing

project. In July 1994, a drawdown to help anadromous fish caused the lake level to drop

below 1,274 feet through early August. As a result, the concessionaire's marina at Kettle Falls

had to move its rental docks out of the harbor for the first time during the visitor use season.

In 1995, a Biological Opinion allowed as much as ten feet of water to be drafted from Lake

Roosevelt, generally in August, to augment flows for downstream fisheries. LARO's 1998

draft GMP noted, "Recreation and fisheries within the national recreation area will continue

to be a secondary consideration for the overall operation of the reservoir." [70]

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

laro/adhi/adhi5d.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6h.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:19 PM]

We consider the visitors as our

guests, and try to solve most

violations in a one on one

situation. In unusual incidents

we issue citations which carry a

monetary fine, and sometimes

we are forced to make arrests. 

-- Gordon D. Boyd, LARO

Acting Superintendent, 1985

[100]

There has been a gradual

change in scene on Lake

Roosevelt beaches in this area

during recent years. Gone are

the days when burly chested

young men patroled beaches in

red and white striped bathing

suits; the tops often carrying

'LIFE-GUARD' in large letters

across the back. . . . The Fort

Spokane-Porcupine Bay

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 6:

Family Vacation Lake: Recreation Planning

and Management (continued)

Visitor Protection and Law Enforcement

The purpose of having protection (law enforcement)

rangers at LARO has always been to ensure the safety

of park visitors and to protect the area's natural and

cultural resources and facilities. The ranger division

follows standard Park Service procedures in

accomplishing these goals. At LARO, most of the

rangers are seasonal employees who work from May

to September. In 1950, four years after the NRA had

been established, LARO had only two rangers, and

they were "taxed to the utmost." The park added an

additional seven seasonal rangers in 1961 as part of the

Mission 66 program, and in later decades the numbers

of rangers grew as visitation to LARO increased. The

emphasis has shifted back and forth from land to water a number of times, depending on the

Chief Ranger's and Superintendent's priorities and on changing recreational use patterns.

[101]

Park Service concerns about visitor safety at LARO revolve primarily around water safety,

and indeed most of the fatalities within the NRA, as in other national park units, have been

due to drownings or car accidents. No one drowned at LARO between 1955 and 1971, but in

1972 four people drowned despite a special emphasis on public safety that year. The number

of fatalities each year averages three or less through the present. Lifeguards at LARO have

regularly rescued swimmers. Since the early years, the Red Cross has taught swimming

classes at selected beaches. Lifeguards worked at the most popular beaches until 1996, when

they were dropped because of cost and other concerns. [102]

One of the main safety concerns today is the use of

personal watercraft. Park rangers are currently

monitoring the situation during the peak season. In

1999, seven significant accidents that involved

personal watercraft occurred in the Fort Spokane area

within just two weeks. [104]

Safety messages have been incorporated into

interpretive programs and are posted on bulletin

boards. Handouts and information on safety hazards

such as floating debris, hypothermia, and storms are

distributed at visitor centers. When special
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6h.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:19 PM]

Recreational district is the first

in the state to hire an all girl

life-guard team. The three girls

stagger their days off so there is

a guard on duty every day from

10 a.m. to 6 p.m. and on

Sundays there are two guards

on duty at Porcupine Bay. Each

girl is thoroughly trained in

water safety and life saving

techniques and in addition has

ready knowledge concerning

Coast Guard regulations for

boats and basic rudiments of

law enforcement. She is

required to keep the beach and

swim area free from drift wood

and debris, and in general be a

good park's ambassador. . . . All

are under the watchful eyes of

attractive young girl guards, be

they tall, short, blonde or

brunette. When she shouts

"OFF THE LOGS" or "KEEP

THAT BOAT OUTSIDE THE

BUOYS" — her word becomes

law on the beach, for she is the

guardian of your safety. 

-- Davenport Times, 1964 [103]

circumstances warrant, such as a 1978 toxic algae

bloom, the NRA issues warnings through regional

media. Rangers are trained in and equipped for basic

first aid, and in recent years many park employees are

certified Emergency Medical Services providers. Talks

on safety topics have been given to visitors, such as

programs on fire safety and the use of fire

extinguishers. [105]

Because Lake Roosevelt is a navigable body of water,

since the 1940s the U.S. Coast Guard has been

responsible for performing boat inspections and for

enforcing navigation laws and regulations on Lake

Roosevelt. LARO's first Superintendent, Claude

Greider, recognized that the Park Service also had a

responsibility in relation to boating safety. In 1947, he

told the Coast Guard that the Park Service would agree

to take over the maintenance and installation of

navigation lights on Lake Roosevelt and asked whether

Park Service personnel could be deputized to conduct

boat inspections and enforce boating regulations. The

Coast Guard informed LARO that its employees could

indeed be deputized and would have the authority to

make arrests. The Coast Guard began training LARO

rangers in inspection procedures in the early 1950s,

even though Park Service jurisdiction on the waters of

Lake Roosevelt remained in question until at least

1956. [106]

LARO rangers have conducted regular boat patrols

during the busy season on the waters of each of the

three districts since the 1950s. The enforcement of LARO's boating regulations became

increasingly important and complex over the years. As fishing on the lake improved, the

number of boat inspections began to climb. By the mid-1960s, staff was expressing a need

for more boat patrols, larger boats, more buoys and markers, and improved boat ramps.

Throughout the 1960s, boating violations far outnumbered all other law enforcement offenses

at LARO. For example, in 1969 there were 194 boating violations; all other offenses

numbered five or less per category. In the 1970s, however, parking and motor vehicle

violations began to exceed boating violations in some years. [107]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6h.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:19 PM]

Lifeguard at a LARO beach, 1964. Photo courtesy of National

Park Service, Harpers Ferry Center (HFC 64-156).

As the number of boaters on Lake Roosevelt climbed, LARO staff devised ways to make the

boat inspection process more efficient. In 1976, LARO designed a windshield decal for boat

operators who had already passed inspection. Patrol boats began to be standardized to reduce

training and maintenance time. Boat patrols increased 66 percent in 1978, and that year new

exhibits on boating and safety information were installed at major access points. Most of the

boat ramps had "ramp rangers" who provided lake information and made sure boaters

understood the safety requirements (lack of life preservers was the most common mistake),

but a 1978 survey found that close to 70 percent of Lake Roosevelt boaters had no contact

with LARO's boating safety program. [108]

In 1977, after many years of discussing the possibility, LARO rangers took over from the

U.S. Coast Guard the duty of maintaining and repairing the aids to navigation along Lake

Roosevelt and the Spokane River Arm. These lights are installed as far upstream as Kettle

Falls, and they help commercial log-towing tugs as well as pleasure boaters. This agreement

was apparently not renewed for a period, but in 1993 LARO once again assumed

responsibility for routine maintenance on aids to navigation lights and buoys. Reclamation

continued to maintain its four navigation lights at the China Bar debris-control facilities. The
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6h.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:19 PM]

Coast Guard maintained the channel marking buoys on the lake and also provided assistance

with LARO's boating safety program, including "courtesy marine examinations" on busy

weekends. As an additional navigation aid, LARO installed ten-mile markers from the dam

to just south of Northport in 1988. In 1997, the Coast Guard approached LARO about

discontinuing the aids to navigation because of budget cuts. The Coast Guard currently

maintains the aids to navigation and is examining the need for improvements. [109]

LARO ranger talking on radio in Park Service boat, no date. Photo

courtesy of National Park Service, Lake Roosevelt National

Recreation Area (LARO.FS).

In the early 1990s, LARO, CCT, and STI staff all increased their boat patrols on Lake

Roosevelt. LARO personnel began making more boat stops for inspections, partly to enforce

new boat registration fees based on boat length. If serious safety violations were identified,

such as not having sufficient personal flotation devices or overloading, the boaters had to

return to port and correct the problem. Common boat operating violations included water

skiing without an observer, jumping boat wakes with personal watercraft, and swimming in

boat traffic areas. Currently, LARO personnel have some fifteen boats at their disposal, a

great improvement since 1947, when the staff had only three cruisers. [110]

In the late 1990s, LARO's boating safety program was feeling the pinch of increased

visitation combined with relatively flat operating budgets. Cooperating agencies and

members of the public felt that the Park Service should step up its enforcement of boating

regulations. In response, LARO proposed an enhanced boater safety program in 1997. This

program, funded out of base funds, supports seasonal rangers who perform safety inspections

at twenty-two launch ramps and on LARO's lake and rivers; develop and distribute boating

safety materials to visitors and local communities; and develop and present boating safety

programs. LARO rangers currently average about 600 inspections a year. Visitors appreciate

the reintroduction of an annual LARO sticker that is secured to each boat that passes the

safety inspection, thus allowing the rangers to bypass boats with current LARO stickers.

[111]

Park Service staff has been involved since at least the 1970s in planning for emergency
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6h.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:19 PM]

response in coordination with other local, county, state, tribal, and federal agencies. LARO

completed a safety plan in 1992 and initiated a Hazard Communication Program. LARO staff

have played a leadership role in the Emergency Services Committee of the Lake Roosevelt

Forum. [112]

Law enforcement issues of the 1940s at LARO primarily involved special use permits and

trespass issues. Recreational visitation was quite low, and no regulations for the NRA had yet

been established. In the 1950s, enforcement of the new area regulations and follow-up on

incidents such as vandalism did not require vast amounts of time for the handful of rangers at

LARO. Law enforcement was still a "relatively minor activity" at LARO in the 1960s (in

August 1965, for example, the Superintendent reported that only three "rowdy parties" had to

be broken up, and most years rangers made no arrests). Seasonal rangers stationed at each of

the main campgrounds provided information and services to visitors, and permanent rangers

conducted periodic patrols of developed areas. Night patrols were done at Coulee Dam and

Kettle Falls during the busy season. [113]

In an important case for LARO law enforcement, the Deputy Solicitor in 1961 held that Park

Service regulations were applicable to NRAs, including LARO, and could be enforced under

the criminal provisions of the Act of 1916 that established the Park Service. But, according to

the Field Solicitor in Ephrata, Washington, LARO rangers still did not have the power of

arrest. This was resolved in 1970 when Congress defined the National Park System to include

areas administered by the Park Service for recreational purposes. This legislation gave LARO

law-enforcement personnel the authority to conduct investigations, execute warrants, carry

firearms, and make arrests as at other Park Service units. But the situation at Lake Roosevelt

has always been rather complex because of multiple jurisdictions. In the 1960s, law

enforcement agencies with police authority on LARO land included the state police, five

sheriff's offices, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Park Service, Federal Bureau

of Investigation, and the tribal police. On water, the agencies included the five sheriff's

offices, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, U.S. Coast Guard, Park Service, U.S.

Army Corps of Engineers, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The sheriff's office

handled some 90 percent of the cases on land, the Park Service the remaining 10 percent.

[114]

LARO park ranger visiting with attendees of a Lutheran church

picnic, Fort Spokane, August 1956. Photo courtesy of National Park
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6h.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:19 PM]

Over the past several years

(approximately 23) we have

been campers at Keller Ferry

Campground. . . . The last few

years, drastic changes have

come about. . . . We as

American citizens should be

able to enjoy our parks, without

the fear of some hot nervous

young summer ranger pulling a

gun, without the disgust of

using dirty restrooms, with the

conveniences we think we are

paying for. 

-- Judith Boekle of Wilbur to

Gary J. Kuiper, LARO

Superintendent, 1992 [117]

Service, Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area. (LARO.FS.)

In 1970, a riot in Yosemite and a boy's death in Yellowstone focused attention on Park

Service law enforcement and visitor safety issues, and Congress provided funding for a

comprehensive law-enforcement training program. LARO, like other park units, worked on

improving the training of its ranger force in the 1970s. One district ranger completed the

Basic Law Enforcement Course at the Park Service's National Capital Training Center in

Washington, D.C., in 1971, and the two others in 1972 (since 1977, this training takes place

at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in Glynco, Georgia). Training LARO's

permanent and seasonal rangers was important because the General Authorities Act of 1970

required a law enforcement commission for rangers who patrolled parks. During this period,

the NRA adopted the Case Record system for recording incidents and found it superior to

previous procedures. LARO prepared a set of guidelines, "The Application of Law

Enforcement to Human Behavior," as a supplement to the LARO Law Enforcement Policy

Statement. Only LARO rangers with law-enforcement authority wore the National Park

Service badge during this period. During the 1970s, the area's rangers handled some 200 to

450 case incidents per year. [115]

Currently, all seasonal protection rangers at LARO are required to go through a Park Serviceapproved nine-week training to receive their law enforcement commission. Most do this

through Skagit Community College in Mount Vernon, Washington. All permanent lawenforcement rangers are required to attend the eleven-week federal training program in

Georgia. [116]

Problems in LARO campgrounds have been a longstanding concern to park rangers. In 1973, LARO

imposed a ban on dogs in the major picnic areas. At

Spring Canyon, NRA staff installed streetlights,

patrolled until 2 a.m., and closed the day use area late

at night to try to prevent teenage parties and

vandalism. Despite these measures, the most common

visitor complaints in 1978 involved noise at night,

dogs off leash, disturbances caused by motorcyclists,

and drinking. A campground host at Evans in the early

1990s complained that many if not all of the

campground rules posted on bulletin boards were not

enforced. [118]

During the 1980s, the major law enforcement

problems at LARO involved parties at campgrounds,

but other issues becoming increasingly important were

encroachments, vandalism, and game and fish

poaching. LARO rangers put special effort into

controlling the use of unauthorized roads, mostly to

protect archaeological sites. Reservoir drawdowns resulted in more citations for vandalism of

exposed cultural resources and for damage to sites by off-road vehicles driving on exposed

shore lands. Rangers annually handled some four hundred case incident records, one to two

hundred violation notices, one to two hundred courtesy tags, and ten motor vehicle accidents.

By 1988, LARO's law enforcement personnel were working basically in compliance mode

due to increasing visitation, vast numbers of encroachments, personnel reductions, and a

general workload increase. Pre-suppression fire monies funded large amounts of overtime to

accomplish visitor protection patrols. [119]

Some seasonal positions were split between visitor and resource protection and interpretation.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6h.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:19 PM]

The beautiful lake was a

political nightmare marked by

powerful crosscurrents and

competing channels. . . .The

story goes that if a body were

found floating in Lake

Roosevelt nobody would pull it

out because no one knew who

had jurisdiction over it. It'd just

have to float around out there. 

-- Lake Roosevelt Forum, n.d.

[125]

Many LARO staff, such as former Fort Spokane employee Tom Teaford, enjoyed the

resulting variety of work. Teaford recalls that a ranger participating in a living history

program at Fort Spokane was called out on a law enforcement incident, and he made the

arrest while costumed as an 1890s soldier. [120]

LARO protection rangers in the 1990s were spread more thinly than in the past. Boat patrols,

campground foot patrols, and safety inspections at launch ramps were all reduced. Most of

the rangers' time during the busy season was spent on land dealing with visitor use

management issues at parking areas and campgrounds. The total number of reportable

incidents was over six hundred in 1993. In 1997, LARO had the equivalent of fourteen fulltime staff in law enforcement but reported that the area actually needed twenty-three. By this

time, natural resource violations constituted the majority of case incident reports. Poaching

remained a particular problem. In 1990, about 35 percent of hunters were contacted by

rangers. Violations included exceeding the bag limit and hunting before or after hours.

Covert operations were used in investigating some poaching cases. [121]

Over the decades, LARO has signed cooperative agreements with other federal and state law

enforcement agencies, the tribes, and local jurisdictions. Thus, the Park Service shares some

law enforcement and emergency services jurisdiction with these entities. County sheriffs take

the lead in juvenile crime cases and in criminal cases that require investigative work beyond

LARO's capability. When a case initiated by the Park Service goes to trial, it goes through

the federal court system if the violation involves a federal law. Most cases can be handled

through the state or county court system, which LARO staff prefer. [122]

Park Service rangers and CCT tribal rangers are cross deputized under authority of a

Memorandum of Agreement established in 1991 and subsequently renewed. The Park Service

and the STI have a similar agreement signed in 1999. The CCT's Tribal Park Service was

established in 1988, and the agreement allows tribal rangers to attend Park Service lawenforcement refresher courses. Tribal game officers had been attending LARO trainings such

as the boat school, however, since at least the 1970s. [123]

One of the management headaches caused by multiple law-enforcement entities with

jurisdiction over LARO's land and water in the early years was the lack of direct radio

communications between the various agencies. In the mid-1980s, Park Service vehicles

began to be equipped with radios that tied in to local sheriff's offices and fire districts for

coordinating search and rescues, hazardous material incidents, wildfire suppression, and other

multiple-agency emergencies. Tribal rangers were authorized in the 1990s to monitor

LARO's frequency in order to help when radio communications between Park Service units

were not possible. [124]

Two national programs have helped in recent years to

fund the LARO law enforcement program: Delta 9

Drug Eradication Program and the Drug Abuse

Resistance Education (DARE) program. Delta 9 was

initiated in 1985 as part of a nationwide emphasis on

detecting and eradicating marijuana grown in national

parks. LARO coordinated this program with the BIA,

sheriff's departments, and tribal police. LARO ranger

staff, in preparing funding requests, described the

NRA as "very attractive to those who seek isolation for

their illegal activities" and mentioned heavy drug

traffic in and around the area. In 1987, LARO received

funding to help combat drug-related problems in the

park. Both air and ground searches have been
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6h.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:19 PM]

conducted to find marijuana fields and

methamphetamine labs. These interagency operations result each year in the seizure of

property, arrests, and the removal of plants from lands near and occasionally on LARO lands.

The transporting of illegal drugs across the border in boats, and border trespasses, have not

been a problem on Lake Roosevelt. [126]

In 1990, LARO management converted a permanent GS-7 law enforcement ranger to serve

as a DARE instructor and to serve on a multi-agency drug task force in response to a

community request and in cooperation with the Stevens County Sheriff's Department. That

year, some seventy Kettle Falls students graduated from the DARE school program, which

emphasizes recreation as an alternative to drug and alcohol use for children. The following

year, an additional permanent ranger position was established to serve as a DARE instructor

in the Grand Coulee Dam school district. Soon, the program had expanded to the Wellpinit,

Nespelem, and Hunters school districts, graduating hundreds of students each year, and

LARO obtained two DARE boats. Besides the benefits to the students, the program served as

good public relations for the Park Service in the local communities. Today, rangers teach

DARE at many schools throughout the area, such as Grand Coulee, Coulee City, Hunters,

and Kettle Falls. [127]

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

laro/adhi/adhi6h.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6d.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:20 PM]

In 1966 the Park Service would

be celebrating its fiftieth

anniversary. What a God-given

target to shoot for! Why not

produce a ten-year program,

which would begin in 1956,

aimed to bring every park up to

standard by 1966 — and call it

MISSION 66? . . . The entire

organization went into action,

regional office and park staffs

developing individual project

plans and supplying cost

estimates for each park. Morale

rose steadily as mouth-watering

details were passed along that

old grapevine. In Washington,

the park packages were

reviewed every weekend, until

the total plan, containing the

management and budget

requirements for each of 180

parks, had been completed.

And yet, the final tab seemed

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 6:

Family Vacation Lake: Recreation Planning

and Management (continued)

The Mission 66 Period, 1956-1966

The Park Service and LARO entered a new era in 1956 with the establishment of the Mission

66 program on the national level. This program resulted from the combination of delayed

maintenance of Park Service facilities and increasing visitation to the parks throughout the

country. Conrad Wirth, Park Service Director from 1951-1963, conceived of Mission 66 as a

ten-year reinvestment and development program, timed to end with the agency's fiftieth

anniversary in 1966. Congress responded generously with funding substantially increased

over the annual Park Service budget. Wirth was a strong supporter of recreation in the

national parks. Mission 66 projects included increased staffing, new interpretive facilities,

campgrounds, roads, utilities, administrative and service buildings, restoration of historic

buildings, employee residences, comfort stations, marina improvements, and visitor centers.

The general emphasis was on improving the quality of the visitor's experience; Mission 66

emphasized use over preservation. [55]

Park structures of the early 1950s reflected modern

architectural and landscape design and the use of

modern construction materials such as concrete, glass,

and steel. This type of design for Park Service

buildings continued throughout the Mission 66

program. The Washington Office Division of

Landscape Architecture commented that each area to

be developed at LARO should be designed to have a

"first class appearance," noting that "until this is done,

Coulee Dam N.R.A. will remain neglected, rundown,

and lost in the Master Plan files!" [56] In 1968, LARO

staff proposed three architectural themes for the area,

ones that were appropriate to the desert character of

the southwest shoreline, the wooded northeast

shoreline, and the historic features at Fort Spokane.

[57]

As part of Mission 66 planning, every park prepared a

Mission 66 prospectus, with assistance from the

Regional Offices. The LARO prospectus, authored by

Superintendent Hugh Peyton, emphasized two types of

proposed development at LARO. One was the

provision of facilities currently needed. The other was

a program to set aside and save for future public use
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6d.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:20 PM]

far beyond the limits of reality

for those who had been on short

rations for so long. The total

MISSION 66 program was

projected at $800 million. That

the actual expenditure would

pass $1 billion was not realized

until much later. 

-- William C. Everhart, The

NPS, 1972 [54]

the Lake Roosevelt shoreline and recreational

resources and to resist summer home sites, individual

group development, and other such uses. He proposed

many "pioneer" developments with minimum facilities

to establish public rights to various sites. The overall

program was quite ambitious: 132 new developed

areas, varying from the "pioneer" or wayside areas

with two table-fireplace units to campgrounds with

120 campsites, with a total of sixteen major areas. By

1963, more than halfway through the Mission 66

decade, LARO's facilities for visitors (not including

those provided by concessionaires) consisted of

fourteen bathhouses, twelve comfort stations, two

picnic shelters, and seventy-six pit toilets. The most popular sites were Coulee Dam, Fort

Spokane, Porcupine Bay, Kettle Falls, and Evans. [58]

Map showing both existing and proposed development at the end

of the Mission 66 period, 1967. (NPS, "A Master Plan for Coulee

Dam National Recreation Area, Washington: Preliminary

Working Draft, Feb. 1968: 51, file D18 Master Plan,

LARO.HQ.ADM.)

(click on image for an enlargement in a new window)
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6d.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:20 PM]

One of the principal reasons for

putting minimum facilities at

various spots along the lake in

the form of minor development

areas is to "homestead" and

keep these areas in public

ownership for future

generations and to resist the

eternal pressures of groups and

individuals to acquire

Government land for private

use, which would exclude

practically forever the

vacationist who will need this so

desperately in the future. With

the completion of MISSION 66

all of these areas will receive

proper attention and they will

be preserved for the use of

future generations. The

constant increase in the use of

present facilities in the area

indicates that there is an urgent

need for the type of recreation

which can be afforded by

Coulee Dam National

Recreation Area. 

-- Hugh Peyton, LARO

Superintendent, 1957 [59]

Peyton promoted LARO in the Mission 66 prospectus

as the "Family Vacation Lake." He noted that NRA

staff expected a tremendous increase in visitation

during the coming decade. Their proposals for Mission

66 involved setting up low-cost minimum facilities to

handle present and anticipated future needs. Peyton

wrote, "Our area, in effect, is bypassing the normal

slow gradual development, and passing from a pioneer

stage into complete development." He continued, "We

are confident that this quickening course is necessary

and we welcome its coming." [60] LARO's Mission 66

prospectus was approved in April 1957. The total cost

of proposed physical improvements, including roads,

trails, buildings, and utilities, came to an optimistic

$2,572,600, about 1/3 of which was earmarked for Fort

Spokane. [61]

LARO never was flush with money, however. Even

during the Mission 66 period, when Homer Robinson

was Superintendent, much of the work was still done

on a shoestring with much donated labor and

scrounged materials. For example, all the LARO staff,

plus Superintendent Robinson's wife, spent several

Sundays at Keller Ferry clearing rocks and brush and

trees to develop a small recreation area near the ferry

landing. The ferryman allowed them to attach a pipe to

his garden hose to provide water for the site. Next a pit

toilet was built there, and then trees were planted. Sis

Robinson felt the improvements were "VERY

primitive," and LARO maintenance foreman Don

Everts agreed that because little money was available,

"we did it ourselves." Everts referred to some of these small campgrounds as "hatched,"

because he would fly over Lake Roosevelt and map the areas where people were already

camping without facilities; the Park Service would then develop them. [62]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6d.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:20 PM]

Visitor facilities constructed at Keller Ferry, 1959. Photo courtesy of

National Park Service, Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area

(LARO.HQ.MENG).

Mission 66 and its special funding sources represented a turning point for LARO's

development. Throughout the Mission 66 period (1956-1966), LARO made great progress in

its visitor facilities, although nowhere near the proposed improvements. By 1968, the NRA

had thirty campgrounds (nine of which were accessible only by boats), sixteen boat

launching ramps, twenty-two fixed docks, and twelve developed swimming beaches (six with

lifeguards). Many campgrounds had been expanded, and a few boat launch ramps had been

built. Concessions, however, still played only a minor role at LARO. [63]

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

laro/adhi/adhi6d.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7h.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:21 PM]

I resent having spent seventeen

years of my life in the building

of this structure [Grand Coulee

Dam] only to have the lake

turned over to one firm as a

private monopoly. . . .There will

never be any development of

the lake because it is to be the

private domain of the Park

Service and its concessionaires.

This is really government in

business. 

-- member of Grand Coulee

Dam Yacht Club to Rep. Walter

Horan, 1951 [103]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 7:

Building and Maintaining the Park:

Administrative and Visitor Facilities (continued)

North Marina and the Grand Coulee Dam Yacht Club

North Marina was located on the north side of the reservoir about half a mile above Grand

Coulee Dam. The area closest to the dam was within the Reclamation Zone, and the rest was

within the Recreation Zone. The Park Service provided a swim beach and picnic area for

nearby residents and for tourists, primarily visitors to Grand Coulee Dam. Coulee Dam

Amphibious Aircraft's facilities were located at North Marina, as was the Reclamation dock

facility that had been built by the Work Projects Administration in 1938 or 1939.

Reclamation leased boat slips to members of the Grand Coulee Dam Yacht Club and to the

general public and thus was in direct competition with the LARO concessionaire, Coulee

Dam Amphibious Aircraft. This led to a great deal of contention starting in 1948, when

CDAA began to question the fairness of the existing situation, asking why the dock facilities

leased to the public were subsidized by Reclamation.

In the late 1940s, CDAA spent over $4,000 to

construct new docks to handle anticipated business.

But, Reclamation then made minor repairs on its old

docks and continued to charge only $10 a year for slip

rental vs. the $10 a month charged by CDAA. Greider

was frustrated by Reclamation's actions, noting that

they reflected a fundamental problem that went beyond

the particular situation, and felt that CDAA had the

right to "ask some very embarrassing questions."

LARO personnel continued to work to shift boat-dock

responsibilities from Reclamation to the concessionaire

and put the Yacht Club on a non-subsidized basis.

Rather than Reclamation issuing a lease to the Yacht

Club, the Park Service proposed turning the boat slips

over to the Park Service, which would make them

available to its concessionaire. [105]

Reclamation, however, believed it should continue to

handle the rentals for the remaining few years that the docks would be usable. Greider then

suggested that they increase their dock rental rates to be consistent with local commercial

rates, thus eliminating the competition with the Grand Coulee Navigation Company. After

voluminous correspondence and, presumably, phone calls and meetings, in May 1952 all

involved parties agreed to a Reclamation lease of land and facilities to the Yacht Club, with

assurances from Reclamation that they had no intention of further subsidizing the

organization by repairing the floating dock. [106]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7h.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:21 PM]

Five-passenger Beechcraft float plane taking off from North Marina,

1946. Photo courtesy of U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Grand Coulee

(USBR Archives 1347).

In 1959, Reclamation proposed transferring the North Marina to LARO for no cost, including

the public (non-LARO) swimming beach, the Grand Coulee Dam Yacht Club facilities,

paved road, and water line. The beach, which received heavy local and visitor use, was

located near the Park Service campground and picnic area. Many locals preferred it to the

Park Service beach because the latter was accessed by a steep slope known as "Cardiac Hill."

LARO's Superintendent noted that the Park Service had wanted this piece of land included in

the NRA when it was established, but Reclamation had withheld it because of a "squabble"

between the concessionaire and the Yacht Club. The lease to the Yacht Club of the barge

resting on landfill and dock adjacent to the beach would be transferred to the Park Service.

By this time, Yacht Club membership had declined to only sixteen, and the floating docks

were unsafe. The Regional Office and LARO recommended the transfer be accomplished.

[107]

The transfer of this land to LARO's management never occurred. In 1968, the 260-acre North

Marina area was excluded from LARO because the land was needed for materials staging and

penstock fabrication during the construction of the third powerhouse. The old barge that had

served as a clubhouse was burned, and the Yacht Club docks at North Marina were removed.

The Yacht Club moved its clubroom to a building in Coulee Dam and for a number of years

did not have any waterfront facilities. The club did, however, operate the Spring Canyon

concession for a few years starting in the late 1960s as a way to raise money for the

organization. The Yacht Club established docking facilities at Eden Harbor, not far from the

town of Grand Coulee, in 1981, and has been there ever since under a Park Service special

use permit. The club currently has approximately twenty-five members. [108]

<<< Previous <<< Contents >>> Next >>>
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7h.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:21 PM]

laro/adhi/adhi7h.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7d.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:22 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 7:

Building and Maintaining the Park:

Administrative and Visitor Facilities (continued)

Domestic Water Supply

The domestic water supply for LARO relies on wells and springs. Year-round wells have

always been a challenge. The annual winter drawdowns make some wells and pumps

unusable since the groundwater levels near the lake are within a few feet of lake level and

fluctuate as the lake does. Through agreements with Reclamation and the Washington

Department of Health, LARO installed a series of small water systems at its developed sites

in the 1950s. Because they used seepage water from Lake Roosevelt, they did not function

during the winter. Some wells eventually failed completely. [37]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7d.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:22 PM]

Laying water pipes at Fort Spokane, 1963. Photo courtesy of

National Park Service, Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area

(LARO.HQ.MENG).

LARO maintenance worker Don Everts remembers that he and his co-workers "got a little

fascinated with drilling for water" in the 1950s. At Fort Spokane, for example, U.S.

Geological Survey geologist Fred Jones used a drill rig to dig a well that did not produce any

water, and the Geological Survey was not willing to try again without reimbursement.

Superintendent Hugh Peyton then turned the job over to Everts, who read all he could find on

drilling wells. Everts decided to "blow" the well drilled by the Geological Survey using dry

ice brought in from Spokane. They lined the well with rubber and dropped cakes of dry ice

down the hole. They were standing on top when the water reached the top and literally blew

them off — the water shot fifty feet into the air. After dropping more ice down the well and

watching the water blow out a number of times, they pumped the water out of the hole and

dropped a pump in it. They never pumped it dry after that. Water for several restrooms and

all the campground water came out of that "dry well." [38]

By the late 1960s, twenty-two of LARO's thirty-five developed campgrounds and picnic

areas had water supplies, some adequate and some inadequate. LARO continued to

experience problems with wells that went dry during low reservoir levels. In 1969, LARO

asked the U.S. Geological Survey to help investigate the availability of additional water

supplies at all campgrounds and picnic areas. It was found that groundwater, preferred over
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi7d.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:22 PM]

surface water because it did not require treatment, could be obtained at most of LARO's

campgrounds. The chemical quality of the groundwater was found to be good, although hard

and in some places high in iron. [39]

Sampling of LARO's drinking water at campgrounds in the 1960s and 1970s found that some

water supplies occasionally had high coliform levels. Treatment consisted of the installation

of chlorinators and iodinators. Generally, the lower end of the lake maintained acceptable

coliform levels. Two of LARO's sixteen water systems that used wells (Kettle Falls

campground used city water) were closed in 1975, and the Park Service began sampling all

water systems twice a month when they were in use. In 1976, new drinking water standards

became effective with the passage of the Safe Drinking Water Act. District rangers were

required to sample drinking water systems on a regular basis. [40]

As regulations on drinking water tightened, the time spent by LARO personnel monitoring

water supplies also increased. In 1979, LARO expended 283 person-hours, 7,206 vehicle

miles, and 12 boat hours on water sampling and monitoring. Even so, in 1980 eight out of

seventeen quality failures in the region occurred at LARO. Two wells were closed until

disinfection equipment could be installed, and LARO planned improvements at several water

supply systems to comply with national standards. As a result, six new wells, two pumping

units, and fifteen iodinators and chlorinators were installed. By 1997, all twenty of LARO's

wells had treatment systems, and they all had satisfactory microbiological quality. [41]

The largest spring within LARO is the historic spring at Fort Spokane, first used by the

military and now by the Park Service. In 1994, the Park Service filed a formal protest with

the Washington Department of Ecology against a planned large withdrawal of water for a

nearby proposed recreational vehicle park because it was believed to threaten the spring. The

permit is currently on hold until a state moratorium for new water rights on the Columbia

River is lifted. [42]

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

laro/adhi/adhi7d.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi8d.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:23 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 8:

Changing Stories: Interpretation (continued)

Wayside Exhibits and Interpretive Trails

Wayside exhibits along highways or at campgrounds and boat launch ramps are important at

LARO because visitors often go directly to recreation sites, bypassing visitor contact stations.

LARO's Mission 66 prospectus mentioned that a number of observation points with roadside

exhibits would be developed along Lake Roosevelt to supplement the information available at

the proposed visitor centers (this fit in with the overall Mission 66 program Servicewide).

The 1958 Museum Prospectus listed twelve interpretive sites, mostly along heavily traveled

roads. By 1964, LARO personnel saw the value of providing safety and other information to

visitors at launch ramps, and they proposed exhibit shelters at North Marina and at Fort

Spokane. They also recommended signs to interpret the geology, natural history, history, and

ecology of the area. [57]

By 1975, much of this work was still in the planning stages. The Interpretive Prospectus of

that year talked about the need for visually identifiable wayside exhibits in various locations,

including ones at launch ramps "where we want to hit water users with a punchy safety

message." In the late 1970s, LARO signed a contract with Harpers Ferry Center for eighteen

wayside exhibits for the Fort Spokane grounds and the six major launch ramps. The exhibits

at the ramps were kiosks with three main panels plus side panels. By 1985 these panels were

fading, and they were replaced in 1987. The new panels included a map of LARO on each

central panel plus information on boat safety inspections, personal flotation devices, and

emergency phone numbers. [58]

LARO embarked on a park-wide bulletin board plan in 1990. Park personnel used cyclic

funding to replace exposed plywood bulletin boards with boards with locking Lexan doors,

cork backing, and standardized layouts. The total number of existing bulletin boards was

sixty-four. The plan called for bulletin boards at each boat ramp, campground fee payment

station, restroom building, and concession facility in the NRA. [59]

LARO has a few short trails, most serving interpretive rather than purely transportation

purposes. Self-guided trails within the recreation area were considered in the 1950s for the

Fort Spokane, Spring Canyon, Kettle Falls, and North Marina areas. District Ranger Don

Carney established the Bunchgrass Prairie Nature Trail at Spring Canyon in 1974 and wrote a

trail booklet about the plants and geology of the area. The trails at Kettle Falls and Fort

Spokane were developed in 1979 with information on local history along both trails. The

wayside exhibits for the trail at St. Paul's Mission were installed in 1984. [60]

In 1980, the NRA's six trails totaled less than four miles in length. These consisted of

Bunchgrass Prairie Nature Trail, Lava Bluff Trail, Fort Spokane Interpretive Trail, Fort

Spokane Campground Trail, Kettle Falls Interpretive Trail, and St. Paul's Mission Trail.

Former South District Interpreter Lynne Brougher notes, "We want to go beyond these. . .
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi8d.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:23 PM]

high visitor-use areas. There's a lot of history to be told out there." The park currently has

plans to add more wayside exhibits in several new areas such as Hawk Creek. These would

include interpretive messages on geology and local history. [61]

Publications

Little written information was available for early visitors to LARO. In 1957, the park offered

a mimeographed information sheet and a map prepared by the Roosevelt Lake Log Owners

Association that listed visitor facilities, but an official Park Service map and guide to the area

had not yet been created. A boater's guide was prepared in the 1960s, and a free fourteenpage Park Service booklet was available by 1964. The early 1970s version of the boating

guide provided safety information, a guide to specific locations and features, and information

on geology, launch ramp locations, navigation lights, inundated towns, and customs

inspections. In 1975, park staff prepared a folder on fish and fishing at Lake Roosevelt

patterned after a Glacier National Park brochure. By this time the NRA had an official Park

Service folder. Harpers Ferry Center developed a two-color folder for LARO in 1970. A

four-color folder replaced this in 1984, emphasizing water recreation opportunities within the

recreation area. [62]

LARO also contracted for historical publications on the area. Researcher David Chance

prepared a booklet in the late 1970s on the military period of Fort Spokane, published by the

Pacific Northwest National Parks Association. In 1975, park staff produced four free leaflets

on Fort Colvile, St. Paul's Mission, Kettle Falls, and Fort Spokane; these were all revised in

1980. These handouts were upgraded to site bulletins in 1992, and site bulletins on Grand

Coulee Dam and on the Laser Light Show were written in cooperation with Reclamation that

year. [63]

LARO began publishing The Lake Roosevelt Mirror, its visitors' guide in newspaper form, in

1979, and it has been published most years since then. Until 1983, the Pacific Northwest

National Parks and Forests Association printed the newspaper, and concession operations

have also provided some funds. Then, because of a Servicewide policy change, the

newspaper was no longer a special project and had to be funded by a percentage of the sales

revenues generated at park sales outlets. LARO's percentage obtained in this way did not

equal the costs of the newspaper until 1986. [64]

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

laro/adhi/adhi8d.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 9)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi9d.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:24 PM]

The upper level [of Fort

Spokane] could well be

preserved for the historical

monument and a small amount

of work on the existing

structures would preserve them

for all times. Some of the old

frame buildings probably

should be removed as not being

of sufficient interest to warrant

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 9:

From Simple to Complex: Cultural Resource

Management (continued)

Fort Spokane

When the Colville Indian Agency took over Fort Spokane in 1900, the buildings required a

great deal of maintenance. Most were dismantled, relocated, or lost to fire and vandalism

over the following decades. In 1918, when the hospital opened, only two of the standing

buildings were occupied, and several were soon demolished. Most of the remaining structures

were removed between 1930 and 1960, and the orchards, gardens, and fences were

abandoned. Local farmers often used open areas for pasture and for raising cultivated crops,

and area residents continued to use the site as a picnic spot. A caretaker for the Indian

Service lived on the grounds. In 1940, as part of the Grand Coulee Dam Project, some 310

acres were transferred to Reclamation. The remaining 331.31 acres, on the higher bench,

remained under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land Management. [30]

Beginning in the 1920s, agencies and individuals suggested a number of possible uses for

Fort Spokane. The Washington Natural Parks Association thought it could be a state park.

Some people in Spokane wanted to preserve it as an historic monument. The residents of

Lincoln, at the mouth of the Spokane River, originally planned to relocate their town to the

site of Fort Spokane when their townsite was flooded by the new reservoir, but this turned

out not to be possible. The Lincoln County Historical Society and Spokane Chamber of

Commerce wanted the buildings to be restored. The Park Service became interested in the

site's possibilities as early as 1941, during the planning process for recreation on Lake

Roosevelt. The agency asked to take over jurisdiction of the fort lands in 1943 and again in

1946 when the Tri-Party Agreement was signed. The Bureau of Land Management agreed to

the transfer, but in 1949 the Spokane Business Council asserted its interest based on

aboriginal use and occupancy. The STI hoped to develop the area for recreation and operate it

to produce income for the tribe. As a result of the STI protest, a 1951 Solicitor's Opinion held

that any withdrawal of the lands for inclusion in LARO had to be authorized by Congress.

This delayed the decision for a number of years. [32]

During the 1940s and 1950s, while the Park Service

was waiting on authorization to use the land outside of

LARO's boundaries at Fort Spokane, the agency

continued planning and developing facilities on the

lower bench on land that belonged to Reclamation. The

site was seriously considered for administrative

headquarters in the 1940s. Although the regional office

continued to urge evaluation of the historic qualities of

the remaining buildings, LARO Superintendent

Greider saw little value in them, or in the site's
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 9)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi9d.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:24 PM]

the great amount of work

necessary for their

preservation. 

-- Philip A. Kearney, NPS

Landscape Architect, 1942 [31]

potential for LARO headquarters, as evidenced by this

1949 telegram about Fort Spokane: "Frame buildings

have been removed. Brick buildings and old stable

only good for salvage of brick and timbers. Fort

Spokane satisfactory for district ranger station but not

for general area headquarters." [33]

During the 1950s, Park Service personnel had mixed

feelings about the historical significance of the few buildings still standing at Fort Spokane.

In 1952, the Park Service revised its Master Plan for Fort Spokane to exclude the area

occupied by the fort. In submitting this plan to the Park Service Director, Sanford Hill, Park

Service Assistant Regional Director, explained that "Dr. Neasham [Park Service historian]

does not believe this fort is of sufficient National importance to warrant acquisition or

possible restoration by the National Park Service." The Park Service was trying at that time to

reach a compromise with the Bureau of Indian Affairs whereby the Park Service would

acquire only those acres that it absolutely needed for development of a recreational site at

Fort Spokane. By 1957, however, the regional office again was stating in correspondence that

one or more of the remaining buildings at Fort Spokane should be stabilized and used for

administrative, interpretive, or other purposes. Regional staff did not believe that the fort had

national significance, but they did agree that its state and local values were worthy of

recognition. The primary purpose of acquiring the upper bench, however, according to LARO

Superintendent Homer Robinson, was to develop a water system from the historic spring that

had served the fort and to provide land for Park Service residences and a utility area away

from the public-use area down on the lower bench. The regional office reminded Robinson

that the Park Service had a national policy of preserving historic sites and structures and that

any proposed development of Fort Spokane should not intrude on the historic scene. [34]

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

laro/adhi/adhi9d.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 10)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi10d.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:25 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 10:

An Uphill Struggle: Natural Resources

Management (continued)

Net-Pen Program

Lake Roosevelt's net-pen trout rearing program began in 1984. Win Self, owner of Seven

Bays Resort, started the program after he was advised to establish and document hatcheryraised fish survival and normal growth patterns to aid in his campaign for a fish hatchery on

the lake. This was the first time a net-pen program had been established in a part of

Washington where winter ice was a factor, although it had been successful in western

Washington. Self raised fingerling rainbow trout, supplied by the Washington Department of

Fish and Wildlife, in the bay at Seven Bays Resort. The fingerlings were put in the pens in

October and were released into the lake at catchable size in May or June. By 1986, 80

percent of the rainbow trout caught within ten miles of the resort had been reared in net pens.

The idea caught on, and by 1989, a total of fifteen net pens were operating at various places

around the lake, some run by LARO concessionaires, totaling about half a million trout per

year. Volunteers operating the net pens formed the non-profit Lake Roosevelt Development

Association. Because state and federal hatcheries did not have the ability to raise enough fish

for the program, space was included in the BPA kokanee hatcheries for raising rainbow trout

for the net pens. [50]

By 1988, the CCT was requiring each of its concessionaires to participate in the net-pen

program. LARO's staff began to schedule interpretive programs at the Kettle Falls net-pen

facility. The net-pen program resulted in a dramatic increase in the rainbow trout fishery

throughout much of Lake Roosevelt. By 1996, net-pen rainbow trout accounted for roughly

40 percent of the fish in Lake Roosevelt. [51]

Volunteer efforts for operating the net pens were flagging by 1994, however, and funding for

the net-pen program had become a problem. In 1995, the BPA partially funded the program

as mitigation for the loss of anadromous fish species as a Resident Fish Substitution Project.

The BPA paid for a coordinator, through the Lake Roosevelt Forum, and the Washington

Department of Fish and Wildlife provided fish feed. By 1999, forty-five net pens located on

the lake between Keller Ferry and Kettle Falls were raising both rainbow trout and kokanee

salmon for release into the lake. [52]

LARO Management of the Fishery, 1980s and 1990s

Most fisheries management activities on Lake Roosevelt are developed and administered by

the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, the CCT, and the STI. Park Service staff

provide support for native and introduced fisheries projects through monitoring, enforcement,

interpretation, consultation, and logistical support for research activities. In short, the Park

Service serves as an advocate for the resident fishery and for the interests of recreational
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 10)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi10d.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:25 PM]

fishing on Lake Roosevelt. LARO's efforts have often been limited, however, by the lack of

Park Service funding for fisheries management research.

White sturgeon are native to Lake Roosevelt, and as the pressure on these fish has increased,

so has LARO's interest in understanding and managing this particular fishery. Kettle Falls

district personnel in 1984 began informal surveys of the sturgeon fishery, calculating the

angler time required to catch one fish. Sturgeon fishing was growing on the lake because of

little enforcement of sturgeon fishing regulations by the state and the thrill of landing a large

fish. Local experienced fishermen concentrated on the waters north of Marcus Island.

Poaching of sturgeon was a concern by the late 1980s, and LARO began advocating a

reduced limit of one sturgeon per season. The LARO surveys found that in 1985-1987 it took

an average of 167 hours to catch one sturgeon that was kept. Today, Lake Roosevelt sturgeon

are catch-and-release only. [53]

In 1985 and subsequent years, LARO submitted requests for funding for a baseline study of

Lake Roosevelt white sturgeon. In the late 1990s, the BPA funded a study on the sturgeon

population of Lake Roosevelt that was conducted by the Washington Department of Fish and

Wildlife, the STI, and the CCT. The sturgeon were found to be concentrated primarily in the

Kettle Falls and Marcus Island areas and to be composed primarily of adults. [54]

A fishery management plan for LARO itself has not been prepared. Park management and the

Resource Management staff do not believe it is a high priority due to the CCT and STI's

extensive fishery management program funded by BPA. The tribes' emphasis on native

species, where feasible, is compatible with Park Service policy. [55]

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

laro/adhi/adhi10d.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/images/fig11-5.jpg[2/26/2014 3:38:26 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/images/fig11-5.jpg[2/26/2014 3:38:26 PM]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 11)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi11d.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:27 PM]

The presence of private

facilities at or near the

shoreline creates the

unmistakable impression that

public use within these areas is

not invited. In extreme cases,

permittees have actually denied

visitors access to Federal lands.

. . . Essentially, adjacent land

owners have de facto control of

much of Lake Roosevelt's

shoreline. 

-- LARO Resources

Management Plan, 1982 [46]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 11:

Regaining Ground: Leases and Special Use

Permits (continued)

Changes in Policy, 1980s

Special use permit policy came under even greater scrutiny starting in 1981 with the arrival

of a new superintendent, Gary J. Kuiper. He was experienced in dealing with trespass and

encroachment issues, having started with this during the early 1960s when he was a ranger at

Natchez Trace Parkway in Mississippi. "I kind of waded into that and was successful in

turning around a tradition of inappropriate use of public lands," remembered Kuiper. "That's

kind of followed me my whole career." Turning around the well-established situation at

LARO proved to be a challenge for Kuiper and his staff. [4]

Early in 1982, Chief Ranger Charles V. Janda distilled the background and current issues

concerning special use permits at LARO. He blamed the dilemma on the Tri-Party

Agreement that committed the Park Service to managing the Recreation Zone under a

multiple-use concept. He suggested that this management paradox had led to policies with no

clearly defined objectives, bringing marginal success and frequently setting untenable

precedents. He pointed to several problems and made suggestions for improvement including

standardized guidelines and procedures; clearly defined roles; a system to track special use

permits and encroachments and to circulate such information among key staff; establishment

of goals for resolving encroachments; and an active public relations program that included

regular contact with permittees. [45]

The 1982 Resources Management Plan (RMP) showed

the influence of both Kuiper and Janda. It, too, pointed

to problems stemming from the Tri-Party Agreement

that implied that "private, commercial, agricultural and

industrial uses are at least on a par with Service

developed recreational programs." Forcing the Park

Service to assume responsibility for administration of

the wide variety of leases and special use permits

caused the staff of the 1940s and 1950s to develop

land use policies more through innovation and

compromise than by strictly following Park Service

principles. Most of the encroachment problems could

be traced to current permit holders who had built on

federal land without detection. Over the years, this had

produced enough development along the shoreline to

give the impression that much of the lakeshore was

privately owned. The RMP admitted that, by 1982,

adjacent property owners essentially controlled large areas of Lake Roosevelt waterfront.
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 11)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi11d.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:27 PM]

LARO suggested three possible alternatives for dealing with the complex issue of special use

permits and encroachments. The first continued present lax and inconsistent management

practices; the second introduced strict and consistent enforcement measures; and the third, the

preferred alternative, was a combination of both. Under this approach, the Park Service was

to analyze the problem thoroughly, review objectives, and develop policies and guidelines.

Managers would be allowed some latitude in dealing with encroachments to mitigate

hardships faced by property owners. Good public relations were important to keep the

situation from degenerating into adversarial relationships. [47]

Superintendent Gary Kuiper and his staff developed an Encroachment Plan for LARO in

1982. Although all encroachments were considered violations, Kuiper urged his staff to

approach those responsible in a neighborly, non-intimidating fashion. "If our objective is

legally and morally valid," he wrote, "our methods must be of equal stature and above

reproach." He cautioned his staff not to expect an instant turnaround on a situation that had

been building for two or three decades. The Encroachment Plan outlined procedures that

designated the District Ranger as the key person in the resolution of all encroachments. Other

LARO staff, including the Land Management Specialist, Chief Ranger, and Superintendent,

were available for advice and assistance but only if requested by the ranger in charge. The

Chief Ranger directed the program, reporting to the Superintendent. The plan emphasized

written communications to document each encroachment, with all key personnel kept

informed. District Rangers were to inventory all encroachments by June 1, documenting new

ones. Minor infractions could be resolved immediately, but more complex ones would need

investigation. Special use permits could resolve some encroachments, but the plan cautioned

against this approach: "An encroachment is, first and foremost, a violation of the law, not a

logical extension of a Special Use Permit or cause for its issuance." [48]

The push to regain control of federal lands at LARO was further strengthened with the arrival

of Kelly Cash in 1983. He became Assistant Superintendent, bringing to the job his

experience as a planner with the former Bureau of Outdoor Recreation in Seattle. Cash

immersed himself in the difficult issues of special park uses, writing much of the policy and

correspondence during his twelve-year tenure. "It was like pulling teeth," he recalled, "but it

had to be done." [49]

In January 1986, LARO held a parkwide staff meeting at Kettle Falls to discuss new

guidelines for special use permits. After dividing the permits into various categories of uses,

individuals agreed to draft guidelines. They were encouraged to think about what they were

trying to achieve as well as what the resource should look like in twenty years. They also

agreed that new permits did not have to be handled the same way as existing ones. [50]

LARO adopted a policy in 1987 to use special use permits as leverage to encourage

permittees to remove encroachments. This did not involve putting encroachments under

permit, as had been done in the case of the Moody cabin and others over the years. Instead, if

verbal negotiation with the permittee failed to produce results, the Park Service could apply

special conditions to any existing permits in an effort to promote compliance. For instance,

LARO could recommend against renewal until the encroachment was removed. Where the

permit had already been renewed, the park could shorten the renewal period to ensure

compliance. If the permit were not renewed, the encroachment could be removed by LARO,

with the owner paying costs or, in the most difficult cases, it could be referred for legal

action. Finally, LARO could refuse to issue the permittee any further permits until all

encroachments were removed. [51]

Just as LARO was moving to tighten up special uses, the Park Service did the same with the

publication in 1986 of the "Special Park Uses Guideline NPS-53." The new policy stated

clear limitations on private use of federal lands, "A special park use must not be granted
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 11)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi11d.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:27 PM]

unless the authority for allowing the action can be clearly cited, its need or value is

confirmed, and its occurrence has been judged to cause no derogation of the values or

purposes for which the park was established, except as directly and specifically provided by

law." Derogation involved a judgment call based on the particular park and the context of the

park use. It included not just physical resources, but visitor experience as well. The Park

Service encouraged phasing out existing activities and uses that conflicted with this policy.

The agency knew that permittees would resist the changes, so it stressed the need to keep

careful administrative records to support all decisions. Before any controversial termination,

park managers needed to assess the performance of the permittee over time, examine the

legal/policy implications of both approval and denial of the permit, assess the impacts, and

list alternatives that might achieve desired ends. [52]

As LARO personnel moved into action, they sought approval from Reclamation for their new

policies. Following an interagency meeting in November 1986 to discuss land management at

LARO, Reclamation's Regional Director restated his agency's policy. In general, it did not

object to other land uses as long as they did not interfere with the primary purposes of the

project. Reclamation did not, however, approve of "private or semiprivate uses" of

Reclamation lands unless denial of such use would amount to a hardship, such as with a

utility right-of-way. The Bureau had transferred management responsibility to the Park

Service, but it still expected coordination of the two agencies on land-use decisions. It

deferred to the Park Service on all other management issues. The Park Service Regional

Director compared Reclamation policy with NPS-53 and found the two "very compatible."

He was relieved, since individuals cited for encroachments often questioned Park Service

authority and policy. "As we address these conflicts, it will be beneficial to cite the mutually

supportable policies of both our agencies." He promised that the Park Service would work

with Reclamation at Lake Roosevelt when developing new land-use guidelines. [53]

During this same time, the Park Service requested permission from Reclamation to keep the

fees it collected from special use permits to help offset administrative costs of managing

permits and leases at Lake Roosevelt. These expenses had risen steadily with the increase in

permits and the complexity of the situation, yet LARO received no funding for this work in

its base appropriation and no reimbursement from Reclamation. Instead, the agency used

funding designated for both visitor services and resources management to administer permits.

The Park Service estimated the costs at $50,000 per year, with revenues from permits and

leases totaling approximately $22,000 per year in FY1984-1986. Reclamation agreed in

September 1987 to let the Park Service keep the fees to partially offset administrative costs.

Within a few months, Gordon D. Boyd, LARO's Chief of Interpretation & Resource

Management, did a careful analysis of the costs of administering special use permits. The

twelve staffers working part time on permits amounted to 2.11 full-time equivalents for the

permanent, full-time employees and .10 full-time equivalents for the temporary rangers.

Adding wages, benefits, and support costs, the total came to $66,275 per year. Boyd

estimated FY1988 permit fees would total $23,242, leaving $43,033 to come from the Park

Base. [54]

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

laro/adhi/adhi11d.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4f.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:28 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 4:

Agreements and Disagreements: From TriParty Agreement to Multi-Party Agreement

(continued)

Taking Action, 1972-1973

While the agencies were looking into revision of the basic operating agreement, the STI

pursued a strategy of objectives effectively designed to revise the way that the Tri-Party

Agreement applied to the Spokane Tribe. These included receipt of revenue from all leasing

of freeboard lands; recognition of tribal jurisdiction over all activities in the freeboard area,

such as hunting, fishing, and camping, as well as the right to collect revenue from these; and

recognition of the tribe as the agency issuing permits in the freeboard area, with no charges

made for tribal members. Attorney Dellwo suggested that these jurisdictional questions would

be resolved if the Secretary recognized the "all but exclusive ownership" approach to

freeboard lands. [92]

R. K. Seely, Bureau Operations Manager at Coulee Dam, disagreed with the STI's requests

because of the precedent they might set. For instance, the CCT had sold much of the valuable

lands bordering the lake to non-Indians. "To give the Indians any control over the freeboard

area would put them between the landowners and the lake," he wrote, "which of course is

completely unacceptable to the white landowners." Seely did not believe the tribes should be

allowed to keep revenue from freeboard leases since the Park Service had to turn over all the

fees it collected. He worried that tribal control of the freeboard area might restrict

Reclamation from controlling lands in dangerous slide zones. Furthermore, Seely was

concerned that the tribes might restrict non-Indian use of these lands. He concluded by

emphasizing the need for Reclamation and/or the Park Service to keep control of the

freeboard area. [93]

The STI had an opportunity early in 1973 to take control of some contested ground. When

the tribe heard that the Park Service planned to close Little Falls campground, it asked to take

over management of the site, popular with tribal members. The Park Service then reversed its

decision, claiming that it should keep the campground open since it was so popular and that

because it lay within freeboard lands, it was up to the agency to manage the area. The tribe

met privately with Reclamation to discuss management of the freeboard area and was

encouraged when the agency asked them to submit a management plan. LARO

Superintendent Burgen recognized that the tribe was serious about its request and noted, "Our

credibility with the Tribe, solidifying or shattering our relationship, is on the block." He

recommended getting approval from Reclamation and "political figures" for this transfer and

any others, and he outlined how such a deal could take place with revisions in the Tri-Party

Agreement. [94]

The Regional Director recommended approval of a special use permit to allow the STI to

manage Little Falls campground. Although relations between the Park Service and the tribe
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4f.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:28 PM]

were generally good, he warned that "disapproval of this request could easily escalate ill will

felt by the Spokane Tribe and radical elements of the Indian Rights Movement into a highly

publicized and possibly dangerous confrontation." [95] The Washington office granted

approval. Before the transfer was completed, however, the STI angered Burgen by passing a

resolution to impose fees for fishing, camping, and picnicking on the Spokane Arm. He told

Glenn Galbraith, STI Executive Director, that he would "vehemently object" to such fees for

any area, especially Pierre, administered by the Park Service. He noted that once the tribe had

taken over management, they could assess fees at Little Falls, but if they tried to do the same

at Pierre campground, the Park Service would close the site. [96]

The STI also took its concerns directly to the Secretary of the Interior in June 1973. In

addition to jurisdictional control of the freeboard area, the tribe asked for exclusive rights to

protect and control archaeological remains; transfer of Fort Spokane, along with the

freeboard area on the opposite side of the Spokane Arm, to tribal control; and revenue from

both water storage and power production. [97]

At the same time the STI was pushing to expand tribal rights, the CCT also revealed its

concerns and objectives. The tribes had given up on the Task Force, called for the dismissal

of Emmet Willard, and asked to deal directly with the Secretary of the Interior. Their goals

included employment for tribal members at Grand Coulee Dam; preferential power rates for

planned development on the reservation; irrigation projects for the reservation; tribal use of

freeboard areas; and return of slide areas where there was no danger of slides. They reiterated

their claim to a percentage of the power produced at the dam using their water rights and

riverbed, as well as the valuable dam site. Finally, they wanted exclusive jurisdiction over

hunting, fishing, and boating within the reservation boundaries, and they requested

negotiations to phase the Park Service out of the reservation by allowing the CCT to take

control of Park Service facilities there. One agency official worried that loss of the

campgrounds in the Indian Zones would lead to fragmented administration at Lake Roosevelt,

changing it into more of a recreation area for local groups instead of a national area. He noted

that over the years since 1946, "many non-Indians have come to feel that this area belongs to

all persons." [98]

Activists jumped into the jurisdictional dispute again in the spring of 1973. The Colville

Agency issued a special use permit to a CCT member for Barnaby Island, as well as an

island to the northwest and a small area of freeboard lands. The BIA did not notify the Park

Service of the lease, and the agency discovered it entirely by accident when a maintenance

man stopped at Barnaby on April 27 and found two people there. Stephanie Fuller, a

Nespelem resident, mentioned possible development of the site and said that both the BIA

and Colville Business Council were willing to make it a test case. Paul Larson, LARO Chief

Ranger, called the BIA and talked with Bob Jones, who was surprised that the Park Service

knew about the lease. Jones admitted that the BIA had approved it in January but had not

planned to tell either the Park Service or Reclamation yet. He asked that Larson not tell

Reclamation, but Larson refused. Larson then talked with George Davis, Acting

Superintendent of the Colville Agency, to protest the BIA action and ask that nothing be

done to interfere with public use of the developed site. Davis later told Larson that the CCT

was unwilling to wait any longer for clarification of their rights. The BIA supported the

tribe's contention that it had a right to these lands. At a subsequent meeting in early May,

CCT and local BIA officials continued to challenge Park Service authority and pushed

Larson to admit that the Tri-Party Agreement needed revision. Larson said that he hoped

nothing would happen on Barnaby Island to provoke an "emotional confrontation" and

reiterated the need for continued dialogue to work through differences. Council members,

however, said that they would back Fuller in her lease. [99]

For LARO Superintendent Burgen, things were getting
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4f.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:28 PM]

In the last six weeks a series of

events have taken place within

the Colville and Spokane Tribal

Councils that makes the

management of Coulee Dam

National Recreation Area

nearly impossible on lands and

water adjacent to the two

reservations. In effect, the

Tribes, who in the past have

stated that they consider the

Tri-Party Agreement null and

void, are now exercising rights

that they claim to be virtually

exclusive and have taken

actions that usurp National

Park Service responsibilities

and create an uncertain

situation for the general public.

-- William N. Burgen, LARO

Superintendent, June 7, 1973.

[100]

out of hand. In addition to the Barnaby Island incident,

the Spokane Business Council passed a resolution

claiming all the water surrounding the reservation and

extending to the far banks instead of the midpoint of

the reservoir. The Park Service had been working on a

special use permit to allow the STI to manage the

Little Falls campground, but the tribe decided not to

sign at the last minute and instead announced that it

might start charging visitors to use both Little Falls

and Pierre camping areas. In addition, a group of

young Spokane Indians who claimed to be starting a

cultural area had been given permission from the

Tribal Council to bulldoze a launch ramp at the site.

Burgen warned the regional office that both the CCT

and STI had decided to take control of the Indian

Zones and, in the case of the STI, claim even more.

"Neither Tribe places any weight on challenges to their

right by this office," he continued. "The situation

obviously discards the Tri-Party Agreement and with

it any workable management of the Indian Zone on our

part." Burgen was concerned about the Park Service

not having a sufficient response to help visitors who

faced potential restrictions by the tribes. [101]

In the midst of this uncertainty, the regional office requested a reexamination of the Tri-Party

Agreement. The Washington Office responded that they were unclear just what part of the

present agreement seemed unsatisfactory, and they asked for further detailed information and

recommendations. The Regional Director had sent information through memos and phone

calls to alert the Washington staff to a situation that could become "newsworthy and possibly

embarrassing to the Secretary." He assured them, however, that "We feel fully competent to

handle it at this level." [102]

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

laro/adhi/adhi4f.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4e.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:29 PM]

Task Force members heard

about the reality of reservation

life from a passionate and angry

Mel Tonasket. He described the

terrible poverty and 40 percent

unemployment rate on the

Colville Reservation and

wondered why just 5 Indians

were employed at the dam with

its workforce of nearly 290

people. "The more I talk the

more angry I get, because I see

my people hungry, I see my

people living in shanty houses

and I go off reservation and I

see new . . . homes going up all

over," he said. "I see a white

man cry if he only makes $6,000

a year. I could cry everyday."

[81]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 4:

Agreements and Disagreements: From TriParty Agreement to Multi-Party Agreement

(continued)

1972 Task Force

Increasing tension at Lake Roosevelt led Secretary of the Interior Rogers C. B. Morton to

appoint a Task Force to hear tribal complaints and attempt to find solutions for the conflicts

plaguing the recreation area and adjoining reservations. Chaired by Emmet E. Willard,

Morton's Field Representative in Portland, the Task Force included members of the Colville

Business Council and Spokane Tribal Council; tribal attorneys; various specialists from both

the Colville and Spokane agencies; local and regional representatives of the Park Service,

Reclamation, and BIA; representatives of the Corps of Engineers and Bonneville Power

Administration (BPA); specialists with the Department of the Interior; and various

Washington state officials.

When the Task Force first convened on February 7,

1972, tribal representatives raised issues of concern,

giving agency personnel a chance to hear their

grievances. Mel Tonasket, CCT Chairman, touched on

many hot-button issues: losses of land, buildings,

cemeteries, and fish stemming from reservoir

construction; lack of compensation for these losses;

and the claim of rights under the Winters Doctrine for

the use of Indian waters for power production. He also

discussed the frustrating irony that Grand Coulee was

built to facilitate irrigation and generate electricity,

using Indian land and water, yet the reservations had

no irrigation projects and paid high electrical rates.

Others mentioned the irritations caused by both the

Park Service and the Corps requiring permits for the

same project, but LARO Superintendent Howe noted

that neither he nor STI attorney Dellwo had been able

to change this. Dellwo said that he would like to see

the Task Force reevaluate the Tri-Party Agreement

and clarify the issue of paramount rights. [82]

When the discussion turned to Indian employment,

Howe noted that he had hired two Indians for his permanent staff using excepted

appointments, as the BIA had also done. He admitted that this might not be legal but said that

Civil Service in Seattle knew of his actions. Willard assured him that DOI officials believed

such use of excepted appointments was legal, and Sherwin Broadhead, Superintendent of the
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4e.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:29 PM]

Colville Agency, expressed his appreciation for Howe's initiative. [83]

After this first meeting, Willard evidently asked members to submit written questions to help

guide the direction of the Task Force. Some dealt with topics brought up in the first session,

such as land acquisition and the need to revise the Tri-Party Agreement, while others headed

into new areas. Park Service Regional Director John A. Rutter was concerned about

jurisdictional issues. What were the implications of the CCT move to require tribal fishing

licenses? What were the geographical limits of this tribal authority? What court system

would try these cases? Would the tribes honor the established responsibilities of the Park

Service and Reclamation within LARO boundaries? Would they allow the Park Service to

help with recreation planning on reservation lands that adjoin LARO? Did the tribes honor

the original acquisition of Indian lands by the federal government? [84]

The STI, largely quiet at the first Task Force meeting, presented a lengthy formal statement

to members of the group in May 1972. Drafted by attorney Dellwo and signed by tribal

chairman Alex Sherwood, the document built a case for liberal interpretation of Indian rights,

with far-reaching associated rights under the Winters Doctrine. Since the tribe had received

so little monetary compensation for lands taken, the "remaining values must be reflected in

the rights and property interests the Spokanes still retain in the resulting reservoir area."

Specifically, the tribe claimed title to the riverbeds and banks up to the pre-dam average

high-water mark, as well as the land between this high-water mark and the 1,290-foot level.

In addition, it retained all but exclusive ownership of the freeboard lands between the 1,290

and 1,310 levels. The STI wanted the Indian Zone expanded to include all of the Spokane

Arm and the east half of the Columbia River, and it claimed all but exclusive rights to control

the use of this area, including regulations, licenses, and permits. The tribe asked for

compensation for the loss of the fishery, the original taking of both tribal lands and waters,

and the continued use of these for project purposes. In addition, the tribe claimed the right to

share revenue from the operations of Grand Coulee Dam. Because of these claimed rights,

the STI announced that it would now take over control of water pumps, docks, marinas,

concessions, and other commercial enterprises through tribal permits, and that it was

considering requiring licenses for boating and fishing in tribal waters. It also planned to take

eventual control of all recreation in the Indian Zone, with immediate control of both Pierre

and Little Falls campgrounds, by issuing permits and charging for public use. Although these

claims ran counter to the 1946 Tri-Party Agreement, the STI claimed no involvement with

this agreement and stated, "No Indian leader to this date recalls any tribal approval in 1946,

and the instrument itself did not come to light again until recent years." [85] (Despite this

claim, both the CCT and STI tribal governments had approved the draft agreement formally

in 1946.) [86]

The Task Force hit rougher waters within a few months. The group decided in May to

investigate tribal water rights, assisted by William Veeder, an attorney for the BIA

specializing in the subject. Both tribes asked the various governmental agencies to outline

their jurisdiction and administrative authority prior to a meeting on August 1st. Willard,

however, responded that the agencies were just in the stage of compiling facts and were not

ready to outline jurisdictions. He consequently recommended postponing the meeting until all

were ready to participate. The tribes were unwilling to wait, though, and warned Willard that

they planned to continue with the meeting. They believed that Willard was not cooperating in

their efforts to define their rights since no definition was possible until the tribes understood

where they had jurisdiction. Neither Willard nor representatives from the Park Service,

Reclamation, or BPA attended the August 1972 meeting, where much of the discussion

involved representatives from the Douglas County Public Utility District and its Monse Dam

on the Colville Reservation. Other topics included fishing rights and the importance of

establishing boundaries for tribal and agency jurisdiction. Tonasket expressed regret that

other agencies did not attend and warned, "There better be some drastic changes or this
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi4e.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:29 PM]

whole task force is undermined by lack of communication, cooperation, and respect." [87]

Tensions continued at a meeting, outside the Task Force, with CCT committee members,

Colville Agency Superintendent Sherwin Broadhead, and LARO Superintendent William

Burgen and Chief Ranger Paul Larson. Much of the discussion centered on problems at the

Keller campground where children had been shooting birds on nearby reservation lands and

campers had been riding bicycles outside boundaries. Tribal representatives believed that the

Park Service should control its campers, and tribal member Al Aubertin asked the agency to

close the campground. Indian concerns also included the Tri-Party Agreement. When Burgen

reminded them, "We are operating under the agreement and you people don't recognize it,"

Broadhead replied, "If you continue to operate under that agreement you can operate and

ignore us." He suggested reexamining the agreement. [88]

Water rights and jurisdictional issues dominated the discussion at the Task Force meeting

held on September 19, 1972, in Wellpinit. Indian advocates wanted to clarify tribal rights

under the Winters Doctrine, and CCT attorney Alvin Ziontz warned both state and federal

officials not to try to regulate water rights issues on reservations. "This is . . . a political

struggle," he explained. The tribes found cooperation from Reclamation in their request for

help with irrigation projects on the reservations, but they challenged the agency over its

taking of Indian lands for both the dam and the reservoir, and its continued takings for slide

areas within the project boundaries. They also challenged the BPA to pay the tribes for the

use of their water, just as the agency paid Canada. Once again, the Indians claimed title to the

river beds and full access across freeboard lands. They believed their jurisdiction included

"exclusive access and full control by the Tribes subject only to those elements imperatively

required to maintain and operate the project." [89]

The Tri-Party Agreement also came under fire at the September meeting. When Jack

Christopher, with Reclamation in Boise, asked if the tribes wanted to reopen the Tri-Party

Agreement, William Veeder responded, "Oh, we are trying to destroy that." Christopher,

along with Wayne Howe from the Park Service's regional office, indicated willingness to

discuss the agreement. Howe acknowledged that it was "a very hard document to work with"

because it was out-of-date and thus probably should be redone. [90] Later that fall, Regional

Director John A. Rutter reported to the National Park Service Director about the situation at

Lake Roosevelt. While there had been no physical confrontations, feelings were still running

high on both sides. He warned that confrontations were possible given the recent national

incidents connected with the Caravan of Broken Treaties. The tribes were impatient with the

glacial pace of the Task Force, while non-Indians believed the Park Service should take

things slowly. "We feel that both the Secretary and the Service could be embarrassed if the

situation is not addressed promptly," added Rutter. He suggested a revision of the Tri-Party

Agreement as a good way to start to resolve the issues, but he noted that any such work

should involve legal advice from the Office of the Solicitor as well as input from both LARO

and regional office staff. [91]

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

laro/adhi/adhi4e.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5e.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:30 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 5:

Charting the Course: Managers and

Management Issues (continued)

Landslides

Landslides along the shores of Lake Roosevelt were a major problem in the early years of the

reservoir when the rising waters caused hillsides to slump. Lake drawdowns continue to

cause landslides because the steep, saturated banks become unstable when support from the

water in the lake is removed. Waves from boat wakes or high winds also cause shoreline

erosion, and other minor factors include heavy rainfall, earthquakes, irrigation of adjoining

land, freezing and thawing, building construction, and wedging action by tree roots.

Building a concrete retaining wall at Evans Beach, early 1960s.

Gabions and metal-sheet piling have also been used to reduce

erosion at developed sites. Photo courtesy of National Park Service,

Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area (LARO.HQ.MENG).

Many slides occurred in the 1940s, both as the reservoir filled and after it reached high pool

in mid-July of 1942. Perhaps the largest was a 1949 slide in Hawk Creek Bay that created a

wave some sixty-five feet high that swept across the lake and continued more than one
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5e.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:30 PM]

hundred feet up the opposite bank. All told, about five hundred slides occurred between 1941

and 1953. Sand slides along the lakeshore usually stabilized after one slippage, but slides in

silt and clay slid repeatedly. [71]

The Bureau of Reclamation has always had lead responsibility for dealing with landslides

and shore erosion along Lake Roosevelt, but it is really a joint concern with the Park Service

because landslides directly affect LARO operations. Reclamation policy since the 1940s has

been to acquire any lands that are located within potential slide areas that have been or could

be readily improved. If landowners are unwilling to sell, Reclamation seeks releases from

damages due to slides. Between 1941 and 1969, some six thousand acres of slide-prone land

were acquired. For land in potential slide areas within the two reservations, legislation

amending the Act of June 29, 1940, allowed the federal government to take such land without

challenge. The government did have to pay fair market value, however. Graves from a

number of cemeteries had to be relocated in the 1940s and 1950s because they were located

in critical slide areas. [72]

Construction of homes along the lakeshore in the 1960s led to higher land values.

Reclamation focused on acquiring unstable areas that were most likely to be developed.

During the 1970s, the CCT expressed concerns about the Reclamation program to acquire

land threatened by landslide activity. They wanted any such lands that had shown no slide

activity returned to the tribes. Some people believed that land had been taken under false

pretexts. This remained an issue into the 1980s, but Reclamation continues to acquire land in

potential slide areas. [73]

LARO's Superintendent and staff were quite involved with the landslide studies of the 1940s

because identification of potential slide areas affected planning of recreational areas and

issuing of special use permits. As LARO Superintendent Claude Greider commented in 1950,

"It is becoming increasingly evident that geological factors are more and more important to

our planning program." The Park Service solicited help from the U.S. Geological Survey

(USGS) in evaluating areas proposed for major recreational development, summer homes,

and industrial or agricultural uses. As a result, USGS, Reclamation, and the Park Service

agreed on plans for a multi-year study, starting in 1949, conducted by Fred Jones of the

USGS. LARO provided boat transportation for the project. The primary purpose was to

understand slide conditions along the Upper Columbia River, but Jones also provided detailed

informal reports on specific sites as requested by the Park Service. Discovery of potential

slide conditions necessitated new master plans for certain areas, such as Fort Spokane. LARO

began to install warning signs in 1951 to alert the public to danger from landslides and to

diminish Park Service liability in case a landslide harmed a park visitor. [74]

Although landslide activity decreased after the 1950s, some large slides did occur in later

years. In March 1969, a landslide dammed the Spokane River for nearly thirty-six hours. The

river rose approximately thirty feet behind the 15 million cubic yards of earth before

breaching the dam. This and other slides that year were associated with the extreme

drawdown due to the construction of the third powerhouse. Overall slide activity increased

between 1969 and 1975 and then tapered off again. LARO's 1968 master plan noted that

landslides were still a major planning consideration. Erosion of the lakeshore by wave action

also remained a problem at some developed areas and caused many trees to fall into the lake.

Reclamation had an ongoing program to stabilize the most critical slide areas. LARO

maintenance personnel began measuring all eroding shorelines in major developed areas in

1972 and installed concrete sea walls, gabion bags, or riprap to counteract the erosion

process. [75]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5e.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:30 PM]

Sockemtickem slide near Fort Spokane, April 1969. Photo courtesy of

National Park Service, Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area

(LARO.FS).

The 1961 Jones report determined the relationship between increasing frequency and

magnitude of landslides and increasing severity of reservoir drawdown. It served as a guide

for later investigations along the lakeshore. Reclamation initiated annual inspections and

photographs of active landslides along Lake Roosevelt in the 1960s. These trips often

identified problem areas, such as roads that needed additional marking or berms to prevent

traffic in areas with active landslides. A program of selective logging was initiated along the

lakeshore to harvest timber within a short distance of the water line. Since the 1970s,

Reclamation has tried to avoid creating landslides by keeping the rate of drawdowns less than

1.5 vertical feet per day. [76]

Various experts and officials spent considerable time in the late 1940s and early 1950s

studying landslide potential at the landings for the Gifford-Inchelium ferry. This ferry,

located 78.5 miles upstream from Grand Coulee Dam, was an important transportation link

for Indians living on the reservation. Prior to any landslide assessment, the ferry owner

obtained a twenty-year lease from Reclamation in 1941 to operate the ferry and build

approach roads over federal land. In 1949, an examination revealed that the approach on the

Gifford side (Stevens County) was in a critical slide area. Reclamation believed that the Park

Service should help find a new location and that the counties should build and maintain the

approach roads between the federal boundaries and the main highway. Fred Jones of USGS

proposed possible replacement ferry landings 1.7 miles downstream. Feelings ran high on all

sides over the location of the new landings and responsibility for construction of access

roads; even the current owner remained undecided about continued operations. LARO

Superintendent Greider spent a great deal of time responding to public and agency inquiries

about the situation. [77]

The Park Service allowed the ferry to keep operating during the 1950 season while it worked

with the operator and other agencies to find a solution. In early 1950, Greider recommended

that the ferry be moved to the proposed site 1.7 miles downstream. LARO agreed to build
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5e.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:30 PM]

and maintain the sections of the approach roads within the NRA boundaries. The question of

who would build the roads between LARO and the main highways, however, was difficult to

resolve. LARO maintained it was a county responsibility, but the two counties - and the Park

Service Director — believed that Reclamation should do the work since the creation of the

reservoir had caused the problem. Having reached an impasse, the Park Service canceled the

ferry license at the end of 1950. As expected, county commissioners complained to their

congressman about the hardships caused by the closure. Within six weeks, a compromise was

reached whereby the existing Inchelium landing was retained and the Gifford landing was

moved about one mile downstream to where old State Highway 22 ran into the lake. LARO

built an approach road to connect the old and new highways. The ferry service became a

public utility operated by the counties involved, under a lease agreement with the Park

Service, and the counties assumed all liability. [78]

The seasonal Gifford-Inchelium ferry ceased operations in 1974 because the business was not

profitable. As a result, people had to drive an additional one and a half hours to cross the

river. The CCT asked Reclamation to operate a free ferry service at the site. As the CCT and

BIA solicited Congress for funding, Reclamation provided interim emergency service with a

helicopter and radio communications. The Solicitor's Office determined in 1975 that

Reclamation was not responsible for the ferry. Instead, the Department of the Interior agreed

to fund the ferry, with the BIA taking over operations. The first BIA ferry was a barge and

tug loaned by Reclamation, but in 1981 the sixty-passenger Columbia Princess took over the

service. In 1994, the CCT took over operation of the ferry from the family that had run it

since 1975. [79]

Floating Debris on Lake Roosevelt

In the 1940s and 1950s, floating logs, trees, and other "woody debris" on Lake Roosevelt

caused great concern to LARO and Reclamation staff. This debris was largely composed of

logs, snags, and slash from logging operations, as well as uprooted trees and brush from

lakeshore erosion that extended from Keller Ferry upstream. After the flood of 1948, the

banks of Lake Roosevelt were lined with a band of "trash" as much as fifty feet in width. The

debris piled up on beaches, while logs and "deadheads" (logs that have sunk at one end)

posed a hazard to small boats and float planes. If the debris were not collected, it continued

down the Columbia River and passed over a series of dams. Every year, spring high water

brought more from Canada and large tributaries, and the floating debris filled the lake in a

solid mass from the dam to above Spring Canyon. Debris cleanup was one of the first

activities to receive funding at LARO. [80]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5e.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:30 PM]

Driftwood on beach, Lake Roosevelt, 1956. Photo courtesy of

National Park Service, Harpers Ferry Center.

During years that sawmills were booming and towing logs on the lake, stray logs were also a

constant management headache. LARO Superintendent Claude Greider began to address the

problem of stray logs and "deadheads" by informing logging operators on Lake Roosevelt that

Reclamation would collect loose saw logs floating on the lake. In May 1948, Reclamation

began removing stray logs from the lake and its shores. The Park Service regional office

consulted with the Director about the possibility of LARO granting a permit to a private

individual to boom and take possession of logs in consideration for his agreement to clean up

the debris, but ownership questions made this impossible. The Park Service did, however,

have authority to remove floating logs and debris from the lake as long as the merchantable

timber was returned to the legal owners. [81]

The Roosevelt Lake Log Owners Association, formed in the early 1950s, hired a contractor to

salvage loose logs. After just a short time, they terminated the Grand Coulee Navigation

Company, the first contractor as well as LARO concessionaire, because of unsatisfactory

work. They next hired Hal Marchant, a former LARO maintenance employee, to salvage their

logs. This work, while improving the floating debris situation somewhat, did not eliminate all

the trash from the lake. [82]

LARO received its first funding for debris cleanup in June 1949. The work was delayed

because a sudden lowering of the lake level trapped most of the debris high on the shore. But

starting in September, and continuing the following spring, LARO hired a contractor to use

tugboats to move the material to the dam. Greider optimistically planned to have the lake free

of debris by summer 1950, thus removing one of the barriers to increased use of the lake by

boaters. In the fall, crews cleaned up the Kettle Falls developed area and boomed off the

principal coves in the area to exclude driftwood. Work continued in the spring on other areas

of intensive use. [83]

The onset of the Korean War slowed the reservoir cleanup, however. LARO had to

temporarily shelve plans to install a trash boom in the Evans area to trap debris, so it did not
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5e.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:30 PM]

At the present time, [Lake

Roosevelt] is navigable only

with danger. Boats have to pick

their way between the great

floats of debris and it is

desirable that this [cleanup]

work be gotten under way as

soon as funds can be made

available. This is important

more for the clearing of the

debris so that it will not have to

pass over Coulee Dam or any of

the dams below, as well as from

the point of view of boating on

the lake, which, of course, is of

secondary importance during

this war period.

-- Frank A. Kittredge, Corps

Chief Engineer, Region 3, 1950

[85]

spend all of the $28,000 that was appropriated for reservoir cleanup during FY1950. Instead,

some of the money was transferred out of the cleanup fund to pay for equipment, signs,

construction of the Kettle Falls ranger station, and dredging. But, the Washington Office did

instruct LARO to insert $10,000 per year under cyclic maintenance in their budget request for

debris cleanup. [84]

Greider strongly supported a 1951 proposal to trap

debris at the upper end of Lake Roosevelt and on the

major tributaries. The debris would be boomed and left

on beaches during the winter; the following spring, it

would be burned or pushed into the lake to be carried

over the Grand Coulee Dam spillway. He felt that

simply clearing the bathing beaches was not enough

since remaining debris continued to pose navigation

hazards. In addition, strong winds could blow debris,

damaging docks and other waterfront facilities. He

estimated the amount of debris already floating in the

lake as enough to fill thousands of railroad flat cars.

The 1951 plan would have largely eliminated the

existing floating debris from Lake Roosevelt, but the

Park Service would have needed to do ongoing trash

removal every spring. No part of this plan was

accomplished, however. Instead, the clean-up program

of the 1950s consisted of simply impounding debris in

booms just above the dam and periodically allowing

the debris to go over the spillway. By 1960, the

volume of debris on Lake Roosevelt was estimated to

be three times as large as it had been in 1950. [86]

In 1960, the Columbia Basin Interagency Committee studied the debris cleanup problem

along the entire Columbia River and set up a task force to explore solutions. As a result of

the study, Reclamation, Park Service, Grant County and Chelan County Public Utility

Districts, and the Army Corps of Engineers signed a cooperative agreement on May 26, 1961.

Reclamation was to construct, operate, and maintain debris collection and disposal facilities

on Lake Roosevelt, while the Park Service was to keep the shoreline free of debris, thus

preventing beached debris from refloating. The five-year project was anticipated to cost

$150,000 for facilities (primarily the boom at China Bar, twenty-five miles below the border)

plus $50,000 per year for operation and maintenance. The costs were allocated as follows:

Corps 37.5 percent, Reclamation 37.5 percent, Grant County PUD 16 percent, and Chelan

County PUD 9 percent. [87]

The Park Service regional office realized that the work might require additional

appropriations for LARO, so it included $25,000 for five years, starting in 1961, to cover the

project. During the drawdown, LARO used four D-4 bulldozers equipped with brush blades

to pile debris. Crews then gathered scattered pieces by hand and burned the piles. The Park

Service also agreed to remove undermined trees along the edge of the high-water line as part

of its debris removal program. [88]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5e.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:30 PM]

LARO Chief Ranger Arthur Holmes in boat among floating debris,

1960. Photo courtesy of National Park Service, Lake Roosevelt

National Recreation Area (LARO.HQ.MENG).

The debris cleanup project was quite labor intensive. In 1962, for example, heavy spring

runoff resulted in about 70 percent "re-littering" of the beaches that had been cleaned the

previous year. Thirty-three miles of beaches were cleared by thirteen men working for three

months. The piles of debris had to be burned and piled twice to achieve nearly complete

burning. At the end of the year, there were still 200-250 acres of debris outside of booms on

Lake Roosevelt. A year later, LARO estimated that 75 percent of the accumulation of debris

had been disposed of, and Superintendent Homer Robinson noted that local boaters were

very pleased with the results. [89]

Under the 1960s program, Reclamation installed a boom at China Bend on the upper end of

the lake to catch and dispose of debris coming down the Columbia River from Canada. This

was largely successful, although some debris did escape the boom and other debris floated

into the reservoir from tributaries. Contractors hired by the cooperating agencies (not the Park

Service) periodically collected and burned the debris from China Bend and the boom just

above the dam. Later construction of dams, such as Arrow Dam, upstream in Canada reduced

some of the debris coming to Lake Roosevelt from that source. [90]

The Park Service spent almost $122,000 on the lakeshore debris disposal program between

1961 and 1965, excluding capital investments. After that period, though, the work was

reduced. LARO spent $14,000 on debris cleanup from 1966-1968. The next year, however,

the amount of debris was much higher than usual because of the drawdowns for construction

of the third powerhouse. Collection facilities at the mouth of the Kettle River were completed

in 1969. A new challenge arose in the early 1970s with the passage of new national air

pollution standards, and LARO realized that its annual lakeshore program of piling debris

and burning the piles might have to be phased out. [91]
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5e.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:30 PM]

Portable sawmill owned by Hal Marchant, downstream of Spring

Canyon, 1957. The sawmill was mounted on a barge and towed to

places on Lake Roosevelt where drifting logs had accumulated.

Photo courtesy of National Park Service, Lake Roosevelt National

Recreation Area (LARO.HQ.MENG).

In 1972, LARO contracted for a study of potential uses for Lake Roosevelt debris. The

consultants noted that most of the debris at that time originated in the United States. The

boom at China Bend was not working well at all. At full pool, approximately one-third of the

six million cubic feet of debris was lodged on the shore and the rest was floating. The

Roosevelt Lake Log Owners' Association annually salvaged approximately 2 percent of the

material as merchantable timber. The report concluded that 59 percent was suitable for

manufacturing fence posts and the rest for wood chips or charcoal production. The report

recommended a market survey and economic feasibility analysis. [92]

LARO did not find a market for the debris, however, and it continued to accumulate. In

1976, LARO did a one-week test project collecting, piling, and burning debris. LARO

Superintendent William Burgen discounted the air pollution concern, noting that "Smoke

rising from the burning debris is usually minimal and a light blue-grey in color. As there are

few homes on or near the shores of Lake Roosevelt, sight pollution is not a factor to

consider." New LARO Superintendent William Dunmire considered floating debris the single

greatest deterrent to public recreation on the waters of Lake Roosevelt. [93]

In 1977, Reclamation agreed to take the lead in funding an "initial clearing program" of the

two million or so cubic feet of beached debris along Lake Roosevelt. The agency provided a

barge, forced-air burner, and hydraulic crane, along with funding of $800,000 over the next

five years for the work. The Park Service provided a barge and crawler tractor, LCM (a 56-

foot shallow-draft boat that could haul men and heavy machinery to remote work places),

and personnel for piling debris with the tractor along the shallow beach areas. The Park

Service also installed and operated a collection boom at Keller Ferry. About one mile of

shoreline could be cleared per day. The debris was burned in a barge-mounted burner except

for shallow beach areas, where crews set fire to the debris on the beach. Crews formed some

debris into artificial reefs for fish habitat, later anchored to the lake bottom with their tops

several meters below 1,290 feet. As part of the agreement, the Park Service removed trees

with exposed roots on unstable banks, leaving the stumps to retain soil. Once this "initial"
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5e.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:30 PM]

clean up was completed, the Park Service was to take over responsibility for future cleanup of

shoreline debris along the lake. In 1984, the debris cleanup program achieved some stability

when its funding was incorporated into the park base as routine maintenance. [94]

Because of concern about public reaction to the burning of woody debris, considered a

potential source of energy, in 1979 LARO established a no-burn policy for Lake Roosevelt

debris and began encouraging the public to collect the wood for use in private wood stoves.

All large material was stacked on the beaches rather than burned. This program was most

effective near the developed areas. It has since been discontinued because of concerns about

people driving onto the drawdown lands to collect the wood. Reclamation continued to burn

debris at China Bar, Kettle River, and Coulee Dam. [95]

In 1990, the CCT proposed a five-year shoreline improvement project that included removing

lake debris from reservation lands. Reclamation agreed to provide funding. The U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service expressed concern, however, about cumulative impacts on fish habitat,

particularly from loss of root wads and fallen trees. The solution was to again establish

artificial reef complexes to provide mitigation for lost fish habitat. These were clusters of

debris cabled together to form bundles approximately 150 feet long, 40 feet wide, and 5 to 15

feet high that were anchored underwater between 1,265 and 1,275 feet. Because of the

potential hazards to boaters and swimmers, each ARC was marked by buoys. [96]

Barge with backhoe and extension boom removing beached debris,

and small tug pulling sweep boom, 1976. Photo courtesy of National

Park Service, Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area (file D3217

[old 1023] Report for Cleanup of 1967 Flood Debris, box 3 of 3,

LARO #95, Cat. #3250, LARO.HQ.PAO).

After the Reclamation/CCT program had been underway a few years, Reclamation agreed to

consult annually with LARO for input on site selection and other aspects of the debris

removal program. Until then, the park had virtually no input on the 1990s debris clean-up

program except at annual meetings at which the LARO Superintendent was asked to

comment on all of the tribe's plans for the coming year. Also in 1994, the Reclamation
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi5e.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:30 PM]

contractor who had been burning the debris and disposing of the ash in the lake learned that

state air and water regulations no longer allowed this practice. In response, he began chipping

the debris. [97]

LARO is not currently involved in debris clean-up on Lake Roosevelt. The joint

Reclamation/CCT program is now on a smaller scale than when it started, consisting mostly

of picking up debris at the 1,290-foot line. Reclamation still funds the China Bend and Kettle

River debris-collection operations, and the work is done by a private contractor. [98]

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

laro/adhi/adhi5e.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6g.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:32 PM]

Lake Roosevelt

Administrative History

CHAPTER 6:

Family Vacation Lake: Recreation Planning

and Management (continued)

User Fees

Because of the many access roads to Lake Roosevelt, it has never been feasible to collect

park entrance fees at LARO. User fees, however, can be charged for the use of specific

facilities such as campgrounds and boat launch ramps. During the 1940s, LARO

Superintendent Claude Greider argued against instituting boat permit fees at the NRA, and

this was confirmed in the regulations approved in 1952 for Lake Mead, Millerton Lake, and

Coulee Dam national recreation areas. Fees for government-operated campgrounds, however,

were prohibited in the National Park System until 1965 and were not systematically instituted

until 1970. The money collected from these fees was placed in the general treasury and made

subject to congressional appropriation. The funds did not return to the parks in which they

were generated, although after 1972 they did at least return to the Park Service. The use of

the collected fees was authorized for resource protection, interpretation, research, and

maintenance activities related to resource protection. [94]

The institution of campground fees within the Park Service was initiated by the 1962 Outdoor

Recreation Resources Review Commission report, which called for user fees for federal

recreational facilities such as campgrounds. The report led to bills that contained authority for

federal agencies such as the Park Service to set entrance and user fees, and this policy

became effective in 1965 with the passage of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act. By

1968, earlier than most other Park Service units, LARO was charging a camping fee at its

largest and most developed sites (Spring Canyon, Fort Spokane, Porcupine Bay, Kettle Falls,

and Evans). Its $2 camping fee was higher than the local Forest Service fee of $1, and some

members of the public complained about the discrepancy. By the late 1970s, LARO was

collecting some $30,000 each year in camping fees. In 1976, for example, the NRA collected

about $5 for every $1 spent in fee collection. In that year, LARO staff increased the fee to $3

per night, numbered campground sites, and set up registration bulletin boards. [95]

During the 1980s, LARO continued to improve its fee collection system and to increase the

camping fees. In 1982, the fee jumped to $5 per night for sites in the six most highly

developed campgrounds. Despite local controversy, fees were instituted at Marcus Island

campground in 1987. In 1989, a courier system was established to provide better control over

the counting of collected funds, and soon a local bank was counting the monies. In 1989,

over $130,000 was collected in user fees. [96]

The fee collection program at LARO changed significantly in 1994 and 1995 because of

Congressional legislation mandating the collection of fees for some facilities and services that

previously had been free. As a result, LARO began charging fees at all seventeen vehicle

campgrounds. Beginning in June 1995, a boat launch fee was charged to the general public.

Tribal members were exempt from this charge at all LARO ramps, as were Lincoln County
Lake Roosevelt NRA: Administrative History (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/adhi6g.htm[2/26/2014 3:38:32 PM]

taxpayers through 2005 for the ramp they had helped fund. The fees charged were based on

fees for similar facilities at Washington state parks and private sites. LARO was the first Park

Service unit to enforce the charging of fees for boat launch ramps, and the NRA received

little public support for this action. The campground and boat launch fees collected in 1995

increased considerably over previous years to more than $311,000. Today, a fee is charged at

all the launch ramps managed by the Park Service at LARO. The two tribal ramps at

Inchelium and Two Rivers do not charge (the tribes charge for camping only). [97]

The Park Service instituted a three-year Fee Demonstration Program in 1996. LARO was

selected to participate. Under the program, 80 percent of the revenues collected were returned

to LARO for use on approved projects. The remaining 20 percent were distributed

Servicewide. This program provided significant funds to LARO. Projects funded by the

program have included solar lighting at various visitor facilities; accessible restrooms; launch

ramp extensions; and shore anchor and courtesy dock improvements. In general, the monies

fund minor construction, rehabilitation, and cyclic maintenance projects. [98]

User fees are sometimes used to distribute visitors throughout a park. Another method of

controlling crowding at campgrounds is the reservation system. The Park Service instituted a

campground reservation system in 1973. By the late 1980s, group campsites at LARO could

be reserved. The reservation system has not yet been extended to individual campsites,

although this may be considered in the future to reduce problems with overcrowding at

popular areas. Other measures may include installing signs at key junctions along the

highways telling visitors that certain campgrounds are full and offering additional

information. The CCT instituted a reservation system for non-member camping at four

campgrounds on Lake Roosevelt - Inchelium Area AA Camp and the Keller Park, Sanpoil

Bay, and Wilmont Creek campgrounds - and they also began charging a user fee for camping

throughout their reservation, including sites along the shores of Lake Roosevelt. [99]

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

laro/adhi/adhi6g.htm

Last Updated: 22-Apr-2003
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/images/fig6-9.jpg[2/26/2014 3:38:33 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/laro/adhi/images/fig6-9.jpg[2/26/2014 3:38:33 PM]