~ ~.l~ μ.On· A SMALL CAVE NO MORE: .... 

§ ~~~ ADMINISTRATIVE HISTORY 0 JEWEL CAVE 

~ ~ ® NATIONAL MONUMENT, SOUTltliKDTA 

: ~ r;@d\ec.ked SO'tt-=- I iV\. 

: C1 ! ~~~ en 

..... 

:::a 

z=-. 

..... 

-

< 

.... 

= 

en 

..... 

c:::::. 

:::a 

-< 

c:::::. 

.... 

c.. 

.... 

:e ~ .... 

.... 

~ 

z=-. 

< 

.... 

::z:: 

z=-. 

..... " c:::::. 

::z:: 

z=-. 

.... 

iii: 

c:::::. 

::z:: 

c: 

iii: 

.... 

::z:: 

...... 

en 

c:::::. 

c: 

..... 

= 

-

z=-. 

=-= c:::::. 

..... 

z=-. 

I 

t@ 

,'®. ) cl-~ 

©/ " @~-/ I 

,, 

'---,I', 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I ® 

I 'ds-~ 

I 

I 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel 

Cave National Monument, South Dakota 

U.S. Department of the Interior

National Park Service 

Midwest Regional Office/DOI Region 3, 4, 5 

Omaha, Nebraska

2020

__________________________________________ _____________________ 

Recommended/Associate Regional Director Date

Cultural Resources, DOI Regions 3,4,5 (Midwest) 

_________________________________________ _____________________ 

Concurred/Superintendent Date

Jewel Cave National Monument 

_________________________________________ _____________________ 

Approved/Regional Director Date 

DOI Regions 3,4,5 (Midwest)

0D\

ROBERT 

BRYSON

Digitally signed by ROBERT 

BRYSON 

Date: 2020.05.28 09:56:04 

-05'00'

MICHELLE TOURVILLEWHEATLEY

Digitally signed by MICHELLE 

TOURVILLE-WHEATLEY 

Date: 2020.05.28 11:36:11 -06'00'

HERBERT FROST Digitally signed by HERBERT FROST 

Date: 2020.06.01 10:15:39 -05'00'
A Small Cave No More:

An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, 

South Dakota

U.S. Department of the Interior

National Park Service

Midwest Regional Office/DOI Region 3, 4, 5

Omaha, Nebraska

By

Jackie Gonzales, Ph.D.

Emily Greenwald, Ph.D.

Historical Research Associates, Inc.

2020
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota i

Table of Contents

LIST OF ACRONYMS xiii

INTRODUCTION 1

PROJECT TEAM 1

METHODOLOGY 1

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 1

PURPOSE 2

THE CAVE 2

CHAPTER 1: GEOLOGY AND EARLY HUMAN HISTORY OF JEWEL CAVE AREA 5

GEOLOGY OF JEWEL CAVE 5

EARLY HUMAN USE OF THE AREA 9

PALEOINDIAN (CA. 13,000 TO 6000 BP) 10

ARCHAIC (CA. 7500 TO 1500 BP) 10

PRE-CONTACT (1500 BP TO 1750 CE) 11

CONTESTED LANDS 12

OCCUPATION AND USE OF THE BLACK HILLS, 1700S–1800S 12

GOLD RUSH AND THE 1877 SIOUX TREATY 15

FOREST RESERVE ACT AND CREATION OF BLACK HILLS NATIONAL FOREST 16

EUROPEAN AMERICANS FIND JEWEL CAVE 18

DRAWING TOURISTS TO JEWEL CAVE 20

MODIFYING AND PROMOTING JEWEL CAVE 22

WIND CAVE’S ROAD TO BECOMING A NATIONAL PARK 24

A SECOND ROUND OF MINING CLAIMS 27

CONCLUSION 29

CHAPTER 2: ESTABLISHMENT AND FOREST SERVICE MANAGEMENT OF JEWEL CAVE 

NATIONAL MONUMENT 31

ESTABLISHMENT OF THE NATIONAL MONUMENT 31

FOREST SERVICE MANAGEMENT (1908–1933) 35

MINING CLAIMS INVESTIGATIONS 35

DEFINING AND PROTECTING AGAINST VANDALISM 41

GARNERING LOCAL SUPPORT FOR THE CAVE 47

JEWEL CAVE CORPORATION 50

OTHER CAVES UNDER FEDERAL PROTECTION, 1900–1930 53

CONCLUSION 54

CHAPTER 3: THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE TAKES OVER (CA. 1933–1957) 55

JEWEL CAVE CORPORATION, THE CIVILIAN CONSERVATION CORPS, AND THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE 

(1933–1939) 55

HIGHWAY 16 REALIGNMENT 58
ii A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

DEVELOPMENT BY THE CCC 62

NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 69

TOURS, SURVEYS, AND EXPLORATION 70

END OF THE CCC AND JCC ERA 72

NATIONAL PARK SERVICE MANAGEMENT (CA. 1940–1959) 72

STAFFING 72

TOURS AND INTERPRETATION 80

INFORMATIONAL BROCHURE 85

COOPERATING ASSOCIATIONS AND PARTNERSHIPS 86

BELOWGROUND RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 88

ABOVEGROUND RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 89

WATER RIGHTS 93

PLANNING FOR THE FUTURE: DEVELOP OR DEAUTHORIZE? 93

FIRST MASTER PLAN (1942) 93

ASSESSING JEWEL CAVE’S SIGNIFICANCE 96

UPDATED MASTER PLAN (1952) 98

MISSION 66 PROSPECTUS (1955) 102

REVISED MASTER PLAN AND PROSPECTUS (1957–1958) 105

CONCLUSION 111

CHAPTER 4: INVESTMENT IN VISITOR SERVICES AND CAVE EXPLORATION (CA. 1957–

1972) 113

MANAGEMENT AND STAFFING 113

EFFECTS OF EXPLORATION ON NPS PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT 117

EXPLORATION IN THE LATE 1950S 118

MINERAL WITHDRAWAL 122

SEARCH FOR NEW TOUR ROUTES 123

1962 FORMATION DISCOVERIES 128

NEW DEVELOPMENT PLANS 132

DETERMINING THE CAVE’S SURFACE FOOTPRINT 138

LAND EXCHANGE WITH THE FOREST SERVICE 142

MONUMENT OPERATIONS 145

RESEARCH 145

BROCHURE 147

NATURAL HISTORY ASSOCIATION 147

ABOVEGROUND NATURAL RESOURCES 149

LAW ENFORCEMENT AND SAFETY 152

CONSTRUCTION OF THE NEW VISITOR CENTER AND ASSOCIATED DEVELOPMENT 152

GROUNDWORK: ROADS AND UTILITIES 154

CAVE TOUR AND ELEVATOR SHAFT 157

INTERPRETATION DURING DEVELOPMENT 168

MUSEUM EXHIBITS AND THE NEW VISITOR CENTER 171

HOUSING AND MAINTENANCE BUILDINGS 172

VISITOR CENTER CONSTRUCTION AND OPENING 174

CONCLUSION 178
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota iii

CHAPTER 5: MANAGING A LARGER CAVE (1972–1989) 179

GENERAL ADMINISTRATION 179

STAFFING AND BUDGETS 179

VOLUNTEERS IN PARKS 185

GENERAL MANAGEMENT PLANNING 185

COOPERATING ASSOCIATION 186

COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIPS 188

NATURAL RESOURCES 190

CAVE EXPLORATION AND MAPPING 190

CAVE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 194

OUTSIDE STUDIES OF JEWEL CAVE 198

INTERAGENCY CAVE RESOURCE PROTECTION 200

SURFACE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 205

FIRE MANAGEMENT 207

CULTURAL RESOURCES 208

ARCHEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS 210

ADMINISTRATIVE HISTORY 210

MUSEUM COLLECTION 211

INTERPRETATION AND EDUCATION 212

TOURS AND VISITOR SERVICES 213

BROCHURE AND MAPS 222

MAINTENANCE AND FACILITIES MANAGEMENT 223

VISITOR CENTER MAINTENANCE 226

CAVE TRAIL MAINTENANCE 227

SURFACE ROADS, TRAILS, AND MAINTENANCE BUILDINGS 228

HOUSING 229

UTILITIES 232

LAW ENFORCEMENT 235

CONCLUSION 236

CHAPTER 6: INDEPENDENT ADMINISTRATION (CA. 1990–1999) 237

GENERAL ADMINISTRATION 237

PERSONNEL 237

BLACK HILLS ADMINISTRATIVE GROUP 239

PARTNERS 240

GENERAL PLANNING 241

CONCESSIONS 242

LAW ENFORCEMENT AND SAFETY 243

FACILITIES MANAGEMENT 244

ELEVATOR 244

VISITOR CENTER 247

CAVE TOUR STRUCTURES 248

SEWAGE 249

SOLID WASTE 250

HOUSING 251

HIGHWAY 16 252
iv A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

SURFACE TRAILS 254

NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 254

CAVE EXPLORATION 255

CAVE RESEARCH AND RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 257

COOPERATION WITH OTHER CAVES 262

COOPERATION WITH FOREST SERVICE ON CAVE MANAGEMENT (INCLUDING PASS CREEK LAND EXCHANGE) 264

FIRE 267

SURFACE RESOURCES 271

CULTURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 272

ARCHEOLOGICAL STUDIES 272

HISTORIC RANGER CABIN 273

MUSEUM COLLECTION 275

INTERPRETATION 277

CONCLUSION 280

CHAPTER 7: JEWEL CAVE IN THE NEW MILLENNIUM (2000–PRESENT) 281

JASPER FIRE AND AFTERMATH 281

GENERAL ADMINISTRATION 288

PERSONNEL 288

SHARED ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 294

VOLUNTEER PROGRAM 296

PLANNING AND EVALUATIONS 297

BLACK HILLS PARKS AND FOREST ASSOCIATION 301

PARTNERSHIPS 303

CONCESSIONS 306

LAW ENFORCEMENT 306

FACILITIES MANAGEMENT 309

PARKING LOT AND ROADS 309

HIGHWAY 16 311

HISTORIC AREA 313

ELEVATOR 313

SCENIC TOUR INFRASTRUCTURE 315

VISITOR CENTER 317

HOUSING 319

SEWAGE 320

WATER 321

UTILITIES 321

NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 321

CAVE EXPLORATION AND MAPPING PRE-CAVE AND KARST MANAGEMENT PLAN 323

CAVE AND KARST MANAGEMENT PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (EA) 325

CAVE EXPLORATION AND RESCUE POST-CKMP 328

RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PROJECTS AND RESEARCH 330

FOREST SERVICE COOPERATION 332

EXOTIC PLANT MANAGEMENT 334

FIRE MANAGEMENT 335

CULTURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 337

MUSEUM COLLECTION 339
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota v

INTERPRETATION AND EDUCATION 340

TOURS AND VISITOR SERVICES 341

FEE COLLECTION 345

BROCHURES AND MAPS 347

JUNIOR RANGER AND YOUTH EDUCATION/OUTREACH 347

EXHIBITS 350

CONCLUSION 351

CHAPTER 8: BEYOND 200 MILES 353

APPENDIX A: LEGISLATION AND EXECUTIVE ORDERS RELATED TO ESTABLISHMENT OF 

JEWEL CAVE NATIONAL MONUMENT AND ITS BOUNDARIES 357

APPENDIX B: WITHDRAWAL FROM MINERAL ENTRY OF FOREST SERVICE LANDS ABOVE 

JEWEL CAVE 371

APPENDIX C: LEGISLATION PERTAINING TO CAVE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 381

APPENDIX D: PERSONNEL 391

APPENDIX E: VISITATION NUMBERS 395

APPENDIX F: ANNUAL PARK BUDGETS 397

APPENDIX G: ORGANIZATIONAL CHARTS 401

BIBLIOGRAPHY 413

ARCHIVES 413

GOVERNMENT DOCUMENTS AND CONTRACTED STUDIES 413

ORAL HISTORY INTERVIEWS 416

BOOKS AND ARTICLES 417

THESES AND DISSERTATIONS 419

NEWSPAPERS AND PERIODICALS 419

INDEX 421
vi A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

List of Figures

Figure 1. The NPS long assumed that Jewel Cave was a “small cave,” as this sign from 1958 attests. Photo by 

Richard Hart, 1958. 3

Source: Jewel Cave NM. 3

Figure 2. Jewel Cave is named for the calcite crystals that line much of its walls. Pictured here, photo 

undated. 7

Figure 3. Herb Conn holds a handkerchief to illustrate the strong wind blowing through a cave passageway, 

undated. 8

Figure 4. The Black Hills, pictured here from Black Elk Peak, are sacred to the Lakota people. Pictured here, 

August 2011. 13

Figure 5. Custer, South Dakota, pictured here looking west, 1890. 15

Figure 6. Ponderosa pine forests, which are typical in the Black Hills, at Jewel Cave NM, ca. 1965. 17

Figure 7. Frank and Albert Michaud, ca. 1906. 19

Figure 8. A stereograph image of Mammoth Cave, 1866. 21

Figure 9. The Michauds blasted through the cliffs on the eastern side of Hell Canyon an entryway to Jewel 

Cave—first as a vertical tube, and later as this horizontal tunnel. Pictured here as it looked in 2019. 23

Figure 10. The Michauds built this two-story log cabin and hotel near the cave entrance. Pictured here ca.

1917. 24

Figure 11. W. R. Cross photograph from inside of Wind Cave, with the caption, “In Wind Cave, S.D. 350 feet 

below the surface at Odd Fellows’ Hall. . . .” William Jennings Bryan and Governor Andrew E. Lee are in 

the center front of the group, ca. 1897. 25

Figure 12. This 1908 Forest Service map was included in President Theodore Roosevelt’s February 7, 1908, 

proclamation authorizing Jewel Cave National Monument. 34

Figure 13. Father Paul Dobberstein, a Catholic Priest in Iowa, purchased five tons of calcite crystals from 

Frank Michaud for use in Dobberstein’s “Grotto of the Redemption” in West Bend, Iowa. Pictured here in 

2008. 41

Figure 14. Forest Service Surveyor W. C. Danielson took this image of what he called “crackerjack formation” 

in Jewel Cave in 1916. 44

Figure 15. Danielson took this picture in Hell Canyon. The Michaud’s timbered entryway to the cave entrance 

is visible in the center of the image, with a person standing next to it for scale, 1916. 45

Figure 16. This Bureau of Public Roads map shows how the road grading project was split into sections by 

funding source. The National Park Approach Road is “Project ‘A’,” and references Wind Cave National 

Park because Jewel Cave NM was managed by Wind Cave at the time. 59

Figure 17. Crews grade the new road between Custer and Newcastle (now known as Highway 16) near Jewel 

Cave NM, ca. 1932. 60

Figure 18. Looking out over Hell Canyon, new road between Custer and Newcastle after being graded, ca. 

1933. 61

Figure 19. Civilian Conservation Corps crews pictured at Jewel Cave, ca. 1935. 62

Figure 20. CCC crews constructing the ranger cabin at Jewel Cave, ca. 1933. 64

Figure 21. The nearly completed ranger cabin in Jewel Cave, ca. 1936. 64

Figure 22. The CCC built a retaining wall and wooden stairs to the cave entrance, pictured here in partial 

completion. CCC crews eventually covered the retaining well with dirt to provide a more natural 

appearance. They also removed all wooden structures, including the stairs, and left only a steel gate at 

the rectangular cave entrance. 1935. 65

Figure 23. Map showing the existing trail from the entry road to the cave entrance and the proposed new trail, 

which the CCC eventually built. It also shows the existing ranger’s tent and the proposed cabin, 1935. 65

Source: NPS, Western Office of Design and Construction. 65

Figure 24. CCC workers wrote their names on the walls of the cave in the Kittycombs area. Pictured here in 

2017. 66
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota vii

Figure 25. Design of the entrance sign for Jewel Cave, drawn by NPS Branch of Plans and Design, 1936. 67

Figure 26. Plan of the proposed campground at Jewel Cave NM, drawn by NPS Branch of Plans and Design, 

1937. 68

Figure 27. The Jewel Cave Corporation gave tours from the entrance in Hell Canyon, pictured here from inside 

the cave, ca. 1946. 70

Figure 28. “Map of Jewel Cave Showing Underground Passages and Trails,” Office of the Chief Engineer, NPS, 

July 1936. 71

Figure 29. Ranger Lyle Linch, pictured here in front of the entrance to Jewel Cave. 74

Figure 30. Jewel Cave tour tickets, 1942. 81

Figure 31. A tour through Jewel Cave, ca. 1950. 82

Figure 32. Jewel Cave NM informational brochure, 1947. 85

Figure 33. Ponderosa pine forests at Jewel Cave NM, ca. 1950s. 89

Figure 34. An existing truck trail through the monument. 94

Figure 35. There were many caves in the Black Hills, as this map by Lyle Linch shows, 1946. 97

Figure 36. The NPS proposed blasting a new passageway to connect two existing passageways within the cave 

to create a loop tour, 1952. 100

Figure 37. Trail to the cave entrance, 1958. 101

Figure 38. New entrance sign for Jewel Cave NM, ca. 1958. 109

Figure 39. A new sign at Jewel Cave erected in 1958 called Jewel Cave and Jasper Cave “small caves.” This 

sign was near the park entrance and was in addition to the sign in front of the cave entrance that also 

called Jewel Cave a “small cave.” Richard Hart, 1958. 110

Figure 40. Seasonal staff at Jewel Cave, ca. 1959/1960. 113

Figure 41. Park Ranger Keith Miller stands next to a patrol car, ca. 1950s. 115

Figure 42. Wally Elms, the first person to hold the title “management assistant” at Jewel Cave. Pictured here 

at Wind Cave, ca. 1963. 116

Figure 43. Park Ranger P. J. Ryan leading a cave tour, 1961. 118

Figure 44. Herb and Jan Conn, ca. 1959. 121

Figure 45. Jan Conn, Herb Conn, Dave Schnute, and Dwight Deal, 1959. 122

Figure 46. Jan Conn (far left) and Herb Conn (fourth from left standing) with cavers, including Jewel Cave 

Management Assistant Wally Elms (second from right) and his wife (far right). Photo taken by Seasonal 

Ranger Mike Kaback, 1963. 124

Figure 47. Herb Conn surveying Jewel Cave, pictured here in a photo by the South Dakota Highway 

Department, ca. 1963. 125

Figure 48. Jan Conn with Myrna Sheie, Karen Dilts, and Lynn Svatos, photo by Larry Dilts, ca. 1975. 126

Figure 49. The Conns and other cavers discovered new formations in Jewel Cave. Here, Jan Conn is holding 

frostwork. Photo by Dave Schnute, 1962. 129

Figure 50. Herb Conn examines cave “bacon,” in photo by South Dakota Highway Department, ca. 1963. 129

Figure 51. Discoveries made by the Conns and their caving partners included massive rooms, such as “King 

Kong’s Cage,” pictured here with Jan Conn in the foreground and two other cavers in the background 

(their headlamps are visible as white dots to the right of Jan’s knee). Photo by Dave Schnute, 1962. 131

Figure 52. Soda straws in Jewel Cave, ca. 1963. 132

Figure 53. Herb and Jan Conn discovered hollow stalagmites in the cave, which they called “logomites.” At 

left is a photograph of one, ca. 1963, and on the right is Herb Conn’s drawing of them. 134

Figure 54. A cave tour in 1964. This image ran in Don Hipschman’s article on Jewel Cave and the Conns in 

South Dakota Highway Magazine in March 1964. 135

Figure 55. Herb Conn’s drawing of where to drill a hole to hit the Target Room, 1964. 139

Figure 56. Radiolocating the underground cave from the aboveground surface. Father Paul Wightman uses the 

equipment aboveground, while others wait belowground, 1964. 139
viii A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Figure 57. The test hole into the Target Room, 1964. 141

Figure 58. John A. Ronscavage of the NPS Western Office of Design and Construction completed this color 

conceptual drawing, the first to show a proposed visitor center above the Target Room, in September 

1964. 143

Figure 59. Banding bats at Jewel Cave, 1962. 145

Figure 60. Bats at Jewel Cave. Photo by Richard Hart, 1958. 146

Figure 61. A bat in Jewel Cave, with a hand for scale. Photo by Richard Hart, 1959. 146

Figure 62. The ticket booth outside of the ranger station, erected in 1963, with Wind Cave Natural History 

Association publications displayed for sale on the right-hand side, ca. 1965. 148

Figure 63. A schematic drawing of Jewel Cave as it would look after development, if one were south of the 

monument and looking north into Hell and Lithograph Canyons. Drawn by James B. Thompson, November 

1965. 153

Figure 64. Grading for the entrance road to the new development area. Photo by John Tyers, 1965. 154

Figure 65. Power line construction near the location of the new visitor center, 1967. 155

Figure 66. Excavation for the 100,000-gallon reservoir at Jewel Cave National Monument, 1965. 156

Figure 67. The graded future site of the sewage lagoon, 1965. 157

Figure 68. Cavers in the Formation Room, which Herb and Jan Conn included in their proposed tour route. 

Photo by Alan Howard, September 1962. 158

Figure 69. Earth-moving in preparation for construction of the elevator shaft, 1966. 160

Figure 70. Elevator shaft excavation and the partially graded visitor center site, July 18, 1967. 161

Figure 71. Excavation of the elevator shaft. Photo by Don Gillespie, 1966. 161

Figure 72. Inside the elevator shaft during construction, 1967. 161

Figure 73. When excavating the elevator shaft, Frontier hit fractured rock that required lining of the shaft in 

those zones, 1966. 162

Figure 74. When drilling the elevator shaft, rock and muck fell into the cave and blocked a passageway. Drawn 

here by Herb Conn, August 31, 1967. 163

Figure 75. Construction of the access tunnel, pictured here at its entrance in Lithograph Canyon, ca. 1967. 164

Figure 76. Installing wiring along the new cave tour route. 165

Figure 77. Laying asphalt for the new cave tour trail, ca. 1968. 166

Figure 78. Herb Conn and maintenance workers installing aluminum stair treads along the new cave tour 

route. Photo by Don Gillespie, 1968. 167

Figure 79. A 1968 photo of the Target Room, with caption on back reading: “View of Target Rm. showing first 

3 stairs locations - prior to construction of 2 & 3.” The upper landing in the photo is still used to access 

the elevator portal, but no stairs were ever built between the upper and lower landing. Instead, after 

issues with rockfall from the Target Room ceiling, the lower landing was camouflaged with large rock and 

abandoned. If the photo were taken in 2020, the Target Room platform would fill the lower third of the 

image. 168

Figure 80. Tours continued from the Hell Canyon entrance to the cave during development of the new area. 

Pictured here, staircases on the old tour route, 1963. 169

Figure 81. This ticket booth by the CCC ranger cabin was installed in 1963. The soda machine and the water 

fountain in the foreground, in front of the cabin, were also installed in the 1960s. 170

Figure 82. Housing at Jewel Cave near the Hell Canyon entrance, 1967. 173

Figure 83. Transa-Hut at Jewel Cave, 1963. 173

Figure 84. Maintenance shed in Lithograph Canyon, ca. 1966. 174

Figure 85. Drawings for the Jewel Cave Visitor Center, 1969. 175

Figure 86. As shown here, the elevator was built first and then the visitor center was built around it, ca. 1970–

1971. 176
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota ix

Figure 87. Visitor center construction was delayed briefly when a cement truck backed into the restroom 

building in 1971. 176

Figure 88. The Jewel Cave visitor center, built in the Mission 66/Parkscape style, opened to the public in 

1972. 177

Figure 89. US Representative James Abourezk (D-SD) (center, with hands on scissors) and former US 

Representative Ellis Y. Berry (R-SD) (left, with hand on scissors) cutting the ribbon to open the Jewel 

Cave visitor center, 1972. 177

Figure 90. Herb and Jan Conn, pictured here in 1967 just inside the cave’s historic entrance in Hell Canyon, 

explored over 10 miles of Jewel Cave in the 1960s. Their discoveries convinced the NPS to develop a new 

cave entrance and visitor center, rather than delist the national monument. 178

Figure 91. Steve Hurd became management assistant around 1973. 180

Figure 92. Dennis Ditmanson in the cave, examining a hollow stalagmite. Photo by Art Palmer, ca. 1984. 182

Figure 93. Herschel Schulz was chief ranger of interpretation, protection, and visitor protection for part of the 

1980s. 183

Figure 94. Larry Dilts was the chief ranger at Jewel Cave, left for several years, and then returned as 

maintenance lead. Pictured here with Herb Conn in a state of South Dakota photograph, 1975. 184

Figure 95. Herb Conn drew and explained the “Very Important Shortcut” (VISC) in a letter to Father Paul 

Wightman, 1977. 191

Figure 96. Mike Wiles, the first staff person whose position was dedicated to managing cave resources, paints 

an updated cave map to replace an old one (on the wall behind him). Wiles completed the work on his 

own time, with $1,000 of support from the NHA. It took 234 hours to complete. ca. 1984. 196

Figure 97. A photograph of hydromagnesite balloons by Art Palmer, ca. 1984. 199

Figure 98. A park ranger staffs the information desk at the Jewel Cave visitor center, ca. 1974. 212

Figure 99. A tour group passes through the “Torture Room” along the Scenic Tour route, 1973. 213

Figure 100. Herb Conn with a Spelunking Tour, state of South Dakota photograph, 1975. 214

Figure 101. Jim Basinger leads a Historic Tour in the 1980s. 215

Figure 102. Jewel Cave managers developed a “Handspan Squeeze” to put outside of the visitor center, so 

that people thinking of going on the spelunking tour could simulate fitting through tight passages. 216

Figure 103. Park rangers developed short interpretive programs to give outside of the cave, so that people 

waiting for cave tours had something to do. 217

Figure 104. Jewel Cave had Youth Conservation Corps (YCC) crews assisted with trail maintenance and other 

tasks, ca. 1984. 224

Figure 105. This cabin, built by the US Biological Survey at Wind Cave in 1916 and transferred to Jewel Cave in 

1959, was torn down in 1980. 230

Figure 106. Relining the sewage lagoon, ca. 1989. 234

Figure 107. Caver in a fissure near Corrigan Passage, ca. 1984. 236

Figure 108. Kate Cannon became superintendent of Jewel Cave in 1990. 238

Figure 109. Exploration of Jewel Cave continued in the 1990s. 255

Figure 110. Volunteer D. Kruse monitors temperature in Jewel Cave, 1991. 259

Figure 111. Jewel Cave held several prescribed burns in the 1990s, in partnership with other NPS units, the 

Forest Service, and the state of South Dakota. Here, a prescribed burn in 1990. 267

Figure 112. Hazardous fuel reduction at Jewel Cave through mechanical thinning, 1991. 268

Figure 113. A prescribed fire at Jewel Cave National Monument, 1990. 270

Figure 114. Historic rehabilitation and restoration of the ranger cabin began in 1999. 275

Figure 115. Ranger Michelle Gleicher gives a Historic Candlelight Tour in July 1991. 279

Figure 116. The Jasper Fire burned 3,655 acres in its first day, 2000. 282

Figure 117. The Jasper Fire burned close to the Jewel Cave Visitor Center, pictured here during the fire, 2000. 283
x A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Figure 118. The Jasper Fire in 2000 burned 83,508 acres, making it the largest fire in the recorded history of 

the Black Hills. 284

Figure 119. The Jasper Fire burned close to the monument’s residential structures, pictured here in 

background, 2000. 285

Figure 120. Flash flooding caused major erosion and runoff issues after the Jasper Fire burned much of the 

ponderosa pine forest around Jewel Cave. Here, deeply eroded channels in Lithograph Canyon in 2002. 286

Figure 121. The Jasper Fire burned many acres of the monument and resulted in increased erosion and altered 

hydrology after the fire. Here, the sewage lagoon is left of center and the visitor center and parking lot 

are visible to the upper left, 2000. 287

Figure 122. Todd Suess served as superintendent of Jewel Cave National Monument from 2001 to 2010. 289

Figure 123. Mike Wiles, chief of resource management at Jewel Cave starting in 1997, pictured here in 2013. 290

Figure 124. Jewel Cave permanent staff in 2007. 291

Figure 125. Jewel Cave interpretive staff in 2010. 293

Figure 126. Volunteers In Parks (VIPs) assist with interpretation, resource management, exploration, 

administration, and maintenance. Here, a VIP brushes lint from the Scenic Tour trail, ca. 2004. 296

Figure 127. The Midwest Regional Office completed the Foundation Document for Jewel Cave National 

Monument in February 2016. 300

Figure 128. Steve Baldwin, who had previously caved in Jewel Cave, was executive director of the Black Hills 

Parks and Forests Association for many years. Pictured here in 2013. 301

Figure 129. Black Hills Parks and Forests Association bookstore in the Jewel Cave visitor center, 2018. 302

Figure 130. Volunteer cavers donate thousands of hours to exploring, surveying, and mapping the cave. Here, 

Chris Pelczarski and Adam Weaver. Photo by Ben Smith, 2018. 304

Figure 131. Jewel Cave search and rescue training, 2004. 305

Figure 132. Nancy Martinz became chief of law enforcement at Jewel Cave in 2016. 308

Figure 133. Reconstruction of the parking lot, 2018. 311

Figure 134. South Dakota realigned Highway 16 to eliminate dangerous curves. Photo of construction work in 

2014. 313

Figure 135. The NPS removed the wooden structure in the Target Room that had been installed in the late 

1960s to protect people from rockfall. Here, the structure before it was removed, ca. 2004. 316

Figure 136. Every year, maintenance crews replaced between one-fifth and one-fourth of the aluminum steps 

along the Scenic Tour. Here, after replacement in 2007. 316

Figure 137. Split Rock Studios completed a blueprint for visitor center renovations in 2011. 318

Figure 138. Jewel Cave partnered with the Forest Service to build a 10-unit apartment building on Forest 

Service land in Custer, pictured here in 2005. 319

Figure 139. Maintenance crews relined the sewage lagoon in 2005. 320

Figure 140. Underground resource management has focused on monitoring and studying cave resources. Here, 

photomonitoring in 2018. 322

Figure 141. Dan Austin making his way through Dingo Pass, 2018. 323

Figure 142. Volunteers have explored and surveyed over 200 miles of Jewel Cave’s passageways. Here, on an 

exploration trip in 2017. 324

Figure 143. Rene Ohms and Mike Wiles, pictured here on a cave exploration trip in 2004, worked on the Jewel 

Cave Cave and Karst Management Plan in the early 2000s, in partnership with Wind Cave staff. 325

Figure 144. Rene Ohms, pictured here in the cave near the Curio Shop in 2005, worked with Mike Wiles and 

Andy Armstrong to develop the trip leader training program for Jewel Cave. 327

Figure 145. Marc Ohms, Blase Lasala, and Mike Wiles on a cave rescue pre-planning trip to the VACC (Victory 

After Continuous Contortions) in 2015. 328

Figure 146. Deep Camp near Hourglass Lake is one of several camps that allows cavers to extend the distance 

of exploration trips. Photo by Jonathan Venner, 2016. 329
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota xi

Figure 147. In 2002, Father Paul Wightman returned to Jewel Cave to assist with radiolocation work, as he had 

in 1964 and 1977. 330

Figure 148. James McClean looking at aragonite frostwork in Rambling Loft. In the background is rope used to 

mark known routes and mitigate damage to cave resources. 2014. 330

Figure 149. Dan Austin installs a lint collection tarp underneath a bridge on the Scenic Tour route, 2016. 331

Figure 150. NGPN crews released beetles to control leafy spurge, 2008. 334

Figure 151. The Fire Use Module at Jewel Cave, 2002. 336

Figure 152. Bradley Block, chief of interpretation starting in 2008, pictured here 2008. 340

Figure 153. A park ranger leads visitors on a Scenic Tour, pictured here on the platform in the Target Room, 

2010. 342

Figure 154. Interpretive rangers continued to offer aboveground programs while visitors waited for cave tours. 

Here, in 2006. 342

Figure 155. The Wild Caving Tour is an off-trail opportunity for both experienced and novice cavers, 2008. 343

Figure 156. Jewel Cave Rangers giving cave tours from the historic entrance in ca. 1938 replica NPS uniforms. 344

Figure 157. A ranger helps someone at the visitor center desk, while Jan Conn passes by in the background. 

2013. 345

Figure 158. Ranger Rene Ohms talks to students as part of the Adopt a Classroom program, 2011. 348

Figure 159. Jewel Cave held “Belt Loop-a-looza” events at the monument, in partnership with other NPS units, 

Custer State Park, and the BHPFA. Here, the event in 2011. 349

Figure 160. Jan Conn checks out the new visitor center exhibits, 2013. 350

Figure 161. Cavers have discovered over 200 miles of passageways in Jewel Cave, but there is much left to 

explore. Here, inside the cave in 2015. 351

Figure 162. Jan Conn reaches out a helping hand to a fellow caver. 353

Figure 163. Much of Jewel Cave remains unexplored. Here, an NPS employee inside of the cave. 355

A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota xiii

List of Acronyms

ADA Americans with Disabilities Act

ANCS Automated National Catalogue System

AO administrative officer

ARPA Archaeological Resources Protection Act

BAER Burned Area Emergency Rehabilitation

BHAA Black Hills Area Association

BHAG Black Hills Administrative Group

BHNHA Black Hills Natural History Association

BHPFA Black Hills Parks and Forests Association

BIA Bureau of Indian Affairs

BLM Bureau of Land Management

BOR US Bureau of Reclamation

BPR Bureau of Public Roads

CCC Civilian Conservation Corps

CCESO Custer County Emergency Services Office

CIP Comprehensive Interpretive Plan

CKMP Cave and Karst Management Plan

CLR Cultural Landscape Report

CRS Congressional Research Service

CUA Commercial Use Authorization

DAR Daughters of the American Revolution

DOI Department of the Interior

DSC Denver Service Center

ECW Emergency Conservation Work

EDB ethylene dibromide

EIS Environmental Impact Statement

EO(s) Executive Order(s)

EPA Environmental Protection Agency

FCRPA Federal Cave Resource Protection Act

FLREA Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act
xiv A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

FMP Fire Management Plan

FMU Fire Management Unit

FOIA Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)

FTE full-time equivalent

GAO General Accountability Office

GEMS Green Environmental Management System

GLO General Land Office

GMP General Management Plan

HFC Harpers Ferry Center

HFR Historic Furnishing Report

HINEC Howe Investments and Northwestern Engineering Company

HR human resources

HRS Historic Resource Study

ICS International Congress of Speleology

IT information technology

JCC Jewel Cave Corporation

LENA Law Enforcement Needs Assessment

LPF Land Protection Fund

MMS Maintenance Management System

MABOs Major Acquisition Buying Offices

MEMS Modified Environmental Management System

MOA memorandum of agreement

MOU memorandum of understanding

MSHA Mine Safety and Health Administration

MWAC Midwest Archeological Center

NCKRI National Cave and Karst Research Institute

NCRI Northwest Cave Research Institute

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act

NGPN Northern Great Plains Inventory & Monitoring Network

NHA natural history association

NIOSH National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

NPRS National Park Reservation Service
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota xv

NPS National Park Service

NSS National Speleological Society

NTE not to exceed

ONPS Operation of the National Park System

OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration

PHS Public Health Service

PLO Public Land Order

PRIP Park Restoration and Improvement Program

RMP Resource Management Plan

RMRO Rocky Mountain Regional Office

SAR Search and Rescue

SCA Student Conservation Association

SDDHS South Dakota Department of Human Services

SDDOT South Dakota Department of Transportation

SHPO State Historic Preservation Office

SHROs Servicing Human Resources Offices

STEO Student Temporary Employment Program

TKE Thyssen-Krupp Elevator

TNC The Nature Conservancy

USDA US Department of Agriculture

USFWS US Fish and Wildlife Service

USGS US Geological Survey

VACC victory after continuous contortions

VIP Volunteers In Parks

VISC Very Important Shortcut

VRAP Visitor Management-Resource Protection Assessment Program

VUA Visitor Use Assistant

WCNHA Wind Cave Natural History Association

WODC Western Office of Design and Construction

YCC Youth Conservation Corps

A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 1

Introduction 

Project Team 

The Midwest Regional Office of the National Park Service (NPS) contracted Historical Research 

Associates, Inc. (HRA), in 2018 to write this administrative history of Jewel Cave National 

Monument (Jewel Cave). Dr. Emily Greenwald managed the project, conducted research and oral 

history interviews, and assisted with writing and revisions. Dr. Jackie Gonzales conducted research 

at several repositories, conducted oral history interviews, and wrote the bulk of the report. Dr. 

Robert Gardner assisted with the writing. Dawn Vogel copyedited the report and compiled the 

index, and Jessi Frank formatted the report. Teresa Bergen (a subcontractor to HRA) transcribed the 

oral history interviews.

Methodology 

HRA conducted research for this project in the following collections: Jewel Cave National 

Monument’s central files and digitized records, held at the monument’s headquarters in Custer, 

South Dakota; archival records of the NPS Midwest Regional Office and Wind Cave National Park, 

held at the National Archives and Records Administration branch in Kansas City, Missouri; images 

of Jewel Cave museum files stored at Mount Rushmore Curatorial Facility; NPS files held in the 

National Park Service Electronic Technical Information Center (eTIC); and the Chief Historian’s 

Park Unit Files. 

HRA conducted 15 oral histories with former NPS staff and partners, as per our contract, and 

three supplemental interviews during the 200-mile reunion. We were fortunate that the reunion, a 

gathering of dozens of people who have worked or volunteered at Jewel Cave over the last 50 years, 

occurred while we were writing the administrative history of the monument. We learned a great deal 

from the many knowledgeable cavers, NPS staff, and partners who attended the reunion. 

Acknowledgements

Many individuals helped make this administrative history possible. Above all, we would like to 

express our gratitude to Mike Wiles, chief of resource management at Jewel Cave, for sharing his 

deep knowledge of the cave. Based on his 40 years of service at the cave, Mike possesses an 

institutional memory that is difficult to find at most NPS units. We are grateful for Mike’s insights, 

which have greatly enhanced this administrative history. 

We have written several administrative histories under the guidance of Ron Cockrell, Senior 

Historian at the Midwest Regional Office. He has helped us navigate these complex projects with 

ease, and we appreciate the wisdom and experience he brings to them. Superintendent Michelle 

Wheatley, new to Jewel Cave when we began this project, pointed us in the right direction when we 

had questions and made sure we had access to the resources we needed. Katie Atkins and Beckie 

Carder helped us find what we were looking for in Jewel Cave’s files and made sure we were set up 

well to do research at monument headquarters. Bradley Block let us explore the resources of the 
2 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

interpretation library. Patty Ressler of the Black Hills Parks and Forest Association kindly welcomed 

Jackie to Custer, even during a crazy week of preparation for the 200-mile reunion. Zane Martin 

helped arrange informal oral history interviews during the reunion and made sure we had the 

museum files we needed. 

We especially want to thank the 18 individuals we interviewed as part of this project for their

kindness and generosity. They not only let strangers ask them detailed questions for a couple of 

hours, but they welcomed us into their homes and offices, supplied personal files and materials to 

aid our research, and followed up with us when they thought of additional information. Sitting for 

an oral history is often a deeply personal experience for both the interviewee and the interviewer, 

and we feel lucky to have had the chance to talk with these wonderful people. Special thanks to 

Rene Ohms, who not only agreed to be interviewed without being on our list but also introduced us 

to other cavers who shared valuable information about the exploration program, and to Al 

Hendricks, who shared his duty logs with us. 

Purpose 

Administrative histories are intended to assist future managers as they make decisions about a

site. In large institutions like the NPS, managers and superintendents rarely serve for a long period 

of time. An administrative history is therefore an important tool for preserving the institutional 

memory. For example, when a manager 20 years from now grapples with whether to modify 

elevator service to the cave, it may be helpful to know why the elevators were built where they are, 

what issues they have had over the years, and where to find the documents containing more 

information about them. This administrative history can help to answer those questions. 

In addition to its value for future managers of Jewel Cave, this administrative history provides 

data and context that can inform interpretation, resource management, outreach, partnerships, and 

collaboration with other agencies. 

The Cave 

No humans entered Jewel Cave before 1900—none of the blowholes connecting the 

underground cavity with the surface landscape were large enough for a human to fit through. Had 

Frank and Albert Michaud not blasted an opening into the cave, it might have remained a mystery, 

an unknown source of cool air that sometimes flowed into Hell and Lithograph Canyons from little 

cracks in the rock. 

Instead, we now know that Jewel Cave contains well over 200 miles of underground 

passageways, making it (as of 2020) the third-longest cave system on the planet. Its walls are lined 

along many of these miles with the calcite crystals that prompted the Michauds to give it the name 

“jewel,” but explorers have also found countless unique formations, diverse rooms, long 

passageways, and even lakes where the cave intersects with the Madison Aquifer. Exploration to 

discover and survey this complex cave has been ongoing since 1959, with no sign of slowing down. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 3

Figure 1. The NPS long assumed that Jewel Cave was a “small cave,” as this sign from 1958 attests. Photo by 

Richard Hart, 1958.

Source: Jewel Cave NM. 

More than any other variable, the changing size of the cave has been the central factor governing 

NPS management of Jewel Cave. As explorers found more passageways, the NPS had to adjust its 

plans for the cave. In the 1930s, the NPS contracted out guide service for the “small cave,” and the 

Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) made minor infrastructure improvements, which paled in 

comparison to the elevator and visitor center that the CCC constructed at nearby Wind Cave 

National Park. No more than a handful of seasonal employees staffed the cave through the 1950s, 

during which time the NPS seriously considered removing the cave from the National Park System,

due to its assumed small size and insignificance (see Figure 1). However, Herb and Jan Conn began 

explorations of Jewel Cave in 1959 that shattered those assumptions. As the Conns and cavers who 

followed them found more and more cave, managers had to figure out how to accommodate 

increasing crowds, protect cave resources under private and Forest Service lands, study the everlarger cave, and manage exploration in its far reaches. 

Herb and Jan Conn explained the joys and frustrations of exploring Jewel Cave: 

From that day until this, there has always been unfinished business for the explorer and surveyor of 

Jewel Cave. The satisfaction and excitement of adding a new section to the map is always tempered by 

wonder and bewilderment at what remains to be done. . . . 
4 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

At the end of a long day underground the task ahead often seems insurmountable. Sometimes we find 

too many leads, while at other times we cannot find any. When we leave the cave in the evening, we 

are often tired, frustrated, and discouraged. Fortunately, those feelings are quickly forgotten during 

the ensuing week, whereas curiosity lingers to lure us back.1

Cavers, park managers, and friends in the local community have protected Jewel Cave over the years 

by carrying on this curiosity for exploration. Their discoveries have enabled the NPS to better 

understand, and therefore better manage, this previously hidden gem. 

1 Herb and Jan Conn, The Jewel Cave Adventure: Fifty Miles of Discovery Under South Dakota (St. Louis: Cave Books, 

1977), 63–64. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 5

Chapter 1: Geology and Early Human 

History of Jewel Cave Area 

Jewel Cave weaves its way through limestone in the southern Black Hills, where a layer of 

sandstone rests on top of the cavitied limestone. It is south of the major uplift portions of the Black 

Hills, such as Mount Rushmore and Black Elk Peak (formerly Harney Peak). We know only 

fragments of the thousands of years of human history of the area, but the archeological record 

suggests that groups tended to use the Black Hills seasonally. The Lakota people occupied the Black 

Hills most recently, until the US government forced them out in 1877. Although the Lakota had 

knowledge of Wind Cave, we do not currently have evidence that they or other American Indians 

knew that Jewel Cave existed. There are no written accounts of Jewel Cave prior to the 1890s. In the 

early 1900s, European Americans blasted a new cave entrance and developed the surrounding areas. 

Jewel Cave was promoted as a local tourist attraction, but, despite the efforts of local boosters, it 

never attracted as many visitors as nearby Wind Cave. 

Geology of Jewel Cave 

Since the 1930s, geologists have proposed a variety of theories about the origin of Jewel Cave. In 

recent years, cave exploration and detailed geological mapping have offered new ways of viewing the 

relationship between surface and subsurface geological features. The most recent studies suggest that 

Jewel Cave was formed by the same geologic processes that shaped the area’s current surface 

topography.1 Because the understanding of Jewel Cave’s speleogenesis continues to evolve, the 

following discussion provides an approximation of the cave’s geologic history while acknowledging 

that this is not settled science. 

Jewel Cave lies entirely within the Pahasapa limestone that formed in the Mississippian Period 

about 360–320 million years ago (“Paha Sapa” is the Lakota name for the Black Hills). Limestone is 

a sedimentary rock formed by deposition of marine organisms, many with hard, calcium-rich 

components (think relatives of shellfish and corals) at the bottom of a shallow inland sea. Over 

millions of years, these deposits chemically changed into layers of limestone, often containing fossil 

remains of the sea creatures.2

After the Mississippian period, subsequent geological environments deposited an additional 

5,000 feet of sedimentary layers on top of the Pahasapa, beginning with the basal sandstone of the 

Minnelusa formation.3 Around 60–30 million years ago, the Black Hills uplifted in what geologists 

call the Laramide Orogeny. As the hills rose, most of the 5,000 feet of overburden was removed by 

1 Michael E. Wiles, “The Origin Of Jewel Cave And Its Relationship To Landscape-Scale Processes – Part 1,” 

Proceedings of the 17th International Congress of Speleology, 312. 

2 Wiles, “The Origin Of Jewel Cave . . . Part 1,” 312; Katie Kellerlyn, NPS, Natural Resource Program Center, 

“Jewel Cave National Monument Geologic Resources Inventory Report,” March 2009, 29. 

3 Kellerlyn, “Jewel Cave National Monument Geologic Resources Inventory Report,” 29. 
6 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

erosion. Much of the Pahasapa and Minnelusa was also removed, but an exposed remnant remains, 

encircling and tilting away from the uplifted area. Joints and faults associated with the uplift formed 

the pattern along which cave passages later developed.4

Most of the world’s large cave systems formed in limestone, since it can be dissolved by slightly 

acidic groundwater. When water absorbs carbon dioxide from the soil, it becomes a weak solution 

of carbonic acid that can enlarge fractures in the limestone by dissolving some of the limestone and 

carrying it away. Jewel Cave formed around 30–15 million years ago (perhaps more recently), after 

uplift and erosion had shaped the topography and related geological features to nearly their presentday configuration. All Black Hills caves over 500 feet in length occur in limestone that is still capped 

by the Minnelusa sandstone formation. This suggests that something about the Minnelusa formation 

created ideal conditions for the formation of limestone caves.5 Recent studies suggest that the basal 

Minnelusa sandstone functioned as a confined aquifer, transmitting water from lateral recharge sites 

(higher elevation), across the Pahasapa where passages would develop, to discharge sites (lower 

elevation) where the sandstone was again exposed and water could exit the aquifer.

6

The entire cave system formed under phreatic conditions, which means that it was completely 

saturated with water, with no air space. Under such conditions, water from the aquifer could 

circulate through fractures in the underlying limestone, back up to the aquifer, and on to the 

discharge areas. Since the aquifer was confined, it would not have lost carbon dioxide to degassing, 

speeding up the dissolution of the limestone.7

Given these conditions, Jewel Cave could have formed in as short a time as 1.1 million years, 

which is relatively fast on a geologic time scale. The presence of microbial life in the water (which 

scientific studies show to be increasingly likely) could have accelerated the rate of cave 

development.8 The calcite spar would have formed when conditions changed, so that the water 

stopped dissolving the limestone and began depositing it as a crystalline coating on all the surfaces 

within the newly created cave passage. The changes most likely resulted from the reduction of 

hydrostatic pressure as the cave drained, allowing the carbon dioxide to degas. This caused the water 

to lose its acidity, forcing the previously dissolved limestone to precipitate as the spar coating (see 

Figure 2). A single radiometric date suggests the spar stopped forming around 15 million years ago, 

when the water last drained from the cave.9

4 Michael L. Strobel, et al., US Geological Survey, “Potentiometric Surface of the Madison Aquifer in the Black Hills 

Area, South Dakota,” 1999; Kellerlyn, “Jewel Cave National Monument Geologic Resources Inventory Report,” 29. 

5 Wiles, “The Origin Of Jewel Cave . . . Part 1,” 312; Arthur N. Palmer and Margaret V. Palmer, “Geologic History 

of the Black Hills Caves, South Dakota,” National Speleological Society Bulletin (December 1989): 74. 

74; Kellerlyn, “Jewel Cave National Monument Geologic Resources Inventory Report,” 29–30.

6 Michael E. Wiles, “Paleohydrology and the Origin of Jewel Cave,” [2013?], Jewel Cave National Monument Digital 

Files (hereafter Jewel Cave NM DF), 2–3.

7 Wiles, “The Origin Of Jewel Cave . . . Part 1,” 313. 

8 Michael E. Wiles, “The Origin Of Jewel Cave And Its Relationship To Landscape-Scale Processes – Part 2,” 

Proceedings of the 17th International Congress of Speleology, 315.

9 Wiles, “The Origin Of Jewel Cave . . . Part 1,” Proceedings of the 17th International Congress of Speleology, 314; Kellerlyn, 

“Jewel Cave National Monument Geologic Resources Inventory Report,” 30; Author’s communication with Mike Wiles, 

February 9, 2020. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 7

Figure 2. Jewel Cave is named for the calcite crystals that line much of its walls. Pictured here, photo undated.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM. 

Drip zones formed near canyons, where erosion breached impermeable shale layers.10

Travertine, hydromagnesite, and aragonite precipitated from this dripping and seeping water after 

the cave drained the last time. The currently known cave passages range from 5,406 to 4,775 feet 

above sea level, and the deepest known point of the cave is 749 feet below the ground surface.11

Jewel Cave has a naturally occurring breathing effect, caused by changes in barometric pressure. 

Air blows into the cave when the outside air pressure rises, and it blows out of the cave when 

outside air pressure falls. This is apparent to any observer, as early discovery stories of the cave make 

10 Michael E. Wiles, “Infiltration [of groundwater] at Wind and Jewel Caves, Black Hills, South Dakota” (master’s 

thesis, South Dakota School of Mines and Technology, 1992).

11 Kellerlyn, “Jewel Cave National Monument Geologic Resources Inventory Report,” 11, 30.
8 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

clear. A 1907 Forest Service report noted that the early cave developers, Frank and Albert Michaud, 

had studied this phenomenon and noticed other blowing holes in the vicinity: 

They have discovered that ordinarily the wind blows in and out of the cave for regular periods. The 

periods of blowing in and out being fifteen hours each, although they have known the periods to be 

of seventy-two hours duration. Furthermore they have discovered five other wind passages in the 

vicinity of the cave, within a radius of two miles, one of which, Jasper Cave, located one and one-half 

miles to the westward, is similarly held as a mining location by S. V. and Vance I. Coe, and is a 

considerable passage as yet unexplored.12

In the early 1960s, Stan Arlton 

became the first person to calculate 

an estimated volume of Jewel Cave 

using airflow and its response to 

changes in barometric pressure. 

Since changes in barometric 

pressure create changes in the 

volume of air in the cave, Arlton 

mathematically solved for the 

volume using the known pressure 

change and measurements of

airflow.13 In 1966, Herb Conn 

completed the first detailed study of 

Jewel Cave’s airflow (see Figure 3). 

Conn measured wind speed and air 

pressure over 11 to 16 days at 

entrances to Wind Cave and Jewel 

Cave and calculated probable cave 

volume from those measurements.14

Conn determined that Jewel Cave 

could be at least four billion cubic 

feet, which meant that it either had 

huge, wide chambers or was very 

long. Because exploration up until 

then had revealed few wide cavities, the cave was likely to be long. Conn also concluded that the 

winds at the Jewel Cave entrance were weaker than those at Wind Cave. He described wind behavior

at the openings to Jewel Cave: 

12 H. C. Neel and C. W. Fitzgerald, “Report on the Proposed Jewel Cave Game Preserve,” September 1907, 2, in 

Historical Documents of Jewel Cave National Monument binder, File Proposed Game Preserve, Jewel Cave National Monument 

Central Files, Custer, SD (hereafter Jewel Cave NM CF).

13 Herb Conn and Jan Conn, The Jewel Cave Adventure: Fifty Miles of Discovery Under South Dakota (St. Louis: Cave 

Books, 1977), 40; Mike Wiles, comments on draft administrative history, April 7, 2020.

14 Herbert W. Conn, “Barometric Wind in Wind and Jewel Caves, South Dakota,” National Speleological Society Bulletin

28, no. 2 (April 1966): 67. 

Figure 3. Herb Conn holds a handkerchief to illustrate the strong wind 

blowing through a cave passageway, undated.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 9

[Wind] persists for many hours after the barometer becomes steady. Much of Jewel Cave must lie far 

from the entrance, separated perhaps by many constrictions. At these constrictions the wind may be 

fast, even far within the cave, as it is known to be at Hurricane Corner. . . . 

After a pressure jump at the Jewel Cave entrance it will take about 24 hours for one-half of the air 

necessary to equalize the cave pressure to enter the cave. If the mercury rises 1⁄4 inch and then 

steadies, Jewel Cave will continue to blow for over three days before the wind velocity drops to one 

mile per hour.15

Conn added that several local well drillers had reported striking caves that emanated strong winds 

(which may or may not have been connected to the Jewel Cave system), and he noted, “The well 

drillers with whom we talked are not eager for work in this area.”16

Early Human Use of the Area 

A complete archeological inventory for Jewel Cave was completed in 1993, and Bruce Jones of 

the NPS Midwest Archeological Center (MWAC) conducted the first large-scale evaluation of 

recorded archeological sites at the monument from 2000 to 2003. Jones’ and previous projectspecific archeological investigations resulted in finds dating from the Early Archaic through the Late 

Precontact periods (all dates below are approximate).

17 Other archeological investigations general to 

the Black Hills provide information about human use of the area. For a more detailed discussion of 

early human habitation of the Black Hills, see Patricia Albers, The Home of the Bison: An Ethnographic 

and Ethnohistorical Study of Traditional Cultural Affiliations to Wind Cave National Park; Gail Evans-Hatch 

and Michael Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages: Jewel Cave National Monument Historic Resource Study; and 

Linea Sundstrom, Storied Stone: Indian Rock Art of the Black Hills Country.

Human history prior to the arrival of Europeans to the Black Hills falls into three broad periods: 

Paleoindian (approximately 13,000 to 6,000 years before present [BP]), Archaic (approximately 7500

to 1500 BP), and Pre-Contact (1500 BP to 1750 common era [CE]).18 The archeological evidence 

does not indicate use of the cave itself during these phases. The original cave opening was a blowing 

hole, too small for human entry, and while there is no evidence of cave entry, early people could 

have been aware of the blowing hole.

15 Conn, “Barometric Wind in Wind and Jewel Caves,” 68.

16 Conn, “Barometric Wind in Wind and Jewel Caves,” 68; Kellerlyn, “Jewel Cave National Monument Geologic 

Resources Inventory Report,” 11.

17 Bruce A. Jones, “Archeological Investigations at Jewel Cave National Monument, Custer County, South Dakota, 

2000-2003,” Midwest Archeological Center Technical Report No. 94a, NPS, 2006, 1; Glenna J. Sheveland, “An Intensive 

Cultural Resources Survey of Jewel Cave National Monument: Preliminary Report,” July 10, 1993, Cabinet 3, Drawer 1, 

Jewel Cave NM CF; E. Steve Cassell, Prehistoric Hunters of the Black Hills (Boulder: Johnson Books, 1986). 

18 Different scholars periodize the eras differently. We have merged several sources to define the eras here. See 

Linea Sundstrom, Storied Stone: Indian Rock Art of the Black Hills Country (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 2004), 

11; Patricia Albers, The Home of the Bison: An Ethnographic and Ethnohistorical Study of Traditional Cultural Affiliations to Wind 

Cave National Park, Volume One, September 29, 2003, 17–20; Gail Evans-Hatch and Michael Evans-Hatch, Place of 

Passages: Jewel Cave National Monument Historic Resource Study (Omaha: NPS Midwest Regional Office, 2006), 8–22.
10 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Paleoindian (ca. 13,000 to 6000 BP)

Due to an incomplete and complicated archeological record, it is not clear when the first humans 

reached the Black Hills region. While some artifacts from the Clovis period (12,000 to 11,000 BP) 

have been found west of the Black Hills, and a few remains linked to the Folsom period (11,000 to 

9000 BP) are located in the southwestern Black Hills, the first widespread evidence of human 

habitation of the area comes from the Plano period (9000 to 2400 BP). Plano groups were huntergatherers who relied heavily on bison and other large game for food. Archeologists have found 

chisels and other tools from this period, primarily near springs on the limestone plateau of the 

western Black Hills.19

Archaic (ca. 7500 to 1500 BP)

A shift in climate ushered in the Archaic period. As the ice age ended around 8000 BP, the area 

transitioned to a drier and warmer climate, with greater seasonal variations. The largest 

concentrations of archeological sites in the Black Hills are from the Middle Archaic period (starting 

about 5000 BP). During this time, according to Albers, “a clear separation between mountain and 

plains adapted populations developed in the Black Hills.” One group used high elevation areas in the 

summer and winters in the exterior “Hogback zone” (the area of sandstone, with some limestone 

and shale, that surrounds the “Red Valley” or “Race Track” of exposed red sandstone that encircles 

the Black Hills), while others used the Hogback in the winter months and went to the open plains in 

the summer months. On the land that is now Jewel Cave National Monument, archeologists have 

found evidence of human occupation from as early as 4500 to 4200 BP.20 

Based on archeological evidence, the number of people in the Black Hills area likely dropped 

during the Late Archaic period, although there is some evidence of human use of springs at Jewel 

Cave National Monument during this period. The Comanche and the Shoshone may have been 

present, or at least had an influence on rock art motifs. Both Northwestern Plains and Plains 

Woodland cultures expanded into the Black Hills during this era. Archeologists have found a variety 

of sites in the region, including base camps, rock shelters, fire pits, hearths, and tepee rings, 

indicating that people in this era moved seasonally to take advantage of a variety of food sources. 

Rock art from the Late Archaic period is abundant in the Black Hills.21

19 Evans-Hatch and Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages, 8–11; Albers, Home of the Bison, 17–18; Jones, “Archeological 

Investigations at Jewel Cave National Monument,” 12–13. 

20 Evans-Hatch and Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages, 12; Albers, Home of the Bison, 18; Jones, “Archeological 

Investigations at Jewel Cave National Monument,” 109–114. 

21 Alice M. Tratebas, “Black Hills Settlement Patterns: Based on Functional Approach” (PhD diss., Indiana 

University, 1986), 114; Jones, “Archeological Investigations at Jewel Cave National Monument,” 31–40; Albers, Home of 

the Bison, 18–21; Evans-Hatch and Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages, 16.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 11

Pre-Contact (1500 BP to 1750 CE)

Archeological evidence from the pre-contact period is sparse and reflects seasonal occupation. 

Anthropologist Patricia Albers acknowledged that it is difficult to identify which culture groups were 

present in the Black Hills in this era: 

While archeologists are generally confident about the general technologies and adaptive strategies of 

some of the prehistoric populations who occupied the Black Hills, they are much less certain of their 

ethnic and language affiliations.22

Bow and arrow technology arrived on the Northern Plains between 2000 and 1000 BP and altered 

hunting patterns. Gradual climate change resulted in an increase in grasses in the Late Archaic 

period, which allowed bison to flourish on the Northern Plains. The growing numbers of bison, 

along with bow and arrow technology, created new opportunities for human communities in the 

region.23

In addition to sustaining the year-round occupants of the Black Hills, bison drew people from 

Missouri River farming communities into the Black Hills for seasonal hunts. These groups included 

ancestors of the Mandan, Hidatsa, and Arikara, all of which had large farming villages along the 

Missouri beginning around 900 CE. After planting crops in the spring, hunters traveled to the Black 

Hills to pursue bison during the summer, and then returned to villages along the Missouri River for 

the fall harvest. Archeologists have found bison remains at Jewel Cave National Monument dating 

to around 700 CE.24

The Lakota arrived in the Black Hills as a result of both push and pull factors. The push first 

came from the Iroquois, who had dislodged the larger Sioux population from the Great Lakes 

region in the mid-1600s, and then from the Chippewa and Cree, who forced the Sioux farther west. 

This led to the division of Sioux people into three broad groups: Dakota (referred to by 

anthropologists as Santee), Nakota (or Yankton-Yanktonai), and Lakota (or Teton). The pull came 

from bison. The Lakota bands, in particular, adopted an equestrian lifeway that emphasized bison 

hunting in the first half of the 1700s, drawing them farther west than other Sioux groups. As 

pressure from hunting shifted bison populations to the west, the Lakota followed.25 There is 

evidence of human habitation within the boundaries of Jewel Cave National Monument itself from 

this period. As of 1995, archeologists had identified 14 pre-contact sites in Jewel Cave National 

Monument—more than from any earlier period—but evidence does not indicate knowledge or use

of Jewel Cave.26

22 Albers, Home of the Bison, 21.

23 Albers, Home of the Bison, 19; Evans-Hatch and Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages, 16.

24 Jones, “Archeological Investigations at Jewel Cave National Monument,” 114; Sundstrom, Storied Stone, 16; 

Evans-Hatch and Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages, 16.

25 Sundstrom, Storied Stone, 18; Evans-Hatch and Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages, 26–28.

26 Jones, “Archeological Investigations at Jewel Cave National Monument,” 31–40; Glenna J. Sheveland, “An 

Intensive Cultural Resources Survey of Jewel Cave National Monument: Preliminary Report,” July 10, 1993, Cabinet 3, 

Drawer 1, Jewel Cave NM CF; Evans-Hatch and Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages, 17–18.
12 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Contested Lands 

Beginning in the 1700s, the Black Hills increasingly became a contested space. American Indian 

groups competed for resources in the region, with the Lakota achieving control of the territory by 

the early 1800s. European American westward migration to Oregon, Utah, and California put new 

pressures on the region, although the main travel corridor was south of the Black Hills. From the 

1850s to the 1870s, the United States at first made the Black Hills a reserve for the American Indian 

people and attempted to keep white settlers out. The federal government then used diplomacy, 

military action, and other tactics to take territorial control away from the Lakota, ultimately opening 

the region to European American mining and settlement. By the end of the 1800s, the United States 

had asserted federal jurisdiction over most of the area through the creation of national forest 

reserves. Jewel Cave does not appear to have played a role in any of these events.

Occupation and Use of the Black Hills, 1700s–1800s 

During the 1700s, American Indian groups who lived in the Black Hills (whether year-round or

seasonally) likely included the Crow, Kiowa-Apache, Kiowa, Comanche, Suhtai, Arapaho, Padouca 

Apache, and Ponca.27 The people who occupied or used the Black Hills felt the effects of European 

colonization before Europeans entered the region themselves, through disease, trade, dislocations, 

and introduction of the horse. European-introduced horses arrived in the region in the early 1700s 

through intertribal trade and the spread of feral herds. The horse and the new mobility and hunting 

lifeways it made possible led Arapaho and Cheyenne people to move into the Black Hills. They 

pushed out the Crow and Kiowa people, only to be dislodged themselves by the Lakota in the late 

1700s (see Figure 4).

28

Meanwhile, contagious European diseases devastated Mandan, Hidatsa, and Arikara farming 

communities along the Missouri River. The three tribes experienced epidemics of smallpox and 

other diseases during the winters of 1779–1780, 1780–1781, and 1801–1802, decimating their 

populations. The epidemics marked the end of their seasonal use of the Black Hills.29

While the Lakota people were never the sole occupants of the Black Hills, and the Black Hills 

were not the only place that Lakota people lived, the area had become the center of Lakota life by 

the mid-1800s. Most Lakota people wintered along the Missouri River, but they spent summer and 

autumn in the Black Hills and in the area around Wind Cave.30

Wind Cave is a sacred site for Lakota people, as their point of origin.

31 All geological features in 

the Black Hills have sacred significance for the Lakota, but no Lakota stories mention Jewel Cave 

27 Evans-Hatch and Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages, 20, 22; Albers, Home of the Bison, 63.

28 Warren A. Beck and Ynez D. Haase, Historical Atlas of the American West (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 

1989), map 9; Evans-Hatch and Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages, 22.

29 Evans-Hatch and Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages, 19.

30 Evans-Hatch and Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages, 23; Albers, Home of the Bison, 57.

31 Geoff Montes, “Sacred Native American Sites: Bear Butte and Wind Cave,” June 16, 2015, National Trust for 

Historic Preservation website, https://savingplaces.org/stories/sacred-native-american-sites-bear-butte-and-wind-
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 13

specifically.

32 Although the Lakota were the primary occupants of the Black Hills by the mid-1800s, 

the Arapaho and Cheyenne also retain “strong cultural attachments” to the Black Hills.33 (For a 

more detailed discussion of Lakota, Cheyenne, and Arapaho use and occupation of the Black Hills, 

see Albers, The Home of the Bison, 71–83.)

Figure 4. The Black Hills, pictured here from Black Elk Peak, are sacred to the Lakota people. Pictured here, August 

2011.

Source: Flickr, Navin75.

It is not clear exactly when Europeans first arrived in the Black Hills. The earliest Europeans in 

the region were probably French fur trappers and traders in the mid-1700s.34 Trappers reported 

reaching the Black Hills occasionally in the early 1800s, including a party led by Wilson Hunt in 

1811, Jedediah Smith in 1823, and some unnamed (possibly) European visitor who carved a date in a 

stone in 1834. Europeans and European Americans began using the Platte River (in present-day 

cave#.XNshlY5KiUl; Linea Sundstrom, “The Sacred Black Hills: An Ethnohistorical Review,” Great Plains Quarterly 17 

(Summer/Fall 1997): 185–212, here 197–203. 

32 Albers, Home of the Bison, 444–52, 486–89, 530–77; Elaine Marie Nelson, “Dreams and Dust in the Black Hills: 

Race, Place, and National Identity in America’s ‘Land of Promise’” (PhD diss., University of New Mexico, 2011), 46, 52.

33 Albers, Home of the Bison, 57.

34 Evans-Hatch and Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages, 34; Jones, “Archeological Investigations at Jewel Cave National 

Monument,” 21. 
14 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Nebraska and Wyoming) as a travel corridor for the fur trade in the 1820s. By the mid-1840s, with 

the expansion of the United States to the Pacific Coast, European Americans increasingly migrated 

west across the Great Plains, using the Platte River route. The migration at first had little effect on 

the Black Hills, since the Platte River was about 120 miles to the south.35 The number of European 

Americans traveling through the Great Plains increased further in the late 1840s, following reports 

of gold in California. While most overland travelers never entered the Black Hills, they moved 

through territory claimed by the Lakota and other Great Plains tribes. European American migration 

affected bison populations, both through hunting and through consumption of forage by the 

migrants’ livestock. The increasing number of migrants and the cascading ecological effects of their 

presence disrupted the economies of Great Plains tribes and exacerbated intertribal conflict.36

The US government sought to ease tensions among Plains tribes to permit safe passage for 

overland migrants. In 1851, the US government convened representatives of the Arapaho, 

Assiniboine, Arikara, Cheyenne, Crow, Gros Ventre, Sioux, Mandan, and Shoshone tribes to 

negotiate a treaty to end intertribal hostilities. The resulting Treaty of Fort Laramie delineated 

territories for each tribe, the government’s solution for achieving peace. It placed the Black Hills 

within the territory belonging to the “Sioux or Dahcotah Nation.”37 The treaty allowed the United 

States “to establish roads, military and other posts” within the tribal territories. It also provided 

livestock and implements to encourage tribes to adopt European American style agriculture.38

During the 1850s and 1860s, conflicts between the Lakota and the United States led to casualties 

on both sides. Meanwhile, the United States began sending scientific explorers into the Black Hills, 

which resulted in discoveries of gold. Gold finds in Colorado (1858) and Montana (1862) brought 

more overland travelers through Lakota territory along the Bozeman Trail.39 The problems of 

continuing encroachment on Lakota territory and increasing armed conflict led the United States 

and a number of Sioux bands to negotiate a new treaty. The 1868 Treaty of Fort Laramie established 

new boundaries around Sioux territory, setting it apart “for the absolute and undisturbed use and 

occupation of the Indians herein named, and for such other friendly tribes as they may be willing, 

with the consent of the United States, to admit amongst them . . . .” The United States pledged to 

keep unauthorized persons out of the area that became known as the “Great Sioux Reserve.” The 

Black Hills remained within Sioux territory under the 1868 treaty.40 While some Lakota bands signed 

the treaty, others refused to.41

35 Evans-Hatch and Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages, 36.

36 Nelson, “Dreams and Dust in the Black Hills,” 49.

37 Nelson, “Dreams and Dust in the Black Hills,” 50; Treaty of Fort Laramie, September 17, 1851, in Charles J. 

Kappler, ed., Indian Affairs: Laws and Treaties, vol. II (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1904), 594.

38 Treaty of Fort Laramie, September 17, 1851, in Kappler, Indian Affairs: Laws and Treaties, II, 595.

39 Nelson, “Dreams and Dust in the Black Hills,” 53–55; Evans-Hatch and Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages, 37–40, 

43–45.

40 Treaty of Fort Laramie, April 29, 1868, 15 Stat. 635; Nelson, “Dreams and Dust in the Black Hills,” 2011, 55; 

Evans-Hatch and Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages, 46–47. 

41 Great Plains Tribal Chairman’s Association, “Fort Laramie Treaty, 1851 and 1868,” accessed May 18, 2019, 

http://www.nativepartnership.org/site/PageServer?pagename=airc_hist_laramietreaty. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 15

Gold Rush and the 1877 Sioux Treaty 

The 1868 treaty did not succeed in resolving tensions. The Lakota people suffered as bison 

herds shrank and the United States failed to supply food and other goods as specified in the 1868 

treaty.42 Matters grew worse when, in 1874, General George Custer led a US Army survey expedition 

into the Black Hills and reported finding gold. A massive gold rush followed.43

Initially, the US government enforced its treaty obligation to keep white settlers out of the Black 

Hills. In December 1874, the US Army escorted the Gordon prospecting party out of the French 

Creek area, since it was within Lakota territory. However, a few prospectors evaded the Army and 

stayed behind.44 Custer City, first platted in July 1875 as the townsite of Stonewall, quickly became a 

booming settlement (see Figure 5). Prospective miners poured into the Black Hills, in violation of 

the 1868 treaty.45 

Figure 5. Custer, South Dakota, pictured here looking west, 1890.

Source: Library of Congress.

42 Nelson, “Dreams and Dust in the Black Hills,” 59–60; Evans-Hatch and Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages, 47–50; 

Albers, Home of the Bison, 103.

43 Walter P. Jenney, E. M., “Report of Geological Survey of the Black Hills,” in Annual Report of the Commissioner of 

Indian Affairs to the Secretary of the Interior (1875), 181; Evans-Hatch and Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages, 51–52.

44 Evans-Hatch and Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages, 51–57.

45 Nelson, “Dreams and Dust in the Black Hills,” 59; Evans-Hatch and Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages, 60, 64–66.
16 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Recognizing that it could not stem the tide of trespassers, the US government launched efforts 

to acquire the Black Hills, initially seeking to purchase the area. The Sioux refused to sell. Ultimately 

the United States resorted to armed force and refused to provide rations until the Sioux gave up the 

Black Hills. In 1877, US negotiators succeeded in getting enough signatures to claim that that they 

had a valid treaty ceding the Black Hills to the United States. (A century later, the Supreme Court 

awarded Sioux tribes compensation for the wrongful taking of the Black Hills, but the Sioux want 

the land returned and have refused to accept the money.46)

Now legally allowed to enter the Black Hills, more miners arrived, along with farmers and 

ranchers. The relatively dry landscape was better suited to cattle ranching than to farming. Ranches 

between Jewel Cave and Custer as of 1884 included the Y 4 Ranch, Kelly’s Ranch, Smith Ranch, and 

Felix Michaud’s ranch at Lightning Creek. In 1891, the railroad service arrived in Custer, which 

helped stabilize the economy somewhat, since products could now more easily be exported.47

Forest Reserve Act and Creation of Black Hills National Forest 

Congress passed the Forest Reserve Act on March 3, 1891, to protect the nation’s timber 

reserves and to stop the damage to watersheds caused by deforestation.48 The measure was part of 

the Creative Act, which included various public lands provisions. By the time his term ended in 

spring 1891, President Benjamin Harrison had established 15 forest reserves (totaling 13 million 

acres) under the authority of the Forest Reserve Act.49 The Black Hills were not part of this initial 

round of forest creation. 

In the Black Hills, Theodore Reder built the Sylvan Lake Hotel six miles north of Custer. The 

hotel and lake became a popular tourist spot, with visitors arriving on the newly built railroad. Two 

years later, a drought precipitated an economic slump, known as the “Great Dakota Bust,” along 

with a series of large forest fires that killed most of the trees in the northern Black Hills but left 

healthy ponderosa pine forests in the eastern, southwestern, and northwestern corners of the 

region.50 In 1896, during a survey of western forested lands, the National Forest Commission 

(created by the Forest Reserve Act) visited Hot Springs, Custer, and the Sylvan Lake Hotel to assess 

the extant Black Hills timber stands.51

On February 11, 1897, utilizing the recommendations of the National Forest Commission, 

President Grover Cleveland established 13 new forest reserves in the west (called “Washington’s 

46 Evans-Hatch and Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages, 66–75; John F. Freeman, Black Hills Forestry: A History (Boulder: 

University Press of Colorado, 2014), 22–23.

47 Evans-Hatch and Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages, 99–103, 109–10.

48 Freeman, Black Hills Forestry, 27.

49 An act to repeal timber-culture laws, and for other purposes, May 3, 1891, 26 Stat. 1095 (P.L. 51-561); Gerald W. 

Williams, “The USDA Forest Service—The First Century,” US Forest Service (April 2005), 8. 

50 Neel and Fitzgerald, “Report on the Proposed Jewel Cave Game Preserve,” 5; Evans-Hatch and Evans-Hatch, 

Place of Passages, 118. 

51 Gerald W. Williams and Char Miller, “At the Creation: the National Forest Commission of 1896–97,” Forest 

History Today (Spring–Fall 2005): 33–37; Freeman, Black Hills Forestry, 29. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 17

Birthday Reserves”), including the Black Hills in South Dakota. Settlers protested the government 

removing such a large area of the Black Hills from settlement. Under pressure from these settlers, 

President William McKinley signed the Sundry Act on June 4, 1897, which suspended the creation 

of the Washington’s Birthday Reserves for nine months. Through the legislation, Congress 

acknowledged settlers’ concerns without giving in to them. By the time the nine months had 

expired, opposition to the new reserves had died down. The Black Hills quietly became part of the 

forest reserve system (see Figure 6). The Sundry Act also included the “Pettigrew Amendment” 

(later called the Organic Act). The Pettigrew Amendment opened forests to development and 

granted the secretary of the Interior (who oversaw forest reserves at the time) powers to regulate 

and permit activities taking place in national forest reserves.52

Figure 6. Ponderosa pine forests, which are typical in the Black Hills, at Jewel Cave NM, ca. 1965.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

52 Williams, “The USDA Forest Service—The First Century,” 9–10; James G. Lewis, The Forest Service and the Greatest 

Good: A Centennial History (Durham, NC: Forest History Society, 2005), 19–21. 
18 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

By July 1897, the Department of the Interior had sent survey parties to the Black Hills to map 

the topography and to assess mining and agricultural activities. Forester Henry Graves’ resulting 

report on the Black Hills discussed the forest around Hell Canyon, but it did not mention any caves 

in the canyon.53 Only a year later, two dozen sawmills were operating in and around Custer. Grazing 

and mining also boomed within the new Black Hills National Forest Reserve, and by 1901, the Black 

Hills National Forest Reserve supervisor had issued more grazing permits than any other national 

forest.54

European Americans Find Jewel Cave

Since there are several blowing holes in the southern Black Hills, it is possible that Indigenous 

people noticed the phenomenon, but no evidence exists to indicate whether they definitively did.55

No one has ever found rock art or human remains in the cave—the blowing hole was too small for 

human entry prior to its enlargement in 1900. And while Wind Cave is central to Lakota creation 

stories, Jewel Cave specifically is not part of Lakota or other Indigenous traditions.56 However, 

because Jewel Cave, like Wind Cave, is a breathing cave, and since Lakota people see all natural 

features as significant, Jewel Cave can still be considered important in Lakota culture.57

The earliest European American encounters with Jewel Cave may have occurred in the late 

nineteenth century. In the 1940s, Custer resident Joseph Riley told NPS Ranger Lyle K. Linch that 

he and five other boys (Clyde Holmes, Mark Holmes, Buck Raver, Martin Riley, and Ray Sideley) 

happened upon a blowing hole emanating wind in Hell Canyon 

and assumed a cave might lay beyond it, as was the case at Wind Cave, which was already 

world-famous. However, it is not clear exactly where in Hell Canyon this blowing hole was.

The Michaud family is credited as the first to enter Jewel Cave. Felix Michaud was from Quebec, 

Canada, and had moved to the United States sometime before 1864. In 1875, Michaud’s wife died, 

leaving him with five children. He took them to live with family in Colorado while he joined 

prospectors in the Black Hills. At one point, he owned a livery stable in Custer, and he was involved 

in ranching and prospecting for minerals. It appears that no one, including Michaud, could have 

entered the cave, because the opening was too small.

58

The earliest historical record of discovery says that Albert and Frank Michaud (sons of Felix) 

and Charles Bush found the cave on September 18, 1900 (see Figure 7). Bush was a Michaud family 

friend from the Cache la Poudre River Valley, a French settlement in Colorado.59 John Sanford 

53 Henry S. Graves, Black Hills Forest Reserve (Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1899), 76–78, 106–

8.

54 Evans-Hatch and Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages, 96, 121–122.

55 Evans-Hatch and Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages, 124.

56 Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, “Lakota Creation Story,” accessed May 15, 2019, http://sioux.org/lakota-creationstory.html; NPS, “The Lakota Emergence Story,” accessed May 15, 2019,

https://www.nps.gov/wica/learn/historyculture/the-lakota-emergence-story.htm. 

57 Albers, Home of the Bison, 444. 

58 Evans-Hatch and Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages, 127–28, 133.

59 Evans-Hatch and Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages, 129. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 19

attributed the cave’s discovery to the Michaud brothers in his 1902 tourism promotional book, The 

Black Hills Souvenir. In this first published narrative account of the cave, Sanford wrote, 

It was discovered in 1900 by the Michaud brothers, who were prospecting in Hell’s can[y]on, one of 

the rockiest, most precipitous can[y]ons and one of the most beautiful, notwithstanding its infernal 

name, in the Hills. They were letting themselves carefully down a chimney in the rocks and remarking 

the favorable character of the place for a cave, when one of them noticed a hole a couple of inches in 

diameter and called his brother’s attention to it, saying: “There is the entrance to a cave.” The brother 

began pulling away the earth with his hand when the strong current of air blew a cloud of dust in his 

face. They knew so strong a current could come only from an immense cavern, and that they had 

indeed discovered a cave of great extent.

Subsequent exploration opened thirteen miles of passageways and 270 chambers, some of them 

among the grandest to be seen in any cave. A commodious log hotel of two stories has been built, 

providing hospitable shelter for the visitor, who will ever cherish the memory of a visit to the 

romantic place.60

Sanford exaggerated the size and extent of the known 

cave, as was common in stories about caves at the time. 

Sanford included photos of the cave features—frostwork 

and the Milk River—in the publication.61 In a 1907 report, 

Forest Service Assistant H. C. Neel and Surveyor C. W. 

Fitzgerald wrote that the Michaud brothers first found the 

cave when their “attention was attracted by the noise of 

wind coming from a small hole in the lime-stone cliffs on 

the east side of Hell Can[y]on.”62

The Michauds and Bush were the first to file 

paperwork establishing any claim to the cave. On October 

31, 1900, Frank Michaud, Albert Michaud, and Bush filed 

a “Placer and Water Rights Location Certificate” with the 

Register of Deeds of Custer County (this filing is referred 

to in other NPS documents as the Jewel Tunnel Lode 

mining claim). This was a preliminary step in the process 

of establishing a mining claim.63 On the location 

certificate, they listed the date of discovery as September 

18, 1900.64

60 John I. Sanford, The Black Hills Souvenir: A Pictorial and Historic Description of the Black Hills (Denver: The 

Williamson-Haffner Engraving Co., 1902), 218. 

61 Sanford, Black Hills Souvenir, 221–22.

62 Neel and Fitzgerald, “Report on the Proposed Jewel Cave Game Preserve,” 1. 

63 Quinn Evans Architects, Cultural Landscape Report and Environmental Assessment: Jewel Cave Historic Area, Jewel Cave 

National Monument, March 2005, 28; Custer County, Placer and Record Book Y, 552.

64 Ira Michaud to Alex Mitich, December 20, 1970, 3, File 1686, Jewel Cave National Monument Museum Files, 

Custer, SD (hereafter Jewel Cave NM MF). 

Figure 7. Frank and Albert Michaud, ca. 1906.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM. 
20 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

A mining claim was different from a fee-simple title to land.65 First, the claimant “discovered” 

the site, which could be as simple as seeing something on the surface that someone with a geology 

background would consider worth investing in to search for valuable minerals. Filing a location 

certificate meant the claimant could then identify the boundaries of the claim and leave public notice 

that the mining claim was theirs. If the claim thereafter produced minerals in paying quantities, the 

claimant could then file a patent, which, if approved, meant that the claimant owned the land in feesimple title. Before receiving a patent, the filer had to spend at least $100 per year in order to 

maintain the mining claim (in labor and/or materials).66 In the Michauds’ case, it made no difference 

that the claim was in the Black Hills National Forest Reserve; they still filed the location certificate 

with the county, and if they applied for a patent, they would apply to the General Land Office 

(GLO).

Drawing Tourists to Jewel Cave 

Caves had been desirable tourist destinations since at least the 1700s. In 1784, British travel 

writers promoted tours of “caves and other natural curiosities,” for “[w]hile some are pleased with 

the gay and beautiful, others are only to be roused and affected by the grand and terrible.”67 In the 

United States, George Washington was rumored to have scrawled his name on the walls of caves in 

Virginia and, while the stories have been disputed, the signatures attracted tourists to those caves for 

centuries.68

Mammoth Cave in Kentucky, the longest known cave system in the world, opened to tourists in 

the 1810s.69 Visitors arrived at Mammoth Cave by stagecoach until the railroad came in the 1850s.70

Literature describing tours through Mammoth Cave extolled its beauty, the purity of its air, and its 

quietness.71 Visitation peaked at Mammoth Cave in the 1860s, when the railroad brought in tourists 

daily (see Figure 8).

72 Railroad companies promoted caves as a way to get passengers on their trains. 

65 “Fee-simple” title is owning property outright, with the power to possess, use, and dispose of the property as 

desired. It is the most common and most absolute form of land ownership in western society. 

66 Approximately $3,000 in 2020 dollars. 

67 “Extract from A Tour to the Caves in the West-Riding of Yorkshire, in a letter to a Friend,” in Thomas D. West, 

A guide to the lakes in Cumberland, Westmorland and Lancashire (London: B. Shaw, Richardson, and Urquhart, 1784), 235.

68 William R. Halliday, Depths of the Earth: Caves and Cavers of the United States (New York and London: Harper & Row, 

Publishers, 1966), 4–5.

69 NPS, “The Great Shake-Up,” in A Brief History of Mammoth Cave, updated May 23, 2018,

https://www.nps.gov/maca/learn/historyculture/history5.htm.

70 NPS, “Getting There is Half the Fun,” in A Brief History of Mammoth Cave, updated May 23, 2018, 

https://www.nps.gov/maca/learn/historyculture/gettingthereishalfthefun.htm; NPS, “Oh, Innkeeper!” in A Brief 

History of Mammoth Cave, updated May 23, 2018, https://www.nps.gov/maca/learn/historyculture/ohinkeeper.htm.

71 Rev. R. Davidson, The Mammoth Cave and the Barrens of Kentucky, with Some Notices of the Early Settlement of the State 

(Lexington: A. T. Skillman & Son, 1840), 69–72; John Croghan, Rambles in the Mammoth Cave: During the Year 1844, by a 

Visiter (Louisville, KY: Morton & Griswold, 1845), ii–ix; A. D. Binkerd, The Mammoth Cave and its denizens; a complete 

descriptive guide (Cincinnati: R. Clarke & Co., 1869).

72 NPS, “The National Park Idea,” in A Brief History of Mammoth Cave, updated May 23, 2018, 

https://www.nps.gov/maca/learn/historyculture/thenationalparkidea.htm
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 21

The Virginia Midland Railway, Cumberland Valley Railroad Company, Norfolk and Western 

Railway, and the Shenandoah Valley Railroad Company all published, or supported the publication 

of, guidebooks to the sights along the rail lines, which included Luray Caverns in Virginia, 

Mammoth Cave, and smaller caves along the routes. And in the Black Hills, railroads brought 

visitors to Crystal Cave (now called Bethlehem Cave) and in close proximity to Wind Cave before 

the turn of the century.73

Figure 8. A stereograph image of Mammoth Cave, 1866.

Source: Library of Congress. 

Travel literature from the late 1800s described caving as a more exciting form of mountain 

climbing: 

. . . it may be worth while for the lover of adventure to try these unexplored depths. The present 

writer who has tried both lines of exploration, is inclined to consider the cavern-work as, perhaps, the 

more fascinating of the two. Certainly, the explorer more quickly finds his way into the realm of the 

unknown than in mountain-climbing, and is less often met by the discouraging evidence that, after all, 

the ground is not untrodden.74

73 The Virginia Midland Railway, Excursion Guide of the Virginia Midland Railway, the Short-Line Through-Car Route 

Between the North and South, The Virginia Springs, Western North Carolina and North Georgia Summer Resorts (New York: The 

Aldine Press, 1882), 8–11; The Cumberland Valley Railroad Company, Rural resorts and summer retreats along the line of the 

Cumberland Valley Railroad, Including Picnic Parks and Pleasure Places (Philadelphia: Allen, Lane & Scott, 1881), 39–46; 

Norfolk and Western Railway, “Luray Caverns,” 1898; Ernest Ingersoll, Through the Shenandoah Valley: The chronicle of a 

journey through the uplands of Virginia (New York: Liberty Printing Company, 1886).

74 N. S. Shaler, “Caverns and Cavern Life,” Scribner’s Magazine II (July–December): 452–53. 
22 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Newspapers and magazines reported cave discoveries, highlighting their massive features and 

“unknown depths.”75 Much of the mystique of caves had to do with recently developed theories on 

humans’ origins and evolution. For instance, one reporter wrote, 

It is curious but true that a hole in the ground has a powerful fascination for man. This may be due to 

the fact that we are seventeenth cousin to the rat and the ground hog, according to Darwin’s Peerage; 

or, perhaps, because our ancestors 200,000 years ago were all cave dwellers, and we still have a 

remnant of their instinct prompting us to dive into the first pit that yawns in our pathway.76

European Americans’ stories about caves often involved human exploits, mysterious happenings, or 

Indigenous uses of the cave in the distant past.77 In 1896, Horace Carter Hovey wrote one of the 

first comprehensive books on caves in the United States, Celebrated American Caverns. He profiled 

caves in Virginia’s Shenandoah Valley and in southern Indiana; Luray Cavern; Howe’s Cavern in 

Schoharie County, New York; and Mammoth Cave, to which he devoted several chapters.78 In 1900, 

Hovey’s father published an article on Wind Cave in Scientific American.

79 These books and articles 

encouraged Americans to visit caves in the late 1800s. Back at Jewel Cave, the Michauds and Bush

wanted to capitalize on this widespread enthusiasm for seeing and experiencing caves. 

Modifying and Promoting Jewel Cave 

After filing the discovery paperwork for the Jewel Tunnel Lode, the Michaud brothers and Bush 

began making improvements to the cave. One of their first tasks was building a road to the cave 

entrance.80 By summer 1901, they had completed a one-and-a-half-mile entry road that connected 

Jewel Cave to the 37-mile automobile road between Custer and Newcastle, Wyoming, which had 

been built in the 1890s and went down Lithograph Canyon and then wound up the west side of Hell 

Canyon.81

The Michaud brothers and Bush enlarged the existing entrance to the cave using chisels and 

black powder. The original entrance was a vertical tube that people had to be let down into. Later, 

they blasted a horizontal passageway wide enough to walk through (the current historic entrance) 

(see Figure 9). They lined the tunnel with pine timbers for 75 feet, starting at the new cave 

entrance.82 Farther inside, the Michauds and Bush added ladders, steps, and timber poles to facilitate 

75 “Discovery of a Wonderful Cave,” New York Times, August 10, 1883, 2. 

76 “Cave Hunting in Catskill,” New York Times, June 28, 1885, 10. 

77 J. W. Buel, America’s Wonderlands: A Pictorial and Descriptive History of our Country’s Scenic Marvels (New York: John 

Williams, 1893), 91–92, 136–44, 300–302 

78 Horace C. Hovey, Celebrated American caverns, especially Mammoth, Wyandot, and Luray. Together with historical, scientific, 

and descriptive notices of caves and grottoes in other lands (Cincinnati: The Robert Clarke Company, 1896), ix–xi; 53–122.

79 Edmund Otis Hovey, “The Wind Cave of South Dakota,” Scientific American 49 (June 16, 1900): 20458–59; Luella 

Agnes Owen, Cave Regions of the Ozarks and Black Hills (Cincinnati: Editor Publishing Co., 1898), 103–61.

80 Walt Lienau, notes on interview with Mamie Michaud, August 4, 1959, File 1692f, Jewel Cave NM MF. 

81 Evans-Hatch and Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages, 143–44; Quinn Evans Architects, Cultural Landscape Report and 

Environmental Assessment: Jewel Cave Historic Area, 29–30.

82 F. C. Schrader, USGS, “Report on the Jewel and Four Other Lode Claims,” April 15, 1909, 8, in Historical 

Documents of Jewel Cave National Monument binder, File Mining Claims, Jewel Cave NM CF; H. M. Booth, for USDA, 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 23

moving through the cave. Within a few years, they had widened passageways and developed tour 

routes extending one-and-a-half miles into the cave.83 They made these modifications with a goal of 

attracting tourists. They charged an entry fee for guided tours and built a two-story log house 

outside of the cave to lodge visitors.84 In the first years of guided tours, the Michauds and Bush 

allowed visitors to remove specimens as souvenirs.85

Figure 9. The Michauds 

blasted through the cliffs on 

the eastern side of Hell 

Canyon an entryway to Jewel 

Cave—first as a vertical tube, 

and later as this horizontal 

tunnel. Pictured here as it 

looked in 2019.

Source: Jackie Gonzales.

The Michauds and Bush promoted the cave and sought attention from the press in efforts to 

attract visitors. In 1901, they shipped several hundred pounds of cave specimens to the “Mineral 

Palace” in Deadwood, South Dakota, for exhibition.86 In autumn 1902, they started the Jewel Cave 

Dance Club, held in the two-story log cabin hotel (see Figure 10).87 The Custer Chronicle reported 

often on happenings at the cave, and in 1902, John Sanford of Hot Springs visited the cave with a 

photographer to prepare his book for Black Hills tourists, the Black Hills Souvenir. The Black Hills 

USFS, Rapid City Land District, Black Hills National Forest, Custer (Unorganized) Mining District, “Report on the 

Jewel et al Lode Mining Claims and the Jewel Cave,” June 1911, 4, in Government Geologic Investigations and Reports on Jewel 

Cave (1909–late 1920s), Interpretation Division Binder, Jewel Cave NM Visitor Center; Ira Michaud, “Jewel Cave: What I 

Have Heard and Seen,” December 1970, 2, File 1687, Jewel Cave NM MF; Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

83 Schrader, “Report on the Jewel and Four Other Lode Claims,” 8–9; Neel and Fitzgerald, “Report on the 

Proposed Jewel Cave Game Preserve,” 1–2; Evans-Hatch and Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages, 133–35.

84 Neel and Fitzgerald, “Report on the Proposed Jewel Cave Game Preserve,” 3; Lienau, notes on interview with 

Mamie Michaud; Schrader, “Report on the Jewel and Four Other Lode Claims,” 9.

85 Lienau, notes on interview with Mamie Michaud. 

86 “Exhibit of Minerals,” Weekly Pioneer-Times (Deadwood, SD), July 11, 1901, 7, accessed via newspapers.com; EvansHatch and Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages, 147. 

87 Evans-Hatch and Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages, 148–49.
24 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Weekly Journal reported that Sanford and the photographers were “loud in their praise of the 

beautiful and interesting features of the cave, and not to be seen in the other caves in the hills.”88

Despite the publicity, the Michauds and Bush never attracted as many tourists as Wind Cave 

managed to draw. The brothers thought that Custer area promoters undersold Jewel Cave. Some 

locals, as Frank’s son Ira later remembered, called it a “rat hole in the ground” and did little to help 

promote it.89 After the Michauds and Bush spent three years developing the cave almost full time, 

Bush moved on and left Frank and Albert at the cave. From around that point on, the two brothers 

worked only part of the year at the cave.90 

Figure 10. The 

Michauds built 

this two-story log 

cabin and hotel 

near the cave 

entrance. Pictured 

here ca. 1917.

Source: NPS, Jewel 

Cave NM.

Wind Cave’s Road to Becoming a National Park 

The Michauds took inspiration for their promotion of Jewel Cave from Wind Cave. European 

Americans happened upon Wind Cave in the early 1880s, when some hunters noticed wind coming 

out of the ground that, according to local legends, blew their hats off.91 In 1886, 1889, and 1890, 

different individuals filed location certificates at Wind Cave. The last of those was purchased from 

the original owner by the South Dakota Mining Company, which then hired Jesse McDonald to 

manage the claim.92

88 “Peculiar to the Jewel Cave,” Black Hills Weekly Journal (Rapid City, SD), March 21, 1902, 1 (quoting the TribunePilot), accessed via newspapers.com.

89 Evans-Hatch and Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages, 150–51.

90 Neel and Fitzgerald, “Report on the Proposed Jewel Cave Game Preserve,” 1; Lienau, notes on interview with 

Mamie Michaud; Evans-Hatch and Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages, 129.

91 Kathy S. Mason, “Adapting to Endure: The Early History of Wind Cave National Park, 1903–1916,” South Dakota 

History 32, no. 2 (Summer 2002): 151; John W. Bohi, “75 Years at Wind Cave: A History of the National Park,” 1962, 3.

92 Bohi, “75 Years at Wind Cave,” 6; Mason, “Adapting to Endure,” 151.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 25

After realizing that Wind Cave had little in the way of valuable minerals, the South Dakota 

Mining Company fired McDonald, but he stayed on the land and developed it for tourism.93

McDonald benefited from a new railroad line to Hot Springs, which made traveling to the cave easy 

for tourists. To promote the cave, McDonald and John Stabler (who soon built a hotel next to the 

cave) formed the Wonderful Wind Cave Improvement Company and sent rocks from Wind Cave to 

Custer, Hot Springs, and the World’s Fair in Chicago for display.94

Wind Cave attained an elevated status thanks to publicity efforts, strong community allies, and 

laudatory scientific reports about the cave’s size and importance. Several local entrepreneurs 

incorporated a second improvement company in 1898—the Black Hills Wind Cave Company—to 

manage and promote the cave. They had raised $500,000 in capital stock by January 4, 1899.95 They 

partnered with civic groups in the region that held events in the cave and named rooms after these 

organizations, including the Grand Army of the Republic, Masons, Eastern Star, Odd Fellows, 

YMCA, Daughters of the American Revolution (DAR), Knights of Pythias, Epworth League, Elks, 

Women’s Christian Temperance Union, Modern Woodmen of America, Ancient Order of United 

Workmen, South Dakota Federation of Women’s Clubs, and the South Dakota Teachers’ 

Association (see Figure 11).96

Figure 11. W. R. Cross 

photograph from 

inside of Wind Cave, 

with the caption, “In 

Wind Cave, S.D. 350 

feet below the surface 

at Odd Fellows’ Hall. . 

. .” William Jennings 

Bryan and Governor 

Andrew E. Lee are in 

the center front of the 

group, ca. 1897.

Source: NPS, Jewel 

Cave NM.

93 Bohi, “75 Years at Wind Cave,” 7–8, 10–13.

94 Mason, “Adapting to Endure,” 152; Evans-Hatch and Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages, 101; John Milner Associates, 

Inc., and Rivanna Archaeological Consulting, “Wind Cave National Park Cultural Landscape Report,” May 2005, 2–35.

95 This would be equivalent to approximately $15 million in 2020 dollars. 

96 Bohi, “75 Years at Wind Cave,” 38, 46–47.
26 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

In 1898, professors from the South Dakota School of Mines visited Wind Cave and prepared a 

scientific report that called it one of the country’s “most extensive” caves and extolled its 

formations.97 The following year, GLO Agent C. W. Greene reported to the Department of Interior 

(DOI) that Wind Cave was large and important enough to be a national park. The GLO granted the 

DOI permission to temporarily withdraw land at Wind Cave from settlement as it awaited the 

possibility that Congress would establish it as a national park.98

Political momentum built when US Representative Eben W. Martin (R-SD-B)99 of Deadwood 

suggested that Secretary of the Interior Ethan A. Hitchcock add Wind Cave to the Black Hills 

National Forest, which GLO Commissioner Binger Hermann also recommended. Secretary 

Hitchcock took a different approach, however, and directed Interior staff to draft legislation to 

establish Wind Cave National Park. 

A 1902 GLO report called Wind Cave an “extinct geyser,” as some geologists considered it at 

the time.100 US Representative John F. Lacey (R-IA) said on the floor of Congress that Wind Cave

is substantially what the Yellowstone country would be if the geysers should die. It has been excavated 

by hot water in the same manner that the geyser land is now being excavated in the Yellowstone. The 

active forces are no longer in operation there; there is no hot water, and the conditions that formerly 

prevailed there have ceased; but a series of very wonderful caves remain, and the Land Department 

has withdrawn this tract from settlement.101

Promoters used this geyser theory to associate Wind Cave with the already famous Yellowstone 

National Park. They also speculated that Wind Cave rivaled the legendary Mammoth Cave in size.102

Congress passed legislation authorizing Wind Cave National Park in 1902, and President Theodore 

Roosevelt signed it into law on January 9, 1903. McDonald and Stabler, who had developed the cave 

as a tourist attraction, received no compensation from the government for their improvements.

Wind Cave attained federal protection because it had several advantages that Jewel Cave did not. 

Local entrepreneurs and boosters were heavily invested in Wind Cave—financially and otherwise—

before the turn of the century. The cave was on a railroad line, which made it easy for tourists to 

access. A handful of politicians championed the issue in Congress and were willing to fight for the 

cave’s protection—something Jewel Cave would find later, but not in its first ten years. And the 

97 Bohi, “75 Years at Wind Cave,” 39. 

98 Bohi, “75 Years at Wind Cave,” 40–41, 52. The GLO often removed lands with unique natural or cultural 

features from the public domain through “temporary withdrawals,” which could be justified if the area had value for 

anything other than agriculture. After the passage of the Antiquities Act, the GLO worked with President Theodore 

Roosevelt to convert many of the temporary withdrawals to national monuments. Hal Rothman, America’s National 

Monuments: The Politics of Preservation (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1994), 54–55. 

99 At this time, South Dakota had two at-large congressional representatives who occupied “Seat A” and “Seat B.”

100 Bohi, “75 Years at Wind Cave,” 53–55; Owen, Cave Regions of the Ozarks and Black Hills, 141–59.

101 36 Cong. Rec. 1902 (December 6, 1902).

102 Mason, “Adapting to Endure,” 156. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 27

supporters of Wind Cave used networks of promoters and local partners to spread (sometimes 

exaggerated) information about the cave, which attracted more tourists.103

Only a few months after the establishment of Wind Cave National Park, the Custer Chronicle 

suggested that the government should buy Jewel Cave and reimburse the Michauds for their work. 

Another article speculated that Jewel Cave could become a national park just like Wind Cave had.104

In mid-April, the Capital, a newspaper out of Mitchell, South Dakota, reported on the possibility of 

Jewel Cave gaining federal protection, evidence that news of Jewel Cave had begun to travel: 

The government may set apart the land on which is situated the Jewel cave, sixteen miles west of 

Custer, as a national reserve. Recent explorations have proven that the cave is one of the most 

remarkable underground vaults in the world, containing miles of passages and chambers, lined with 

glittering crystals.105

The Michauds used Wind Cave’s success to continue promoting Jewel Cave’s potential size and 

geologic features. They donated rocks from the cave to Rufus J. Pilcher, whose father, Joseph R. 

Pilcher, owned a drug store in Custer. Pilcher displayed the specimens at the 1904 Louisiana 

Purchase Exposition in St. Louis, Missouri, which helped create some buzz about Jewel Cave.106 In 

1905, a newspaper in Deadwood talked up Jewel Cave’s “handsome” specimens, and tourist 

pamphlets had started including Jewel Cave alongside Sylvan Lake and Wind Cave in a list of 

attractions in the southern Black Hills.107

A Second Round of Mining Claims 

The Michauds may have tried to obtain a patent on their mining claim around 1904, but there 

are no records of this apart from Ira Michaud’s recollection years later. In 1970, Ira wrote, 

As a considerable distance of the main passages in the cave had by this time been explored and 

plotted both inside and on the surface, and sufficient claims validated to cover same, the partners 

decided it was time to apply for a patent for the claims. The necessary work and expenditures had 

been made and the partners claimed this natural wonder by rights of discovery and location. This was 

when things started going badly. The Government patent office located at Washington D.C. held up 

patent proceedings regarding the cave, saying they needed more legal advice before they could 

complete the patent for the claims.

103 36 Cong. Rec. 1902 (December 6, 1902); Act of January 9, 1903, 32 Stat. 765 (Ch. 63); Bohi, “75 Years at Wind 

Cave,” 55–59.

104 Custer Chronicle, April 4, 1903; Evans-Hatch and Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages, 165–66

105 The “miles of passages” that the paper described was an exaggeration, typical of cave descriptions at the time. 

“Wonderful Jewel Cave: Government May Set it Aside as a National Reserve,” Mitchell Capital (Mitchell, SD), April 17, 

1903, 1, accessed via newspapers.com; Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020.

106 Rufus J. Pilcher, “Jewel Cave,” March 12, 1969, Cabinet 3, Drawer 1, Folder H14 Area and Service History 

Cultural Park Hist. Research Documents, Jewel Cave NM CF. 

107 “Summer Resorts: Black Hills Hotels Getting Ready for Business,” Argus-Leader (Sioux Falls, SD), March 12, 

1905, 3, accessed via newspapers.com; “Splendors of the New Cave,” Daily Deadwood Pioneer-Times (Deadwood, SD), 

January 29, 1905, 1, accessed via newspapers.com.
28 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

This wrangling between the claim owners and the federal government went on and on, and by the fall 

of 1904 it was quite evident that a legal patent would not be very probable.108

As part of the patent application process, the holder of a mining claim was required to post notice of 

application for patent in a local newspaper for at least 60 days. We have not found any notice for the 

Michauds’ claim. Whether or not they filed a patent application—and the Forest Service believed 

that they never did (see Chapter 2)—no patent was ever granted to them. The Michauds did not 

own the land, and they remained in possession only of a mining claim covering the entrance to Jewel 

Cave.109

Without a patent, the Michauds shifted their strategy. On November 10, 1905, they sold part of 

their interest in the Jewel Tunnel Lode claim to Bertha Cain of St. Louis, Missouri. Cain never did 

any work on the claim; she simply invested, and the Michauds continued to do the required upkeep 

work.110 On November 15, the three of them filed a new location certificate for the Jewel Lode 

claim. They may have taken that step in order to secure their control over the cave in response to 

another claim in the area (filed by Henry Pilger on October 2, 1905).

111 The new Jewel Lode claim 

encompassed 20 acres of unsurveyed territory in Hell Canyon.112

Over the next two months, Cain and the Michauds filed claims for four additional lodes in or 

near Hell Canyon: Golden Rod, Cleveland, Gem, and Denver. The Golden Rod Lode claim was 

adjacent to the Jewel Lode claim, and the others were on the other side of Hell Canyon. They listed 

gold, silver, manganese, and iron as prospective metals for all five claims. None of these minerals

produced in paying quantities in the years following the filings.113

After filing the new claims, the Michauds slowed down. Albert moved to British Columbia, and 

Frank married Mamie Riley and started a family. Frank and Mamie lived at least part of the year in a 

house near Prairie Dog Spring in Hell Canyon.114 By 1906 or so, in addition to the house, they had 

built a log barn, a spring house, a chicken coop, and several sheds near the cave.115 They continued 

to try to attract tourists to the cave, but they had only minimal success. 

108 Ira Michaud, “Jewel Cave: What I Have Heard and Seen,” December 1970, 4, File 1687, Jewel Cave NM MF. 

109 Michaud, “Jewel Cave.” 

110 Bertha Cain to Overton W. Price, July 16, 1908, in Historical Documents of Jewel Cave National Monument binder, File 

B. Cain Letters, Jewel Cave NM CF.

111 Indenture recorded by the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Custer County, South Dakota, November 10, 1905; 

Evans-Hatch and Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages, 153; Quinn Evans Architects, Cultural Landscape Report and Environmental 

Assessment: Jewel Cave Historic Area, 31–32.

112 W. F. Hill, Report on Mining Claim, Jewel Lode, February 19, 1908, in Historical Documents of Jewel Cave National 

Monument binder, File Mining Claims, Jewel Cave NM CF.

113 W. F. Hill, Report on Mining Claim, Jewel, Golden Rod, Gem, Denver, and Cleveland Lodes, February 19, 1908, 

in Historical Documents of Jewel Cave National Monument binder, File Mining Claims, Jewel Cave NM CF.

114 Lienau, notes on interview with Mamie Michaud. 

115 Schrader, “Report on the Jewel and Four Other Lode Claims,” 8.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 29

Conclusion

Although we now know of Jewel Cave and have at least some grasp of its extent (more than 200 

miles have been mapped at the time of this writing), it remained obscure until the late 1800s. Early 

inhabitants of the region visited the Black Hills seasonally for many thousands of years, but there is 

no archeological evidence or oral tradition to indicate that they were aware of the cave. The Lakota 

people, for whom the Black Hills are sacred, have cultural associations with nearby Wind Cave, but 

there are no specific relationships documented between the Lakota and Jewel Cave.

Treaties in 1851 and 1868 acknowledged Lakota ownership of the Black Hills. But after 

European American discovery of gold in the Black Hills, the United States allowed miners and 

settlers in and forced the Lakota out. The area around and including Jewel Cave subsequently 

became part of a national forest. The newcomers to the region, perhaps because of their focus on 

belowground minerals, became aware of caves in the Hell Canyon area in the late 1800s, although 

there is no clear evidence of whether they encountered Jewel Cave specifically. In 1900, the Michaud 

brothers and Charles Bush found Jewel Cave while prospecting, and they filed a mining claim. They 

did not obtain minerals in significant paying quantities from their claim but instead developed the 

cave for tourism.

Tourists came to Jewel Cave, but nearby Wind Cave drew much more attention and was more 

accessible to visitors. Partly due to the success of local boosters in promoting protection for Wind 

Cave, Congress established Wind Cave National Park in 1903. For the first few years of the 1900s, 

Jewel Cave remained in Wind Cave’s shadow. 

A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 31

Chapter 2: Establishment and Forest 

Service Management of Jewel Cave 

National Monument 

By 1906, Custer residents had finally started to notice Jewel Cave. The local paper reported on 

the wonders of the cave. Bertha Cain, who owned a share in the Michaud mining claims surrounding 

Jewel Cave, later recalled the great public support for Jewel Cave in the first decade of the 1900s: 

The citizens of Custer and vicinity came in great numbers to see the cave. They were excited and 

enthusiastic over it and begged us to allow them to make an effort to have the Government reserve 

the cave as a National Monument and improve it along the lines of the Wind Cave near Hot Springs, 

S.D.1

This enthusiasm helped gain federal protection for Jewel Cave in 1908, when President Theodore 

Roosevelt used the power of the 1906 Antiquities Act to designate the cave as a national monument. 

In the years that followed, the US Forest Service had authority over the monument but did little to 

manage it, due to confusion surrounding the mining claims of Cain and the Michaud brothers. Until 

the late 1920s, Jewel Cave remained mostly closed to the public. 

Establishment of the National Monument

In 1906, Custer area residents, with support of local attorney and US Representative William H. 

Parker (R-SD) and attorney C. E. Smith, circulated a petition to establish a Jewel Cave Game 

Preserve.2 Game preserves had become popular with some eastern conservationists as a way to 

protect wild game for wealthy sportsmen. Black Hills area promoters hoped a preserve would 

protect surface fauna, whose numbers were declining with increasing settlement in the area, and 

draw in sport hunters and their wallets. The idea had little to do with protecting the cave.3Still, 

Frank and Albert Michaud, the brothers who possessed a mining claim covering the entrance to 

Jewel Cave, favored the idea of a game preserve. They were frustrated with the paltry numbers of 

tourists at Jewel Cave—especially compared to Wind Cave National Park—and their 

correspondingly low revenues.

4

1 Bertha Cain to the President of the United States, May 29, 1908, in Historical Documents of Jewel Cave National 

Monument binder, File B. Cain Letters, Jewel Cave National Monument Central Files, Custer, SD (hereafter Jewel Cave 

NM CF).

2 Gail Evans-Hatch and Michael Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages: Jewel Cave National Monument Historic Resource Study

(Omaha: NPS Midwest Regional Office, 2006), 167. 

3 Evans-Hatch and Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages, 123, 160–61. 

4 H. C. Neel and C. W. Fitzgerald, “Report on the Proposed Jewel Cave Game Preserve,” September 1907, 3, in 

Historical Documents of Jewel Cave National Monument binder, File Proposed Game Preserve, Jewel Cave NM CF.
32 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

In mid-1907, Parker sent the petition to the Black Hills National Forest supervisor.5 The 

proposal worked its way up through higher levels in the US Forest Service, and eventually Chief 

Forester Gifford Pinchot ordered a study of it. After some discussion about who would conduct the 

study, Forest Service Surveyor C. W. Fitzgerald and Forest Assistant Harry Campbell Neel were 

assigned to the task.6

Neel and Fitzgerald completed their “Report on the Proposed Jewel Cave Game Preserve” in 

September 1907. The proposed preserve would include 38,400 acres of forest land (16,400 acres of 

merchantable timber), several permanent springs that grazing stock relied on, a few potential 

homestead sites (depending on the availability of water), and, beneath it all, the cave.7 Neel and 

Fitzgerald, like Wind Cave promoters before them, cited geologists who described the caves of the 

Black Hills as “extinct geyser channel[s].”8 They also noted that there were other cave openings in 

the vicinity of Jewel Cave, including one called “Jasper Cave”: 

The explorers [Michauds] have been careful observers of the action of the wind within the cave. They 

have discovered that ordinarily the wind blows in and out of the cave for regular periods. The periods 

of blowing in and out being fifteen hours each, although they have known the periods to be of 

seventy-two hours duration. Furthermore they have discovered five other wind passages in the 

vicinity of the cave, within a radius of two miles, one of which, Jasper Cave, located one and one-half 

miles to the westward, is similarly held as a mining location by S. V. and Vance I. Coe, and is a 

considerable passage as yet unexplored. Several hundred dollars have been expended in developing 

this claim [Jasper Cave] in a search for manganese, but mineral in paying quantities was not found.

They have also observed the action of the wind in these openings and have found it to correspond 

very closely with that of Jewel cave.9

Neel and Fitzgerald concluded, “It is believed that Jewel Cave, Jasper Cave and the nearby wind 

passages are objects of scientific interest.”10

Neel and Fitzgerald ultimately advised against creating a game preserve but favored protection 

of the cave itself. They cited local opposition to the game preserve, saying that some Custer County 

settlers wanted to graze livestock in the area, which a preserve would prevent. Some local leaders 

worried that loss of grazing and mining lands would hurt the county’s chances of economic 

development in the future.11 Instead of a game preserve, Fitzgerald and Neel wrote, 

It is recommended that the N. l/2 of Section 2, the N. 1/2 of Section 3, T. 4 S., R. 2 E, the S. l/2 of 

Section 34, the S. 1/2 of Section 35, T. 3 S., R. 2 S., B. H. Mer. [Black Hills Meridian], approximately 

5 Neel and Fitzgerald, “Report on the Proposed Jewel Cave Game Preserve,” 3–4.

6 Chief Inspector, USFS District 2, to the Chief Forester, July 26, 1907; C. W. Fitzgerald to Smith Riley, July 30, 

1907; and Smith Riley to C. W. Fitzgerald, August 1, 1907, all in Historical Documents of Jewel Cave National Monument 

binder, File Proposed Game Preserve, Jewel Cave NM CF.

7 Neel and Fitzgerald, “Report on the Proposed Jewel Cave Game Preserve,” 6–7.

8 Neel and Fitzgerald, “Report on the Proposed Jewel Cave Game Preserve,” 2; 36 Cong. Rec. 80 (December 6, 

1902). 

9 Neel and Fitzgerald, “Report on the Proposed Jewel Cave Game Preserve,” 2. 

10 Neel and Fitzgerald, “Report on the Proposed Jewel Cave Game Preserve,” 7.

11 Neel and Fitzgerald, “Report on the Proposed Jewel Cave Game Preserve,” 6.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 33

1,280 acres, be withdrawn from settlement and that this in area be declared a “National Monument,” 

to be known as the Jewel Cave National Monument.

Fitzgerald and Neel proposed that the Michauds be “partially reimbursed” for the investments they 

had made to develop the cave and its entrance area, and they recommended that the Forest Service 

make “a thorough investigation and appraisement of this work” to calculate proper compensation.12

Forest Service District Chief Inspector Smith Riley agreed with Neel and Fitzgerald’s 

recommendation against a game preserve but recommended a smaller “game refuge” around the 

cave.13 Associate Forester Overton Price responded to Riley’s suggestion:

I talked over your plan of a Game Refuge with Mr. Pinchot and we decided that it was not necessary 

or desirable to set aside such a Refuge in the Black Hills National Forest. I have written Congressman 

Parker informing him what action would be taken and enclose a copy of my letter to him.

Price concluded that the Forest Service would not recommend creation of the preserve. He cited 

“lack of scientific need” to protect the flora and fauna of the Black Hills “because these animals are 

identical to those found in the Rocky Mountains” and those found at Yellowstone.14

Price instead favored establishing 1,280 acres around the entrance to Jewel Cave as a national 

monument, justified “by the great natural and scientific interest of the cave.”15 The president of the 

United States had the power to create national monuments through the authority of the Antiquities 

Act of June 8, 1906, which provided a way for the federal government to protect land without 

requiring an act of Congress (see Appendix A).

16 By early 1908, President Theodore Roosevelt had 

created 12 national monuments, covering cultural, historical, and natural sites.17 Roosevelt used the 

“scientific interest” clause in the Antiquities Act liberally, granting national monument status to such 

places as the Grand Canyon, Muir Woods, and the forests of the Olympic Peninsula.18

On January 20, 1908, Acting Secretary of Agriculture Willett Martin Hays sent Secretary of the 

Interior James R. Garfield a Forest Service map of the area proposed as Jewel Cave National 

Monument. The area of the proposed monument included Jewel Cave, Jasper Cave, the Michaud’s 

two-story log hotel, and Hill Spring (later known as Jewel Cave Spring) (see Figure 12).19 Forest 

Service officials remained uncertain about the validity of existing mining claims. On February 4, 

1908, Associate Forester Price asked the Black Hills National Forest to “have an examination made 

12 Neel and Fitzgerald, “Report on the Proposed Jewel Cave Game Preserve,” 7.

13 Smith Riley to Chief Forester, December 10, 1907, in Historical Documents of Jewel Cave National Monument binder, 

File Proposed Game Preserve, Jewel Cave NM CF.

14 Overton Price, Associate Forester, to Smith Riley, January 6, 1908, in Historical Documents of Jewel Cave National 

Monument binder, File Proposed Game Preserve, Jewel Cave NM CF.

15 Overton Price, Associate Forester, to Smith Riley, January 6, 1908, in Historical Documents of Jewel Cave National 

Monument binder, File Proposed Game Preserve, Jewel Cave NM CF.

16 An act for the preservation of American Antiquities, June 8, 1906, 34 Stat. 225 (P.L. 59-209). 

17 Hal Rothman, America’s National Monuments: The Politics of Preservation (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1994), 

86.

18 Rothman, America’s National Monuments, 66–69.

19 Willet M. Hays to the Secretary of the Interior, January 20, 1908, in Historical Documents of Jewel Cave National 

Monument binder, File Proclamation, Jewel Cave NM CF.
34 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

to determine the validity of this filing and if mineral can not be found in sufficient quantities to 

warrant exploitation, the claims can be proved invalid. Please submit full reports on other claims if 

there are any within the area recommended.”20

Figure 12. This 1908 Forest Service map was included in President Theodore Roosevelt’s February 

7, 1908, proclamation authorizing Jewel Cave National Monument.

Source: Library of Congress.

20 Overton Price, Associate Forester, to E. M. Hamilton, Black Hills National Forest, February 4, 1908, Files 1655c–

1655d, Jewel Cave National Monument Museum Files, Custer, SD (hereafter Jewel Cave NM MF). 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 35

On February 7, 1908, President Theodore Roosevelt used the authority of the Antiquities Act to 

proclaim the proposed 1,280 acres around the opening to Jewel Cave as the nation’s fourteenth 

national monument (see Appendix A). Jewel Cave was the first national monument authorized to 

protect a cave. The 1908 Forest Service map showing the openings to both Jewel and Jasper Caves 

was included in the proclamation, but only Jewel Cave (not Jasper Cave) was mentioned in the text 

of the proclamation. The order stipulated that the Forest Service would manage Jewel Cave National 

Monument, but the national monument designation would be the “dominant reservation” of the 

land, taking precedence over the national forest designation. Roosevelt’s executive order creating 

Jewel Cave National Monument stated that the cave was “of scientific interest” and removed it from 

all “settlement, entry, and all forms of appropriation under the public land laws, subject to all prior 

valid adverse claims.”21

Forest Service Management (1908–1933)

The US Forest Service has its roots in several small government agencies. In 1881, the federal 

government established a Division of Forestry within the Department of Agriculture (USDA) as an 

education and research agency that lacked any land management responsibilities. Congress passed 

the Forest Reserve Act in 1891, through which the federal government established the nation’s first 

15 forest reserves. In 1897, President William McKinley signed into law the Sundry Act, which 

granted the General Land Office (GLO) authority for managing the nation’s forest reserves. With 

the responsibility for forests spread over several agencies, influential forester Gifford Pinchot began 

a movement to consolidate federal forest management. Pinchot’s efforts resulted in the creation of 

the Bureau of Forestry within the USDA in 1905. Later that year, the bureau was renamed the 

Forest Service.22

Initially, the Forest Service did little to manage Jewel Cave National Monument as distinct from 

surrounding forest lands. The continued uncertainty about the validity and extent of the mining 

claims posed an obstacle to management. Ultimately, Forest Service inaction on Jewel Cave was 

symptomatic of the agency’s larger tendency to neglect the national monuments under its 

jurisdiction. At other Forest Service national monuments in the early 1900s—as well as those under

the supervision of the War Department or the GLO—agency representatives usually visited only 

once or twice per year. From 1908 to 1933, the Forest Service investigated mining claims and 

attempted to protect the cave from vandalism, but it did little else to manage, protect, or promote 

Jewel Cave.23 

Mining Claims Investigations 

Within two weeks of Roosevelt establishing Jewel Cave National Monument, the Forest Service 

sent W. F. Hill, a forest ranger, to conduct a preliminary investigation of the Michauds’ mining 

21 Theodore Roosevelt, Presidential Proclamation No. 799, February 7, 1908. 

22 Gerald W. Williams, “The USDA Forest Service—The First Century,” US Forest Service (April 2005), 5–17. 

23 For more on vandalism at national monuments, see Rothman, America’s National Monuments, 74–75, 188. 
36 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

claims. Hill reported that the claimants had not applied for a patent on any of the five claims within 

the monument (Jewel Lode, Golden Rod Lode, Gem Lode, Denver Lode, and Cleveland Lode).24

Hill wrote that the Jewel Lode was “not located in any known mineral belt” and that the Michauds 

were not regularly removing ore from the cave. He concluded, 

Undoubtedly the original location of this claim was for the purpose of holding the ground on account 

of the Jewel cave, which was discovered about the year 1900, and an entrance opened up and 

excavations made at different places from time to time. But mineral has since been found in different 

places in the cave.25

Hill noted, however, that the minerals found within the Jewel Lode “are regarded as of only 

moderate value.”26

For the Cleveland, Denver, Golden Rod, and Gem lodes, Hill wrote that each of the claims 

“would undoubtedly be considered a valid claim under the mining laws,” since they were situated 

along well-defined, possibly mineral-bearing veins in limestone. However, the claimants had not 

developed those claims to the extent that they had developed Jewel Cave, and, “the fact . . . of the 

entrance to Jewel Cave being located on adjoining claim is probably a great inducement to [the] 

applicant for holding the claim.” Hill recommended that a mineralogist examine the Jewel Lode and 

the four surrounding claims in order to verify that there were not minerals of paying quantities 

present at any of them.27

Having learned of the cave’s new national monument status via Hill, the Michaud brothers and 

Bertha Cain wondered what to do. On May 26, 1908, Cain wrote to President William H. Taft, 

I fear that I am going to be wronged out of my property . . . So far as I can learn the petition of the 

citizens of Custer County was not presented to Congress and no bill appropriating money to pay the 

owners was introduced, as we were led to believe it would be.

Cain explained that C. E. Smith, the Custer attorney who promoted the game preserve with Parker, 

was the person who had led them to believe that federal protection of Jewel Cave would include 

reimbursement to the claimants for the work they had done at the site. She called Smith an “an 

irresponsible person” and reported that he had since left the state. Cain requested remuneration for 

her investment in the claim.28

Associate Forester Price reassured Cain that the national monument designation would not 

interfere with existing mining claims: the Antiquities Act authorized the secretary of the Interior to 

accept relinquishments of mining claims, but it did not give him the power to purchase such 

24 W. F. Hill, Report on Mining Claim, for Jewel, Gem, Denver, Golden Rod, and Cleveland Lodes, February 19, 

1908, in Historical Documents of Jewel Cave National Monument binder, File Mining Claims, Jewel Cave NM CF.

25 W. F. Hill, Report on Mining Claim, Jewel Lode, February 19, 1908, in Historical Documents of Jewel Cave National 

Monument binder, File Mining Claims, Jewel Cave NM CF.

26 Hill, Report on Mining Claim, Jewel Lode.

27 Hill, Report on Mining Claim, for Jewel, Gem, Denver, Golden Rod, and Cleveland Lodes.

28 Bertha Cain to the President of the United States, May 29, 1908, in Historical Documents of Jewel Cave National 

Monument binder, File B. Cain Letters, Jewel Cave NM CF.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 37

claims.29 Although there was no legal mechanism for the Forest Service to purchase the claim, Price 

still asked Cain for a figure at which she and the Michauds would be willing to sell it, if they could. 

Cain replied that the Michauds would be willing to accept $1,000 each, which meant $4,000 total if 

Cain received the same price for her 50 percent stake in the claim.30 Price later reiterated that the 

Forest Service could not legally purchase the claim and informed Cain that she and the Michauds 

would need to develop the claims as required by federal mining laws if they wanted to retain 

ownership of them.31

In an appeal to President Theodore Roosevelt, Cain had also asked if her father (who had 

entered the cave many times) could be appointed superintendent of the national monument, to help 

with her family’s financial troubles.32 Price responded that the Forest Service planned to administer 

the national monument “by the executive force of this Forest without extra expense to the 

Government.” The Forest Service followed through on its decision not to hire anyone to manage 

Jewel Cave specifically.33

The Forest Service did, however, continue to investigate the mining claims on the monument. In 

April 1909, F. C. Schrader, a geologist with the US Geological Survey, sent the secretary of the 

Interior a report on the claims.34 Schrader reported that none of the claims were in good shape:

ladders into the cave were rotting and broken (which hindered Schrader’s investigation) and only 

small amounts of ore had been removed from the cave, “principally for testing.” While the deposits 

in the Jewel and Cleveland claims contained manganese, iron, jasper, and lithographic limestone, the 

claimants had already extracted most of the valuable minerals. Schrader estimated that the claimants 

had spent $5,000 in labor and materials for developing the mine, and $1,200 for surface 

improvements.35 He wrote, “A large part of this work perhaps was done with the view of attracting 

to the cave the patronage of tourists, from whom a moderate fee for board and lodging and 

underground guide was collected.”36

29 Overton W. Price to Bertha Cain, May 12, 1908, in Historical Documents of Jewel Cave National Monument binder, File 

B. Cain Letters, Jewel Cave NM CF.

30 Roughly equivalent to $28,000 and $108,000, respectively, in 2020 dollars. Bertha Cain to Overton W. Price, July 

16, 1908, in Historical Documents of Jewel Cave National Monument binder, File B. Cain Letters, Jewel Cave NM CF.

31 Overton W. Price to Bertha Cain, July 29, 1908, in Historical Documents of Jewel Cave National Monument binder, File 

B. Cain Letters, Jewel Cave NM CF.

32 Bertha Cain to the President of the United States, May 29, 1908, in Historical Documents of Jewel Cave National 

Monument binder, File B. Cain Letters, Jewel Cave NM CF.

33 Overton W. Price to Bertha Cain, May 12, 1908, in Historical Documents of Jewel Cave National Monument binder, File 

B. Cain Letters, Jewel Cave NM CF.

34 George Otis Smith to USFS Forester (unnamed), April 15, 1909, in Historical Documents of Jewel Cave National 

Monument binder, Jewel Cave NM CF.

35 Roughly equivalent to $141,000 and $33,000, respectively, in 2020 dollars. F. C. Schrader, USGS, “Report on the 

Jewel and Four Other Lode Claims,” April 15, 1909, 2–5, in Historical Documents of Jewel Cave National Monument binder, 

File Mining Claims, Jewel Cave NM CF.

36 Schrader, “Report on the Jewel and Four Other Lode Claims,” 9.
38 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Forest Service officials took no immediate action in response to Schrader’s report, in part 

because it appears to have gone missing for a few years.37 The situation may have been caused or 

exacerbated by the President Taft’s 1910 division of the Black Hills National Forest: the southern 

half (which included Jewel Cave National Monument) became the Harney National Forest, while the 

northern half remained the Black Hills National Forest.

38

When the Schrader report resurfaced, officials still did not know what action they should take, 

since Schrader had stopped short of declaring the claims invalid. Acting District Forester Fred W. 

Morrell complained that “it’s impossible to tell from Schrader’s report whether or not he considers 

them valid, but there seems to be a pretty fair indication that they are.” Morell commissioned a 

second study of the claims so that the Forest Service could determine whether to declare them 

invalid, or, if the claims were still valid, to figure out a legal way to purchase them from the 

Michauds and Cain for $4,000.39

Frank and Albert Michaud became discouraged when the Forest Service took no steps to protect 

the cave and failed to reimburse them for their improvements. In January 1911, they asked Secretary 

of Agriculture James Wilson to reimburse them for improving and protecting the cave.40 The 

national monument designation had attracted more tourists, but the government had provided no 

funds for protecting the cave or guiding visitors through it, so Frank Michaud began locking the 

cave entrance.41 “If the Government wishes to preserve the beauties of this cave in their natural 

state,” Frank and Albert wrote to Wilson, “then we advise that they take steps to having it 

protected.” In an attempt to secure additional allies in their quest for reimbursement, the Michauds 

asked US Representative Eben Wever Martin (R-SD) for help “securing a reasonable reimbursement 

for our labor and improvements upon said ground.”42 They were unsuccessful.

Secretary Wilson confirmed in March 1911 that the mining claims would need either to be 

relinquished by the Michauds and Cain, for which they could not receive reimbursement, or to be 

substantiated as valid, patented claims. Wilson told the Michauds that developing the area as a 

tourist attraction was not a valid use for the land under their mining claim, so it would not be proper 

for the Forest Service to pay them for improvements they had made that were unrelated to mining.43

37 P. G. Redington to USFS Chief Forester, June 4, 1910; Willis L. Moore, Acting Secretary of Agriculture, to the 

Secretary of the Interior, June 10, 1910, in Historical Documents of Jewel Cave National Monument binder, Jewel Cave NM CF.

38 Jewel Cave remained within Harney National Forest until 1954, when the two Black Hills forests were 

consolidated into one Black Hills National Forest. John F. Freeman, Black Hills Forestry: A History (Boulder: University 

Press of Colorado), 70, 124.

39 Around $108,000 in 2020 dollars. Fred W. Morrell, Acting District Forester, to the Chief Forester, February 27, 

1911, in Historical Documents of Jewel Cave National Monument binder, File Michaud Letters, Jewel Cave NM CF.

40 Frank Michaud and Albert Michaud to James Wilson, Secretary of Agriculture, January 2, 1911 in Historical 

Documents of Jewel Cave National Monument binder, File Michaud Letters, Jewel Cave NM CF.

41 Evans-Hatch and Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages, 184.

42 Frank Michaud and Albert Michaud to E. W. Martin, March 4, 1911, in Historical Documents of Jewel Cave National 

Monument binder, File Michaud Letters, Jewel Cave NM CF.

43 James Wilson to F. W. Michaud, March 9, 1911, in Historical Documents of Jewel Cave National Monument binder, File 

Michaud Letters, Jewel Cave NM CF.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 39

The Michauds and Cain were in a bind. They could relinquish their claims, but they would get 

no money for them. Or they could continue to maintain their claims, which required at least $100 in 

investments (labor or improvements) annually, but they would likely never be able to own them in 

fee-simple title because there were no valuable mineral deposits on the site. They would never be 

able to obtain a patent through the cave’s value as a tourist attraction. 

Cut Location

Potentially 

Valuable 

Minerals 

Present

Dump 

Value of 

Work (1911 

dollars)44

Cleveland Lode

18 feet (ft) long, 

7 ft wide, 12 ft 

deep

100 ft above 

canyon floor None 5 tons of ore $75.00

Gem Lode

20 ft long, from 

6 to 8 ft wide, 

15 ft deep

Crevice in 

limestone above 

canyon 

None None noted $100.00

Golden Rod Lode 10 ft long, 6 ft 

wide, 10 ft deep 

Exact location 

unclear; cut is in 

carboniferous 

limestone

Iron and 

manganese 

(small 

amounts) 

1.5 tons of 

ore 

$75.00

Denver Lode 16 ft long, 6 ft 

wide, 10 ft deep 

Exact location 

unclear; cut is in 

rock that is a 

reddish-brown 

color 

Calcite and 

powdered 

lime 

(considerable 

amounts) 

None noted $75.00

Jewel Lode

Tunnel, 4 ft by 

6 ft, 75 ft long, 

timbered

100 ft above 

canyon floor Manganese None noted $750.00

During summer 1911, the Forest Service again examined the mining claims at Jewel Cave 

National Monument. This time, it sent H. M. Booth, an “expert miner,” accompanied by the 

Michauds and a forest assistant. Booth reported that there were “no producing mines in the 

immediate vicinity” and that the nearest successful mine was for mica, nine miles to the southeast.45

Booth outlined the status of each claim (see Table 1). He estimated that the Michauds and Cain had 

spent $6,000 for labor and material in development and $1,200 for surface improvements.46

Expenditures in support of mineral development (which Booth estimated at $2,000) included 

44 As a point of reference, $75.00 in 1911 US dollars is roughly equivalent to $2,000 in 2020 dollars. 

45 H. M. Booth, for USDA, USFS, Rapid City Land District, Black Hills National Forest, Custer (Unorganized) 

Mining District, “Report on the Jewel et al Lode Mining Claims and the Jewel Cave,” June 1911, 1, 8, in Government 

Geologic Investigations and Reports on Jewel Cave (1909–late 1920s), Interpretation Division Binder, Jewel Cave NM Visitor 

Center. 

46 This would be about $162,000 and $32,000 in 2020 US dollars, respectively.
40 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

enlargement and timbering of the main passageway.47 Booth noted, as had other Forest Service 

personnel, that “the greater portion of the development work has been directed toward the 

improvement of the cave for scenic exploration.”48 Improvements that did not support the mining

claim included widening of passageways that did not lead to mineral deposits and erecting ladders in 

the tunnel. Surface improvements included the two-story log cabin hotel, a fence, a surface cellar, a 

16 by 18 foot log barn, a spring house, sheds, a trail to the cave, and “about one-half mile of a very 

fair wagon road along the hillside.” The surface area of the claims contained about 150 cords of 

yellow pine.49

Booth found that none of the lode claims within Jewel Cave contained minerals in paying 

quantities. He identified what almost looked like jasper, but he clarified that “it lacks the peculiar 

colorings and varigations [sic] characteristic of real Jasper.” He noted the manganese, calcite crystals, 

and boxwork that Jewel Cave is now known for.50 In all, Booth was impressed by the cave, but he 

did not believe that the work done to improve it substantiated a mining claim: 

The brilliancy of some of these cavities is very beautiful. The Cave as a whole is a wonderful creation 

of nature, and it worthy of exploration beyond the known limits. . . . 

The claims were evidently initiated in good faith for mining purposes, but up to the present time the 

development work seems to have been more for the purpose of making the cave accessible for scenic 

exploration, than for practical mining. It is no doubt true that considerable ore has been taken from 

the Cave, but this, I understand, has been for sample tests only. However, the construction and 

maintenance of a tunnel directed toward the principal ore deposits would indicate that the extraction 

of ore for market had been contemplated. . . . 

Since the land involved does in fact contain mineral in such state as will justify further exploitation, 

there can be no question as to the validity of the claims as mining locations. The claimants have not 

made application for patent; therefore, it would seem that action should be deferred, pending the 

filing of such application or negotiations with the claimants be initiated looking toward a 

relinquishment of the claims.51

Upon reading Booth’s report, Acting Secretary of Agriculture William Hays decided to wait until the 

Michauds applied for a patent before making the next move. Both Booth and Schrader had reported 

that the Michauds had never attempted to secure a patent.52 If the GLO denied the patent, then the 

proclamation declaring Jewel Cave National Monument would continue being effective. If the GLO

approved the patent, the Forest Service could then reexamine the case and possibly undo the 

monument’s establishment. Hays recommended that the Forest Service move slowly, especially since 

the report, in his opinion, should “give the mineral claimants sufficient equities to justify 

47 Booth, “Report on the Jewel et al Lode Mining Claims and the Jewel Cave,” 4.

48 Booth, “Supplemental Report on the Jewel et al Claims and The Jewel Cave.”

49 Booth, “Report on the Jewel et al Lode Mining Claims and the Jewel Cave,” 5, 8. 

50 Booth, “Report on the Jewel et al Lode Mining Claims and the Jewel Cave,” 5.

51 Booth, “Report on the Jewel et al Lode Mining Claims and the Jewel Cave,” 7–9. 

52 Booth, “Report on the Jewel et al Lode Mining Claims and the Jewel Cave,” 7–9; Schrader, “Report on the Jewel 

and Four Other Lode Claims,” 2. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 41

reimbursing them for work performed while holding the land by means of mining locations.”53 The 

Forest Service and the claimants (the Michauds and Cain) were at a stalemate. 

Defining and Protecting Against Vandalism 

By 1911, Frank Michaud was the only 

claimant left working on the claim in any 

capacity. Bertha Cain had abandoned all 

interest in the claim around 1908, and Albert 

Michaud left Custer County for British 

Columbia in 1910, became a citizen of 

Canada, and deeded his interest to Frank.

54

Frank had maintained the claim by investing 

the required $100 of annual labor or 

materials in the claims. He also tried to make 

money by selling the calcite crystals within 

the cave. In 1911, Booth reported that the 

Michauds had removed rocks from the cave, 

but Forest Service officials did not respond 

to that information with concern. A couple 

of years later, Frank Michaud extracted large 

slabs of calcite crystals weighing around five 

tons and shipped then to a Catholic priest in 

Iowa, Father Paul Dobberstein, to build a grotto (see Figure 13). This was one of several shipments 

to Dobberstein.55

The forest ranger in charge of the area that included Jewel Cave was not sure whether Michaud’s 

mining claim gave him the right to remove whatever rocks he wanted from the cave. The national 

monument proclamation declared any “appropriation, injury, or trespassing” to be a finable offense, 

which raised questions for Forest Service officials about whether Michaud had violated the executive 

order.56 Acting District Forester Morrell ultimately determined that Michaud had the right to remove 

the rocks, since calcite was classified as a mineral and he owned the mining claim. When asked, 

53 W. M. Hays, Acting Secretary of Agriculture, to Representative E. W. Martin, August 5, 1911, 2–3, in Historical 

Documents of Jewel Cave National Monument binder, Jewel Cave NM CF.

54 Affidavit, State of South Dakota, County of Custer, signed by Mamie Michaud, June 23, 1928, Files 51b and 51c, 

Jewel Cave NM MF. 

55 Michaud appears to have shipped calcite crystals to Dobberstein in 1913 and 1915, and possibly in 1911. Harney 

National Forest Supervisor to District Forester, Denver, October 25, 1913, in Historical Documents of Jewel Cave National 

Monument binder, File Mining Claims Correspondence, Jewel Cave NM CF; Judy Love, Jewel Cave National Monument

(Mount Pleasant, SC: Arcadia Publishing, 2008), 8; Jen Hirt, Under Glass: The Girl with a Thousand Christmas Trees (Akron, 

OH: University of Akron Press, 2010), 77; Quinn Evans Architects, Cultural Landscape Report and Environmental Assessment: 

Jewel Cave Historic Area, Jewel Cave National Monument, March 2005, 36.

56 Harney National Forest Supervisor to District Forester, Denver, CO, October 15, 1913, 1, in Historical Documents 

of Jewel Cave National Monument binder, File Mining Claims Correspondence, Jewel Cave NM CF.

Figure 13. Father Paul Dobberstein, a Catholic Priest in Iowa, 

purchased five tons of calcite crystals from Frank Michaud for 

use in Dobberstein’s “Grotto of the Redemption” in West 

Bend, Iowa. Pictured here in 2008. 

Source: NPS, Ben Franske.
42 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Michaud said that most of the material he removed had been blasted out of the cave when they first 

opened up the passage a decade earlier. Forest Service officials in the Black Hills and Denver agreed 

not to prosecute Michaud, since he believed he was acting within his rights, but they determined 

they would prosecute anyone not on the claim who removed materials.57

Frustrated by the ambiguity of the situation, forest supervisors considered their legal options to 

cancel Michaud’s claims. In 1913, they considered using the precedent set by a legal decision 

regarding Wind Cave.58 That case, South Dakota Mining Company v. McDonald, hinged on whether a 

mineral was valuable because it warranted “an ordinarily prudent man in the expenditure of further 

time and money in exploration and development,” or if the mineral had to be present in paying 

quantities.59 In the aftermath of that case, the Department of the Interior (DOI) had updated its 

mineral regulations to clarify that crystalline deposits and other features ordinarily found in caves did 

not count as minerals of value under mining laws: 

Crystalline Deposits.—Crystalline deposits and formations of that character, such as stalactites, 

stalagmites, geodes, “box work,” “frost work,” etc., found in caverns, and which substances are 

valuable solely as natural curiosities, and disposed of as such, are not minerals within the purview of 

the mining laws. (South Dakota Mining Company v. McDonald, 30 L. D., 357.)60

Although the Minerals Division of the DOI had adopted this policy in 1900, Forest Service officials 

did not consider using it to declare the Michauds’ claim invalid until 1913. Morrell had apparently 

not been aware of the regulation, which contradicted his decision.

This meant that if Michaud could not show that Jewel Cave produced more than crystals and 

other cave features, such as mineral deposits in paying quantities, he could never obtain a patent 

from the GLO. However, he could still develop other valuable minerals in the claim area. So, once 

again, the Forest Service decided to wait until Michaud applied for a patent, at which time a study 

could be made and then, based on those results, the Forest Service could justify cancelling the claim. 

Michaud, likely aware of his slim chance of obtaining a patent because of this regulation, took no 

action.

61

In late 1913, Assistant Forester James B. Adams reported that the Michauds cared about the 

cave and had been good custodians of it. Adams instructed forest rangers to keep an eye on the cave 

to be sure no improper removal of specimens occurred, but he advised against prosecuting 

57 Harney National Forest Supervisor to District Forester, Denver, October 25, 1913, in Historical Documents of Jewel 

Cave National Monument binder, File Mining Claims Correspondence, Jewel Cave NM CF; G. M. Grander, Acting District 

Forester, to Harney National Forest Supervisor, October 31, 1913, in Historical Documents of Jewel Cave National Monument 

binder, File Mining Claims Correspondence, Jewel Cave NM CF.

58 Daniel A. Jensen, “Mining Claim Abuse: Has the FLPMA Filing Requirement Helped?” Utah Law Review 1987, 

no. 3 (1987): 636–37. 

59 C. J. Stahl, Acting District Forester, to the Chief Forester, December 18, 1913, 2, in Historical Documents of Jewel 

Cave National Monument binder, File Mining Claims Correspondence, Jewel Cave NM CF.

60 Minerals Division, “Decisions under the mining laws rendered since last report,” Annual Reports of the Department of 

the Interior for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1901 (Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1901), 424.

61 C. J. Stahl, Acting District Forester, to the Chief Forester, December 18, 1913, 4–5, in Historical Documents of Jewel 

Cave National Monument binder, File Mining Claims Correspondence, Jewel Cave NM CF.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 43

Michaud.62 In 1916, Michaud again sold calcite crystals to Dobberstein, and Forest Service officials 

again opted not to prosecute him.63 This time, however, Assistant District Forester C. J. Stahl raised 

the possibility of using the authority in the Antiquities Act interest to protect the cave: 

Since the Government has set aside this cave as a national monument subject to prior valid claims, it 

is the desire of this office that full protection be given to it. We do not want to interfere with the 

legitimate prospecting and mining operations of any one, but if an attempt is made to commercialize 

and exploit the deposits and formations of the cave the right of those so engaged to do so should not 

go unchallenged until firmly established. However, I think we can rely to some extent upon the 

penalties prescribed by the Act of June 8, 1906 (34 Stat., 225), as a deterrent to vandalism.

Stahl recommended that a local Forest Service official examine the cave.64

Around 1916, the Forest Service sent Surveyor W. C. Danielson to make a topographical survey 

of Jewel Cave, and, while he was at it, to “make a careful inspection of the effect which the removal 

of specimens has had upon the beauty of the galleries.”65 He surveyed and described two routes 

through the cave, only one of which fell entirely within the Jewel Lode claim. Danielson’s 

descriptions are the first thorough descriptions of Jewel Cave tour routes: 

The main passage bears in an easterly direction for about 100 feet and then divides into two passages; 

one bearing in a northeasterly direction and the other southeasterly. The former, shown on the map as 

Route 1, has few rapid changes in grade and not many ladders are necessary. This route is composed 

of narrow winding passages opening into side galleries and chambers of various dimensions. The walls 

of the small connecting passages are of limestone and in places do not especially appeal to the 

ordinary observer. However, these narrow passages contain some very picturesque occurrences, the 

boxwork or honeycomb crystallization being particularly attractive. This route ends in a Gothic dome, 

23 feet high, lined with a thick scale of crystalline calcite. The walls at this end are honeycombed, and 

unexplored passages lead everyway. A small amount of exploration has been done in an endeavor to 

find a passage of some length, but as yet no passage leading any distance has been found. This route is 

now in good condition and, with the exception of replacing a few of the wooden ladders with 

galvanized pipe ladders, no work is necessary.

Route 2 . . . is the longer and is farther under the surface . . . The greater portion of the route is 

outside the limits of the lode claim and most of the pretty scenery is from what is known as Milk 

River northwesterly to the end of the route. An entrance could possibly be made here, as this point 

falls underneath the draw draining southwesterly into Hell Can[y]on. This point is about 65 feet below 

the surface and is an extremely interesting occurrence. Water seeps through the roof forming 

stalagmites; flowing over these it drips onto a snowlike bank of limestone crust, falling into a small 

basin two feet below the top. The effect is that of milk flowing over a small falls into a lake below. 

From this point on there are no ladders, and passages are quite small in places opening up into larger 

chambers. At Junction Chamber the walls are honeycombed, and unexplored passages lead in every 

62 James B. Adams, Assistant Forester, to District Forester, December 22, 1913, in Historical Documents of Jewel Cave 

National Monument binder, Jewel Cave NM CF; C. J. Stahl, Acting District Forester, to the Chief Forester, December 18, 

1913, 4, in Historical Documents of Jewel Cave National Monument binder, File Mining Claims Correspondence, Jewel Cave 

NM CF.

63 Conner, Acting Forest Supervisor, to District Forester, Denver, February 26, 1916, in Historical Documents of Jewel 

Cave National Monument binder, File Mining Claims Correspondence, Jewel Cave NM CF. 

64 C. J. Stahl, Assistant District Forester, to Harney National Forest Supervisor, May 2, 1916, 3, in Historical 

Documents of Jewel Cave National Monument binder, File Mining Claims Correspondence, Jewel Cave NM CF.

65 Conner, Harney National Forest Supervisor, to District Forester, Denver, May 10, 1916, in Historical Documents of 

Jewel Cave National Monument binder, File Mining Claims Correspondence, Jewel Cave NM CF.
44 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

direction. At Station 108 on the Underground Survey Map, the largest and most picturesque chambers 

of the Cave occur. Many passages open off from these chambers and practically no exploration has 

been done in here. The walls are lined with a thick scale of crystalline calcite giving the appearance of 

a room formed of “Cracker-Jack.” The majority of the passages leading from Milk River to the 

explored end are low and most of the distance must be traveled on hands and knees. However, there 

are places in which some of the difficult travel could be eliminated with a small expenditure of money.

The route, from the entrance to Milk River, has some interesting formations in places. The passages 

are fairly open and the trip easily made. Quite a few ladders are used and these ought to be replaced 

by galvanized pipe ladders as the wooden ones rot very quickly, and practically all of them had to be 

replaced before this survey could be made. The narrow passages connecting the chambers are 

straighter than in Route 1, but the walls are mostly of limestone formation, and, aside from a few 

picturesque places, are uninteresting until Onyx Hall and Milk River are reached.66

The new Harney National Forest supervisor, James F. Conner (who had grown up in Spearfish and 

was well-respected locally), relayed from Danielson’s report that “With the exception of one gallery 

practically all of the specimens have been taken from side passages or points which would not tend 

to mar the scenic beauty of the cave” (see Figure 14).

67

Figure 14. Forest 

Service Surveyor W. C. 

Danielson took this 

image of what he 

called “crackerjack 

formation” in Jewel 

Cave in 1916.

Source: NPS, Jewel 

Cave NM.

Danielson reported that few people visited the cave, “due, no doubt, to the fact that they have 

never heard of it.” He suggested that, “if properly administered,” the cave could attract tourists 

visiting Wind Cave and Sylvan Lake. Danielson noted that the road built by the Michauds 

“connecting the Cave with the main road” had “a maximum grade of about 10 per cent” and would 

need only minimal investments to make it ready for the public. Danielson wrote that the Michauds’ 

66 W. C. Danielson, “Report on Jewel Cave National Monument,” ca. 1916, 3–5, in Historical Documents of Jewel Cave 

National Monument binder, File c.1916 Report on Jewel Cave National Monument, Jewel Cave NM CF.

67 Conner, Harney National Forest Supervisor, to District Forester, Denver, May 10, 1916, in Historical Documents of 

Jewel Cave National Monument binder, File Mining Claims Correspondence, Jewel Cave NM CF. On Conner’s background, 

see Freeman, Black Hills Forester, 77. Freeman refers to him as John F. Conner, and while he signed most letters J. F., a 

Forest Service employee publication from 1921 lists him as James F. Conner. USDA, List of Workers in Subjects Pertaining 

to Agriculture, 1920–1921 (Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1921), 20. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 45

two-story log house was in “fair condition,” although the spring house and barn were “quite 

dilapidated” by this point.68 He recommended that the Forest Service appoint a guard to protect the 

cave and to repair the crumbling infrastructure inside and outside of it (see Figure 15).69

Figure 15. Danielson took this picture in Hell Canyon. The Michaud’s timbered entryway to the cave 

entrance is visible in the center of the image, with a person standing next to it for scale, 1916.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

The Forest Service hesitated in adopting Danielson’s recommendations. Overall, Forest Service 

personnel knew little about the cave, both a symptom and a cause of the agency’s difficulties in 

managing it. Conner reported, “Officers have been very reluctant to investigate the different 

passages without the assistance of a guide who was familiar with the route” for fear of getting lost, 

despite Michaud’s offer to help. The Forest Service never appointed a permanent ranger to the cave, 

so Michaud remained the only one who really knew how to get around it.70

In 1919, Conner learned that Michaud apparently had “a crew of men at work getting out a 

carload of specimens from Jewell [sic] Cave,” the first report of specimen removal since 1916.71

From the time Jewel Cave was designated a national monument, it had been closed to the public. 

But Conner thought that if the Forest Service developed and opened the cave, “it would be an 

important factor in increasing the attractiveness of this Forest for recreational purposes.” Conner 

wanted the Forest Service “to finally decide the ownership of this Cave.”72 He asked District 

Forester John Hatton what he should do. 

68 Danielson, “Report on Jewel Cave National Monument,” 1–2.

69 Danielson, “Report on Jewel Cave National Monument,” 5–6.

70 Conner, Harney National Forest Supervisor, to District Forester, Denver, May 10, 1916.

71 Conner, Harney National Forest Supervisor, to District Forester, Denver, June 18, 1919, in Historical Documents of 

Jewel Cave National Monument binder, File Mining Claims Correspondence, Jewel Cave NM CF.

72 Conner, Harney National Forest Supervisor, to District Forester, Denver, May 9, 1919, in Historical Documents of 

Jewel Cave National Monument binder, File Mining Claims Correspondence, Jewel Cave NM CF.
46 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Hatton, like his predecessors, tried to figure out a legal solution to the Forest Service’s issue with 

Jewel Cave. Hatton noted that rocks removed by Frank Michaud were valuable not as minerals but 

as “natural curiosities and souvenirs.” Hatton called out the Michauds for deliberately holding the 

claim in limbo: 

None of the minerals proper have ever been extracted in commercial quantities, and this is doubtless 

so because the locators have realized that the resources of the cave are much more valuable than the 

mineral substances, and that the latter are of too low a grade to be worth working, – a conclusion 

which seems to be strengthened by the fact that although the claimants have had to their credit for 

many years past several times the requisite amount of statutory expenditures in improvements 

directed to development of the mine proper, they have never risked applying for patent, but for ten 

years or more have been engaged almost exclusively in the exploitation of the cave.73

Hatton suggested invoking South Dakota Mining Company v. McDonald to prosecute Michaud for 

protecting crystalline deposits that had no mineral value under US mining regulations. He wanted to 

force the issue, since the Forest Service already had several reports claiming that Jewel Cave’s chief 

value was scenic, not mineral. Those reports had “been filed away without action,” awaiting 

Michaud’s application for patent.74 Hatton hoped that if the Forest Service prosecuted Michaud, the 

claims would be declared invalid and the Forest Service could develop the national monument 

without the cloud of a mining claim.75 Hatton also considered prosecuting Michaud under the 

Antiquities Act.76

Conner talked Hatton out of prosecuting Michaud under mining regulations or the Antiquities 

Act. Instead, Conner spoke with Michaud and asked him to stop selling souvenirs from the cave. 

Michaud complied, and Conner allowed him to retain his mining claim.77 Assistant District Forester

C. J. Stahl agreed with Conner that the Forest Service should not force the issue. Unlike Conner, 

however, Stahl wanted to give up on the cave and rescind its protected status: 

Ultimately, I believe, the executive order creating the Jewel [C]ave National Monument ought to be 

revoked, the land restored to its original status as a Reserved National Forest because it possesses no 

unusual value that would justify its development and protection as a National Monument. 78

Other Forest Service officials did not support Stahl’s proposal to de-list the national monument. 

73 John Hatton, Assistant District Forester, to Assistant to Solicitor, June 24, 1919, 2–3, in Historical Documents of 

Jewel Cave National Monument binder, File Mining Claims Correspondence, Jewel Cave NM CF.

74 John Hatton, Assistant District Forester, to Assistant to Solicitor, June 24, 1919, 1–2.

75 John Hatton, Assistant District Forester, to Assistant to Solicitor, June 24, 1919, 3; Hatton to Forest Service, 

Custer, SD, June 24, 1919, telegram, in Historical Documents of Jewel Cave National Monument binder, File Mining Claims 

Correspondence, Jewel Cave NM CF.

76 John Hatton, Assistant District Forester, to Assistant to Solicitor, June 24, 1919, 3.

77 Frank Michaud to District Forester Smith Riley, October 26, 1919, in Historical Documents of Jewel Cave National 

Monument binder, File Michaud Letters, Jewel Cave NM CF; C. J. Stahl, memorandum, July 7, 1919, in Historical Documents 

of Jewel Cave National Monument binder, File Mining Claims Correspondence, Jewel Cave NM CF; Harney National Forest 

Supervisor James Conner to R. P. Stewart, US Attorney, Deadwood, SD, July 2, 1919, in Historical Documents of Jewel Cave 

National Monument binder, File Mining Claims Correspondence, Jewel Cave NM CF.

78 C. J. Stahl, memorandum, July 7, 1919.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 47

During this time, Ira Michaud (Frank’s son) took care of the cave while Frank worked for the 

Forest Service as a lookout on Bear Mountain. Ira kept the cave locked, as Frank had done since 

1916, but there was little they could do to prevent forced entry and vandalism.79 It took a lot of time 

and energy for the Michauds to protect the cave, and yet people still entered. Frustrated, Frank 

asked the Forest Service to take over the cave. He wanted to get rid of it.80 After all the work he and 

Albert had done developing the cave, Frank wrote, 

all we ask is to be reimbursed for it. I have a large Family to support and I am in poor health and a 

deal of this kind would never come in better time than just now . . . I don’t feel like waiting very long 

for I need the money and not able to do a days work. There is lots of Tourists coming to the Hills 

now and are getting interested in Jewel Cave it will soon be a great drawing card for the Hills and I 

think the Government aught to take hold of it soon.81

Michaud could no longer make money selling souvenirs, since the Forest Service would prosecute 

him for that, but neither did he have the resources to develop the cave as a tourist attraction.82

The Forest Service again disappointed Michaud when it determined that it could not legally 

purchase the mining claim without an act of Congress and that the Forest Service lacked the 

resources to develop the cave for tourists. The Forest Service did, however, want to protect the cave 

from vandalism, so the agency installed signs warning about trespassing. In 1921, during one of their 

infrequent visits to the cave, Conner and District Forester A. S. Peck found a locked entrance and 

no work being done.83 Peck admitted a few years later,

We have felt here that it was a waiting game and that the older Michauds would eventually leave the 

country or in time lose interest in the property and the Government could then improve it to the

extent justified.84

Neither the Michauds nor the government took any action, so the waiting game continued. 

Garnering Local Support for the Cave 

In 1923, Conner spoke with US Senator Peter Norbeck (R-SD) about developing Jewel Cave 

National Monument. Norbeck believed that opening Jewel Cave to tourists would boost the 

economy of the area. He wanted to secure a congressional appropriation of approximately $1,000 to 

reimburse the Michauds for their investment, plus additional appropriations to repair ladders and to 

79 Conner, Acting Forest Supervisor, to District Forester, Denver, February 26, 1916, in Historical Documents of Jewel 

Cave National Monument binder, File Mining Claims Correspondence, Jewel Cave NM CF.

80 Conner to District Forester, Denver, October 23, 1919, in Historical Documents of Jewel Cave National Monument 

binder, File Mining Claims Correspondence, Jewel Cave NM CF.

81 Frank Michaud to District Forester Smith Riley, October 26, 1919, in Historical Documents of Jewel Cave National 

Monument binder, File Michaud Letters, Jewel Cave NM CF.

82 Frank Michaud to District Forester Smith Riley, October 26, 1919.

83 A. S. Peck to the Chief Forester, February 5, 1924, in Historical Documents of Jewel Cave National Monument binder, 

Jewel Cave NM CF.

84 A. S. Peck to the Chief Forester, February 5, 1924.
48 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

hire a superintendent for the cave.85 District Forester C. J. Stahl thought Norbeck’s proposal was “a 

very happy solution of this vexatious problem” and suggested that Conner work with local civic 

groups to build political support for it.86

Conner was a member of the Custer Commercial Club, and he encouraged the club to get 

involved. The club agreed, marking the first time that local boosters had expressed significant 

interest in the future of Jewel Cave since the proposed game preserve in 1907. Club members 

worked with Norbeck and US Representative William Williamson (R-SD) to secure appropriations 

to carry out Norbeck’s idea, but they were unsuccessful.87 According to Assistant Forester Leon F. 

Kneipp, Williamson admitted that “the relative inaccessibility of Jewel Cave and the greater 

attraction of the Wind Cave Natural [sic] Park rather minimized the importance of the Jewel 

Cave.”88

In 1924, with no congressional appropriations forthcoming, Assistant Forester Leon F. Kneipp 

recommended that the Forest Service build a “stout door at the mouth of the cave and secure it with 

a stout padlock.”89 Conner had reported considerable damage in the first gallery of the cave, which 

further justified the added security.90 Williamson liked the idea and the Forest Service proceeded.91

The Forest Service also put up several signs at the entrances of both Jewel Cave and Jasper Cave 

warning against trespassing and the removal of cave specimens.

92

The Forest Service did not inform the Michauds that it was adding a door and lock to the cave 

entrance. After finding the cave inaccessible in February 1924, Mamie and Ira Michaud went to the 

Forest Service office in Custer. Conner told them he had locked the cave under direction from the 

chief forester’s office and that it would be locked permanently.93 Mamie Michaud wrote a letter to 

the chief forester the next day. She argued that the reports of vandalism were unfounded and that 

85 Equivalent to roughly $15,000 in 2020 dollars. J. F. Conner to District Forester, Denver, November 7, 1923, in 

Historical Documents of Jewel Cave National Monument binder, File Mining Claims Correspondence, Jewel Cave NM CF.

86 C. J. Stahl to J. F. Conner, November 13, 1923, in Historical Documents of Jewel Cave National Monument binder, File 

Mining Claims Correspondence, Jewel Cave NM CF.

87 J. F. Conner to District Forester, Denver, February 2, 1924, in Historical Documents of Jewel Cave National Monument 

binder, File Mining Claims Correspondence, Jewel Cave NM CF; Evans-Hatch and Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages, 184–

185; Freeman, Black Hills Forestry, 77. 

88 L. F. Kneipp, Assistant Director, USFS, to A. S. Peck, District Forester, Denver, January 25, 1924, in Historical 

Documents of Jewel Cave National Monument binder, File Mining Claims Correspondence, Jewel Cave NM CF.

89 L. F. Kneipp, Assistant Director, USFS, to A. S. Peck, District Forester, Denver, January 25, 1924

90 A. S. Peck, District Forester, to Supervisor, Harney National Forest, February 4, 1924, in Historical Documents of 

Jewel Cave National Monument binder, Jewel Cave NM CF.

91 US Representative William Williamson to L. F. Kneipp, Assistant Director, USFS, January 25, 1924, in Historical 

Documents of Jewel Cave National Monument binder, File Mining Claims Correspondence, Jewel Cave NM CF; J. F. Conner 

to D. F. McGill, February 2, 1924, in Historical Documents of Jewel Cave National Monument binder, File Mining Claims 

Correspondence, Jewel Cave NM CF.

92 L. F. Kneipp to District Forester, Denver, February 8, 1924, and J. F. Conner to District Forester, Denver, 

February 14, 1924, in Historical Documents of Jewel Cave National Monument binder, File Mining Claims Correspondence, 

Jewel Cave NM CF.

93 J. F. Conner to District Forester, Denver, February 14, 1924.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 49

the Michauds had been there over the winter. She reiterated that the Michauds had taken specimens 

only out of side areas and that they had tried to protect the cave, but their locks had been broken by 

vandals.94

Mamie Michaud also protested the locking on the grounds that it prevented the Michauds from 

continuing the requisite assessment work to maintain the mining claim, which they had been doing 

for 24 years.95 Stahl acknowledged this issue:

If the Forest Service now places a door at the entrance and locks it against the claimants it is doubtful 

if we can logically or legally maintain an action against the claim for lack of development work.96

Throughout 1924 and 1925, the Michauds continued to ask for reimbursement for their mineral 

rights, while the Forest Service continued to argue that it could not legally do so. The Forest Service 

maintained that removal of minerals for “commercial exploitation or in such a manner as would 

destroy or mar the scenic value of the cave, can not be permitted. The rights conferred by the 

mining laws do not embrace this privilege,” as established under the precedent set by South Dakota 

Mining Company v. McDonald.

97

Conner wanted the Forest Service to develop Jewel Cave and remained frustrated by the 

continued impasse with the Michauds. He commented, 

I am wondering if in view of this increasing number of tourists to the Black Hills, some action should 

not be taken to arrange for developing the cave and making it available to tourists. In its present status 

the government is doing nothing with it but keeping it locked and preventing the Michauds from 

developing it.

98

Conner committed to resolve the problem. He secured approval from Assistant District Forester E. 

W. Tinker to negotiate with the Michauds. Tinker wrote to Conner, 

It seems to me there is only one satisfactory way in which to clear up this case. That is to reach an 

agreement with the Michauds as to the value of the work they have done in this cave and have local 

organizations get in back of a bill providing for a compensation to them for the work and make a 

provision for the administration of the monument, as such. If this cannot be done, I presume, for 

protection of the cave, we should provide for a new door that will keep people out. My understanding 

was that the proposal to compensate the Michauds was favorably considered at one time, but no 

94 Mrs. Frank W. Michaud to the Forester, February 15, 1924, in Historical Documents of Jewel Cave National Monument 

binder, File Michaud Letters, Jewel Cave NM CF.

95 Mrs. Frank W. Michaud to the Forester, February 15, 1924.

96 C. J. Stahl, Assistant District Forester, to Harney National Forest Supervisor, February 15, 1924, in Historical 

Documents of Jewel Cave National Monument binder, File Mining Claims Correspondence, Jewel Cave NM CF.

97 Quotes from E. W. Tinker, Assistant District Forester, by T. M. Moorman, Acting, to Frank Michaud, March 26, 

1925, in Historical Documents of Jewel Cave National Monument binder, File Michaud Letters, Jewel Cave NM CF. See also 

Albert Michaud to [National Park Service?], March 26, 1924; C. J. Stahl, Assistant District Forester, to Albert Michaud, 

April 10, 1924; and Frank Michaud to “Friend” (USFS?), March [22?], 1925, all in Historical Documents of Jewel Cave 

National Monument binder, File Michaud Letters, Jewel Cave NM CF.

98 J. F. Conner to District Forester, Denver, December 30, 1926, memorandum, in Historical Documents of Jewel Cave 

National Monument binder, File Mining Claims Correspondence, Jewel Cave NM CF.
50 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

action obtained. It seems to me if there is real public need or any public purpose commensurate with 

the cost, we could now get the needed legislation.99

Conner approached Mamie Michaud on February 10, 1927, and asked her how much it would take 

for her to surrender her mining claims. He reported that Mamie Michaud thought $1,000 “was 

rather small but stated she would be willing to take this figure and have the matter adjusted.”100

Mamie did not consult with Frank, who was in British Columbia at the time. He died there that 

same week.

101 Conner then got in touch with the Custer Commercial Club, which agreed to lobby 

South Dakota’s congressional delegation to appropriate funds to pay Mamie Michaud and fix the 

cave.102 

Jewel Cave Corporation

Residents of Custer, South Dakota, and Newcastle, Wyoming, had for several years wanted a 

better road between Custer and Newcastle, one that could more easily accommodate automobiles. 

The alignment of the road between the two cities at that time went down Lithograph Canyon and up 

the west side of Hell Canyon to Mud Springs Road (different from the route of present-day 

Highway 16).

103 Since Jewel Cave National Monument was along the way between the towns, not far 

off of the road, developing the cave as a tourist attraction could help draw attention to the need for 

an improved road. Civic organizations in both towns believed that developing Jewel Cave “would be 

of great benefit to the Custer-Newcastle road [the currently existing road] as well as to the two 

towns.”104

In 1927, Conner asked the Custer Commercial Club to help secure appropriations to pay the 

Michauds for the mining claim and refurbish the cave’s buildings and ladders, hire guides, and 

establish campgrounds. At Conner’s request, William A. Nevin, a “prominent grocery dealer in 

Custer” who belonged to the Custer Commercial Club and was later in state and county 

government, asked Norbeck to introduce legislation appropriating $2,000 to pay the Michauds and 

to prepare the cave for tourism.105 Newcastle Lions Club President A. F. Lesley (who was the 

secretary-treasurer and general manager of the U.S. Oil and Refining Co. in Osage, Wyoming) also 

asked Norbeck (since Jewel Cave National Monument was in South Dakota) to secure the 

appropriation. Nothing happened. The next Newcastle Lions Club president, O. C. Kerney, 

99 Assistant District Forester E. W. Tinker to Harney National Forest Supervisor J. F. Conner, January 4, 1927, in 

Historical Documents of Jewel Cave National Monument binder, File Mining Claims Correspondence, Jewel Cave NM CF.

100 $1,000 in 1911 dollars would be equivalent to about $15,000 in 2020 dollars. J. F. Conner to District Forester, 

Denver, February 19, 1927, memorandum, in Historical Documents of Jewel Cave National Monument binder, File Mining 

Claims Correspondence, Jewel Cave NM CF.

101 Evans-Hatch and Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages, 186–187.

102 J. F. Conner to District Forester, Denver, February 19, 1927, memorandum.

103 Conner, Harney National Forest Supervisor, to District Forester, Denver, May 9, 1919, in Historical Documents of 

Jewel Cave National Monument binder, File Mining Claims Correspondence, Jewel Cave NM CF; “Custer-Newcastle Road 

to Open Up Jewel Cave,” Lead Daily Call, November 28, 1923, 1, accessed via newspapers.com.

104 “Discuss Opening of Jewell Cave,” Rapid City Journal, February 18, 1928, 4, accessed via newspapers.com. 

105 About $30,000 in 2020 dollars. Evans-Hatch and Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages, 192. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 51

repeated the request that the South Dakota congressional delegation obtain funds needed to open 

Jewel Cave to the public, but Congress again took no action.106 

Getting nowhere on their own, the Newcastle Lions Club and the Custer Commercial Club 

decided to work together. They met in February 1928 to discuss Jewel Cave. They held a second 

meeting in April 1928 and decided to form a new, joint corporation dedicated to opening Jewel Cave 

to the public, believing that the cave would attract tourists to both towns and provide an impetus for 

better upkeep of the Custer-Newcastle Road.107

On June 26, 1928, the following individuals officially incorporated the Jewel Cave Corporation 

in the state of South Dakota: William A. Nevin (Custer), C. E. Perrin (Custer), Samuel U. Coe 

(Custer), A. F. Lesley (Osage, WY), and E. E. Wakeman (Newcastle, WY).108 To raise funds needed 

to pay Michaud and maintain the cave, they sold $25,000 of capital stock divided into one thousand 

$25.00 shares.109 Shareholders included successful business leaders and entrepreneurs in Custer and 

Newcastle, as well as Conner, the Harney National Forest supervisor.110

As one of its first actions, the Jewel Cave Corporation secured a quit-claim deed from Mamie 

Michaud, in which she attested that she was the sole interest holder in the five claims at Jewel Cave. 

Through this deed, she surrendered any possible remaining ownership of the mining claims to the 

Forest Service.111 Since the Michauds had never owned the land outright, as per mining laws 

discussed in Chapter 1, the quit-claim deed was sufficient to remove the “prior adverse claims” that 

the national monument proclamation had been subject to.112

Jewel Cave Corporation paid Mamie Michaud $750 total for signing away her claim to the cave. 

Ira and Mamie both recalled only having received $500 total, but in 1929, Conner reported having 

paid Mamie $500 for improvements to the cave and $250 for the quit-claim deed, so $750 total.113

According to both Mamie and Ira, she accepted that amount because she was a widow with children 

106 Evans-Hatch and Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages, 193.

107 Evans-Hatch and Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages, 194.

108 Articles of Incorporation, Jewel Cave Corporation, June 28, 1928, File 51a, Jewel Cave NM MF; South Dakota 

Department of State, Certification of Incorporation, Jewel Cave Corporation, June 18, 1928, File JECA Certificate, Jewel 

Cave NM MF; “Jewel Cave is Formally Opened,” Queen City Mail (Spearfish, SD), October 3, 1928, 1, accessed via 

newspapers.com. 

109 About $380,000 in 2020 dollars. By-Laws of the Jewel Cave Corporation, July 19, 1928, 1, File 49h, Jewel Cave 

NM MF.

110 Subscribing Stock Holders of the Jewel Cave Corporation [ca. 1928], File 55a–55b, Jewel Cave NM MF. 

111 Affidavit, State of South Dakota, County of Custer, signed by Mamie Michaud, June 23, 1928, Files 51b and 51c, 

Jewel Cave NM MF; Jewel Cave Corporation Meeting, minutes, July 19, 1928, 1–2, Files 49l and 49m, Jewel Cave NM 

MF. 

112 Theodore Roosevelt, Presidential Proclamation No. 799, February 7, 1908.

113 $750 in 1911 dollars would be roughly equivalent to $11,000 in 2020 dollars. Evans-Hatch and Evans-Hatch, 

Place of Passages, 195–96; Roger W. Toll, “Report to the Director, National Park Service on Jewel Cave National 

Monument,” November 18, 1929, File 62f, Jewel Cave NM MF; Ira Michaud, “Jewel Cave: What I Have Heard and 

Seen,” December 1970, 9, File 1687, Jewel Cave NM MF; Walt Lienau, notes on interview with Mamie Michaud, August 

4, 1959, 2–3, File 1692f, Jewel Cave NM MF; 
52 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

still to raise, and she had no money to protect her claim in court.114 By signing the quit-claim deed,

Mamie Michaud relinquished all remaining mineral rights she or others might have to the claims 

within Jewel Cave National Monument. 

With the obstacle of the mining claims now resolved, the Jewel Cave Corporation leased one 

square mile of the Jewel Cave National Monument from the Forest Service in order to develop the 

area around the cave entrance.115 The Forest Service had outsourced cave management at other 

national monument caves, such as Lehman Caves in Nevada, where a private operator ran the 

tourism and guiding services throughout the 1920s.116 The corporation hired Ira Michaud, Will E. 

Davis, and Dave Peterson in summer 1928 to make the repairs required to open the cave to the 

public. They improved the road the Michauds had built connecting the cave entrance to the CusterNewcastle Highway, cleared space for a parking lot, and put in a foot trail from the parking lot to 

the cave entrance. Inside the cave, they cleared passageways, rebuilt ladders, and installed 

stairways.117 The corporation used the rest of the money to buy lanterns and pay guides, with the 

idea that the entrance fees collected from visitors would be used to repay investors.118 Davis (the 

lead guide) and Ira Michaud lived in the “old Kirk cabin, located below Prairie Dog Spring.”

119

On August 15, 1928, Jewel Cave opened for tours for the first time since it had been declared a 

national monument.120 The Jewel Cave Corporation held a picnic for stockholders in September 

1928 to showcase the improvements in and around the cave.121 The corporation gave tours only of 

Jewel Cave, not of nearby Jasper Cave. Jewel Cave was only open in the summer, and tours were 

around 25 cents (some sources say 50 cents) per person. From 1928 to 1929, attendance jumped 

from 834 to 2,200.122 The support of local organizations and the corporation’s investments had 

finally put Jewel Cave on the tourist map. Davis figured at the end of the 1929 season that visitors 

had come from almost every state in the country, and even a few from Europe. The Sioux Falls 

Argus-Leader reported, “Mr. Davis stated that a common expression of tourists who had visited many 

caves was that Jewel Cave was the most beautiful they had seen.”123

114 Michaud, “Jewel Cave: What I Have Heard and Seen,” 9; Lienau, notes on interview with Mamie Michaud.

115 Jewel Cave Corporation Meeting, minutes, July 19, 1928, 2, File 49m, Jewel Cave NM MF; Quinn Evans 

Architects, Cultural Landscape Report and Environmental Assessment: Jewel Cave Historic Area, 39. 

116 Keith A. Trexler, “Lehman Caves . . . its Human Story,” (Baker, NV: NPS, 1966, updated through 1975 by NPS 

staff), 18–30.

117 Michaud, “Jewel Cave: What I Have Heard and Seen,” 10; Walt Lienau, notes from interview with Eric and Fred 

Heidepriem, July 9, 1959, File 1692c, Jewel Cave NM MF. 

118 Walt Lienau, notes on interview with Jim Connor, August 5, 1959, File 1692k, Jewel Cave NM MF. 

119 Evans-Hatch and Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages, 196. 

120 Roger W. Toll, “Report to the Director, National Park Service on Jewel Cave National Monument,” November 

18, 1929, 2, File 62f, Jewel Cave NM MF. 

121 Jewel Cave Corporation Meeting, minutes, September 12, 1928, 4, File 49q, Jewel Cave NM MF.

122 Evans-Hatch and Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages, 197.

123 “Custer Commercial Club Fetes Men From Wyoming,” Argus-Leader (Sioux Falls, SD), October 15, 1929, 4, 

accessed via newspapers.com. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 53

Other Caves Under Federal Protection, 1900–1930 

The federal government protected several caves between 1900 and 1930, in addition to Wind 

Cave and Jewel Cave. Only a few months after establishing Jewel Cave, President Roosevelt signed 

an executive order establishing Lewis and Clark Cavern National Monument in Montana from lands 

donated to the federal government by Northern Pacific Railway.124 The following year, President 

William Howard Taft proclaimed Shoshone Cavern National Monument in Wyoming and Oregon 

Caves National Monument in Oregon. Oregon Caves, like Jewel Cave, was formerly national forest 

land (Siuslaw National Forest), and the Forest Service managed it.125

The executive orders establishing these national monuments emphasized the caves’ scientific 

importance, aesthetic beauty, and unknown depth, both to justify protecting them under the 

Antiquities Act and to validate to their potential for tourism. For instance, Taft’s proclamation 

establishing Shoshone Cavern National Monument began, 

WHEREAS, a cavern in the State of Wyoming, of unknown extent but of many windings and 

ramifications and containing vaulted chambers of large size, magnificently decorated with sparkling 

crystals and beautiful stalactites, and containing impenetrable pits of unknown depth, is of great 

scientific interest and value to the people of the United States, and it appears that the public interest 

would be promoted by reserving it as a National Monument . . . .

126

In 1922, Warren G. Harding established Lehman Caves National Monument. As Taft had for 

Shoshone Cavern, Harding emphasized the “unusual scientific interest and importance of the 

caves.” Lehman Caves National Monument had also been part of a national forest (Nevada National 

Forest), and the Forest Service managed it.127 At Lehman Caves and Oregon Caves, as at Jewel Cave, 

the Forest Service granted a private concessionaire a contract to operate the tourist services.128

While these caves were being carved out of Forest Reserves, protected as national monuments, 

and managed by concessionaires contracted out by the Forest Service, Kentucky legislators fought to 

make Mammoth Cave a national park. In 1923, NPS Director Steven Mather recommended its 

protection: 

Many efforts have been made in the past to secure the Mammoth Cave of Kentucky, with sufficient 

adjoining area, including the recently discovered Onyx Cave, to permit of its full development for a 

national park, but thus far these efforts have been fruitless. Nature’s most magnificent and certainly 

the largest, limestone cavern, with approximately 40 miles of wonderfully formed underground 

124 Theodore Roosevelt, Presidential Proclamation No. 807, May 11, 1908; Bob Janiskee, “Pruning the Parks: Lewis 

and Clark Cavern National Monument (1908–1937),” National Parks Traveler, October 17, 2010,

www.nationalparkstraveler.org/2010/10/pruning-parks-lewis-and-clark-cavern-national-monument-1908-19377072. 

125 William Howard Taft, Presidential Proclamation No. 876, July 12, 1909; William Howard Taft, Presidential 

Proclamation, September 21, 1909, 36 Stat. 2501; Bob Janiskee, “Pruning the Parks: Shoshone Cavern National 

Monument (1909–1954) Would Have Cost Too Much to Develop,” National Parks Traveler, September 18, 2008, 

www.nationalparkstraveler.org/2008/09/pruning-parks-shoshone-cavern-national-monument-1909-1954-would-havecost-too-much-develop2972. 

126 William Howard Taft, Presidential Proclamation, September 21, 1909, 36 Stat. 2501. 

127 Warren G. Harding, Presidential Proclamation, January 24, 1909, 42 Stat. 2260.

128 Trexler, “Lehman Caves . . . its Human Story,” 18–30; NPS, “Oregon Caves National Monument & Preserve 

Timeline,” last updated May 18, 2018, https://www.nps.gov/orca/learn/historyculture/timeline.htm.
54 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

passages and chambers, it is not only known to every school child in the land but is already the mecca 

of travelers the world over. . . . More national parks are needed in the East, and the inclusion of the 

Mammoth Cave region would add one of the most remarkable of ‘distinguished examples of typical 

forms of world architecture” to the proud national-park family.129

The following year, several local citizens created the Mammoth Cave National Park Association to 

promote the creation of a park protecting the cave. Their lobbying efforts were successful, and in 

1926, Congress passed, and President Calvin Coolidge signed, legislation establishing Mammoth 

Cave National Park, the second national park to protect a cave (after Wind Cave).130

On the other side of the country, Coolidge’s administration had taken steps to protect Carlsbad 

Caverns in New Mexico. In 1923, President Coolidge issued a presidential proclamation establishing 

Carlsbad Cave National Monument, and supplemental executive orders over the following years 

withdrew additional land and authorized a possible national park at the caverns.131 In 1930, Congress 

passed, and President Herbert Hoover signed into law, legislation creating Carlsbad Caverns 

National Park, to be administered by the NPS.132 Thus, as of 1930, the NPS had three national parks 

dedicated to protecting caves: Carlsbad Caverns, Mammoth Cave, and Wind Cave. 

Conclusion 

In 1906, Custer-area boosters promoted creation of a Jewel Cave Game Preserve, eager to 

protect Jewel Cave and draw in tourists as boosters had at Wind Cave. Frank and Albert Michaud 

and Bertha Cain maintained their mining claims at and near the then-known cave, and Frank and his 

family lived near the cave part of the year. Although the Forest Service rejected the game preserve 

idea, President Theodore Roosevelt established Jewel Cave National Monument on February 8, 

1908. For the next 20 years, the status of Jewel Cave was in limbo. The Forest Service could not 

develop the cave because of the Michauds’ mining claims, but the Michauds would not relinquish 

their claims or apply for a patent without reimbursement for their investments in the property. 

Finally, thanks to community organizations in Custer and Newcastle and a proactive Harney 

National Forest supervisor, the Jewel Cave Corporation was formed. The corporation raised money 

to pay Mamie Michaud to surrender all remaining claims to the site, thus ending the impasse 

between the Forest Service and the Michauds. Despite almost 30 years of commitment to Jewel 

Cave, Mamie Michaud received relatively little for the family’s investment—less than what Cain had 

requested in 1908. After paying Michaud, the Jewel Cave Corporation provided the funds to develop 

and open Jewel Cave to visitors in 1928. 

129 Stephen T. Mather, “Report of the Director of the National Park Service to the Secretary of the Interior,” 

(Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1920), 84. 

130 An Act of May 25, 1926, 44 Stat. 635 (P.L. 283); NPS, “The National Park Idea.”

131 Calvin Coolidge, Presidential Proclamation, October 25, 1923, 46 Stat. 1929; Calvin Coolidge, Executive Order 

3984, April 2, 1924; Calvin Coolidge, Executive Order 4870, May 3, 1928.

132 An Act of May 14, 1930, 46 Stat. 279 (P.L. 216). 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 55

Chapter 3: The National Park Service Takes 

Over (ca. 1933–1957) 

In 1933, a federal executive order transferred Jewel Cave National Monument from the 

jurisdiction of the Forest Service to the National Park Service (NPS). Within the NPS, Jewel Cave 

fell under the jurisdiction of Wind Cave National Park. The NPS did not appropriate money 

specifically for the management of Jewel Cave in the 1930s. Instead, for most of the decade, the 

Jewel Cave Corporation (JCC) provided guide services at Jewel Cave, and the Civilian Conservation 

Corps (CCC) carried out infrastructure improvements. When the JCC ceased operations in 1939, the 

NPS took full responsibility for activities at the monument. Over the next two decades, Wind Cave 

superintendents created positions at Jewel Cave with increasing management responsibilities. 

Both the JCC and NPS confronted an issue that became an ongoing reality for the NPS in later 

eras: more and more people wanted to tour the cave. The JCC was able to meet the demand with a 

staff of three guides. Throughout the 1940s and 1950s, the NPS struggled to keep Jewel Cave 

adequately staffed, due to tight budgets and continually increasing visitor numbers. By the mid1950s, the NPS reached a tipping point with Jewel Cave. Agency officials debated three options: the 

agency could (1) invest in the monument and create an experience for visitors like that at Wind Cave 

(which had an elevator), (2) keep Jewel Cave in its current state and emphasize its “primitive” nature 

to contrast with more developed tours, or (3) delist the monument altogether and remove it from 

the care of the NPS. 

Jewel Cave Corporation, the Civilian Conservation Corps, and the 

National Park Service (1933–1939) 

Following creation of the NPS in 1916, NPS officials sought to take control of the nation’s 

national monuments, concerned that the Forest Service neglected those under its purview.1In 

October 1929, the NPS sent a representative to report on Jewel Cave, perhaps in response to an 

August 1929 letter from Albert Michaud to NPS Director Stephen Mather, in which Michaud 

complained about the Forest Service’s lack of interest and investment in Jewel Cave.2 The 

development work that the JCC had done at the cave in the preceding year might also have caught 

NPS officials’ attention. Whatever the impetus, on October 20, 1929, Yellowstone National Park 

Superintendent Roger W. Toll visited Jewel Cave National Monument (Jewel Cave) and prepared a 

report on its history, geology, operations, and management. Toll concluded, 

1 Hal Rothman, America’s National Monuments: The Politics of Preservation (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1994), 

202. 

2 Gail Evans-Hatch and Michael Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages: Jewel Cave National Monument Historic Resource Study

(Omaha: NPS Midwest Regional Office, 2006), 201. 
56 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

The cave has much beauty, but crystals, unless extraordinary in variety, can hardly hold the continued 

interest of visitors, to the same extent as “drip formations.” It would seem that the cave is of local and 

state-wide importance rather than of national interest.3

Toll made no further recommendations, and the NPS showed no signs over the next several years of 

wanting to take over management of Jewel Cave. 

On June 10, 1933, in an unrelated action, President Franklin D. Roosevelt issued Executive 

Order (EO) 6166, which reorganized federal executive agencies in order to reduce expenditures. 

Section 2 of the order consolidated management of all “public buildings, reservations, national 

parks, national monuments, and national cemeteries” into one Office of National Parks, Buildings, 

and Reservations, which would replace the extant NPS but would remain under the Department of 

the Interior (DOI).4 One year later, Congress changed the agency’s name back to the National Park 

Service.5 The reorganization greatly expanded the role and scope of the NPS: when the order went 

into effect in August 1933, the National Park System immediately acquired 70 new units.6 These 

included national monuments, national memorials, national military parks, urban spaces in 

Washington, DC, and a recreational area. The expanded land area and new site types posed 

management challenges for the still-fledgling NPS.7

EO 6166 affected the Forest Service by moving some lands that it had managed as national 

monuments, like Jewel Cave, to NPS jurisdiction. Forest Service officials in Washington had been 

unaware of the impending transfer and, once they learned of it, were displeased with losing control 

of forest acreage.8 With the reassignment of Jewel Cave to the NPS, for example, the Forest Service 

lost around 7,000,000 board-feet of timber, worth an estimated $55,495.44, which included “one of 

the finest stands of virgin ponderosa pine in the Black Hills.”9

The JCC did not receive formal notice of the transfer until June 1934. Board members’ 

immediate concern was that the NPS would not honor its lease with the Forest Service for the area 

around the cave entrance, which enabled the JCC to conduct tours at the site. Under the assumption 

that the lease was void and that it would no longer be allowed to operate a guide service, the JCC 

board resolved to recover its investment in the cave from the US government.

10 The JCC held a 

3 Roger W. Toll, “Report to the Director, National Park Service on Jewel Cave National Monument,” November 

18, 1929, 2, File 62f, Jewel Cave National Monument Museum Files, Custer, SD (hereafter Jewel Cave NM MF). 

4 Executive Order 6166 of June 10, 1933, Organization of Executive Agencies. 

5 Act of March 2, 1934 (48 Stat. 369).

6 Rothman, America’s National Monuments, 202. 

7 Rothman, America’s National Monuments, 187; Ronald F. Lee, “Family Tree of the National Park System,” 1972, 

http://npshistory.com/centennial/0316/timeline.htm. 

8 Harlan D. Unrau and G. Frank Williss, “C. Reorganization of 1933,” Expansion of the National Park Service in the 

1930s: Administrative History (Denver: NPS, 1983), https://www.nps.gov/parkhistory/online_books/unrauwilliss/adhi2c.htm. 

9 DOI, NPS, “Land Ownership Record,” September 1944, Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, Folder L1425 Holdings other than 

Federal, Jewel Cave National Monument Central Files, Custer, SD (hereafter Jewel Cave NM CF). 

10 Jewel Cave Corporation meeting, minutes, September 14, 1933, File 49r, Jewel Cave NM MF; Jewel Cave 

Corporation meeting, minutes, June 10, 1934, Files 49s–49t, Jewel Cave NM MF. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 57

picnic for over 1,000 people at the monument on June 10, 1934, to raise funds and to celebrate the 

transfer.11

The JCC spent two years waiting for direction from the NPS about how to proceed. Members 

petitioned the NPS to reimburse them for “monies the Corporation had expended in acquiring title 

to and improving Jewel Cave.”12 It is not clear whether the JCC continued to give tours between 

1934 and early 1936, which overlapped with the beginning of the period that the CCC was active at 

the cave (1935–1939), or if it took a hiatus while seeking reimbursement. Finally, in June 1936, the 

JCC received a special use permit from the NPS to conduct a guiding service at Jewel Cave.13 The 

JCC paid the NPS $5 for the permit.14 The agreement provided that “all fees shall revert to the 

corporation in return for guide service furnished until an investment of $1925 has been paid to the 

stockholders,” after which point profits would go to Wind Cave National Park (Wind Cave) to 

support management of Jewel Cave.15

For the remainder of the decade, Jewel Cave was officially under the management of Wind Cave, 

but the JCC continued to administer day-to-day operations through the special use permit. Congress 

did not include a line item for Jewel Cave in NPS budgets during the 1930s, although minimal 

funding for Jewel Cave came through Wind Cave and the CCC. When the NPS Region 2 office 

(covering the Midwest) opened in Omaha in 1937, Jewel Cave and Wind Cave fell under it, but the 

change had little practical effect on management of Jewel Cave. Wind Cave Superintendent Edward 

D. Freeland oversaw Jewel Cave’s partnerships with the JCC and the CCC until he transferred to 

another post in March 1939. Howard B. Stricklin then served as acting superintendent until Harry J. 

Liek became the next permanent Wind Cave superintendent on May 26, 1939.16

Although the NPS left operation of Jewel Cave tours in the JCC’s hands, NPS planners drafted 

plans for development of Jewel Cave infrastructure to be carried out by CCC workers from a 

temporary CCC camp on site.17 The NPS, in partnership with the Public Health Service and other 

11 Jewel Cave Corporation meeting, minutes, June 10, 1934, Files 49s–49t, Jewel Cave NM MF.

12 The minutes use the term “acquiring title,” but the JCC never owned the land at Jewel Cave. Presumably they are 

referring to the lease they had with the Forest Service. Jewel Cave Corporation meeting, minutes, March 30 ,1936, File 

49u, Jewel Cave NM MF.

13 Jewel Cave Corporation meeting, minutes, June 4, 1936, File 49v, Jewel Cave NM MF .

14 Jewel Cave Corporation meeting, minutes, September 26, 1939, File 49dd, Jewel Cave NM MF.

15 Jewel Cave Corporation meeting, minutes, April 4, 1939, File 49z, Jewel Cave NM MF.

16 John W. Bohi, “75 Years at Wind Cave,” 96–97, 108; Howard Baker, “The Early Days,” Courier 34, no. 3 (March 

1989): 18; Howard B. Stricklin, Superintendent’s Annual Report, Wind Cave National Park, Fiscal Year 1939, October 7, 

1939, 1, National Parks and Monuments Central Classified Files (1936–52), Box 125, Folder 207-01.4 Superintendents 

Annual Reports, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), National Archives and Records 

Administration, Kansas City, MO (hereafter NARA KC). 

17 Congress passed the Unemployment Relief Act on March 31, 1933 (48 Stat. 22, P. L. 73-5). On April 5, 1933, 

President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed Executive Order 610 establishing the Emergency Conservation Work program 

(ECW) under the authority of the Unemployment Relief Act. The ECW was known publicly as the Civilian 

Conservation Corps (CCC), and its name officially changed to CCC in 1937. For the purposes of clarity in this report, 

we use the term CCC, although the reader will see in footnotes that sources cited referred to the program as ECW. See 

Lou Ann Speulda, “History of the CCC and WPA and other Depression-Era Programs in Region 6 of the USFS,” 2003, 

2, https://www.fws.gov/uploadedFiles/Depression%20Era%20Programs%20-%20Region%206.pdf. 
58 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

government agencies, considered JCC suggestions for developing the cave, including establishing a 

campground for visitors, running a pipe from the spring “at the Old Michaud residence down to the 

proposed campground,” constructing a “new log office and residence building,” and erecting a 

maintenance building.18 Although the NPS did not adopt all of these suggestions, it took them into 

account when developing plans for the monument. The CCC did not perform any significant work 

at Jasper Cave, and the JCC continued to give tours of only Jewel Cave. 

Highway 16 Realignment 

Custer and Newcastle boosters had lobbied the federal government for a more direct route 

between the two towns for decades. In the 1930s, increasing numbers of tourists used the old road, 

despite its deteriorating condition. The US Department of Agriculture (USDA) Bureau of Public 

Roads (BPR), which was responsible for building Forest Service roads, supported the plan to 

construct a new road between the towns, echoing boosters’ hopes that a better road would increase 

tourist traffic through the southern Black Hills.19 The new route would be located along “the only 

logical outlet leading west from the southern portion of the Black Hills,” which was just south of the 

original monument boundary. BPR schematic plans showed the new road passing within a quarter

mile of the entrance of Jewel Cave.20 The JCC and civic groups in Newcastle and Custer hoped a 

new road would boost visitation to the cave.

The proposed road (the current Highway 16, although it had different designations on Forest 

Service land) passed through Forest Service, NPS, and private lands in both South Dakota and 

Wyoming, and its construction was a multiagency effort. In 1931, the BPR completed a location 

survey of Forest Highway route Number 6, which included a portion of the proposed CusterNewcastle Road. In 1932, the South Dakota State Highway Department completed four miles of the 

road, from Custer to Four Mile Creek, “as a federal aid project.”21 Also in 1932, the Forest Service 

constructed two sections of the road—from Four Mile to Lightning Creek (4.1 miles) and the 

stretch from Lightning Creek to around Lithograph Canyon (3.62 miles)—as forest highways. The 

following year, the Wyoming State Highway Department constructed portions of the road in 

Wyoming, from the state boundary to the intersection with Highway 85.22

18 Jewel Cave Corporation meeting, minutes, September 14, 1933, File 49r, Jewel Cave NM MF. 

19 USDA Bureau of Public Roads, District No. 3, “Final Construction Report on Custer-Wind Cave Approach 

Road ‘E’ Grading, Section A. Harney National Forest and Jewel Cave National Monument Custer County State of South 

Dakota,” December 12, 1934, 3, National Park Service Electronic Technical Center (hereafter eTIC).

20 USDA Bureau of Public Roads, District No. 3, “Final Construction Report on Custer-Wind Cave Approach 

Road ‘E’ Grading, Section A,” 2, eTIC.

21 USDA Bureau of Public Roads, District No. 3, “Final Construction Report on Custer-Wind Cave Approach 

Road ‘E’ Grading, Section A,” 4, eTIC.

22 DOI, NPS, “Plans for Proposed Custer – Wind Cave Park Approach Road (e) Project ‘A’ Grading,” map, 1932, 

eTIC.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 59

Figure 16. This Bureau of Public Roads map shows how the road grading project was split into sections by funding source.

The National Park Approach Road is “Project ‘A’,” and references Wind Cave National Park because Jewel Cave NM was 

managed by Wind Cave at the time. 

Source: Bureau of Public Roads, US Department of Agriculture.

This left one remaining segment to build: the 8.6 miles around Jewel Cave, from Lightning 

Creek to the western boundary of Harney National Forest (see Figure 16).23 The NPS financed this 

segment as a “National Park Approach Road,” made possible under an April 9, 1924, act of 

Congress that allowed the NPS to fund construction of roads leading to national parks. Laborers 

carried out the construction pursuant to the Act of January 31, 1931, as amended by the Emergency 

Relief and Construction Act of July 21, 1932, which enabled emergency funding and labor for public 

works projects during the Great Depression. The secretary of the Interior and the president 

approved the 8.6-mile “Custer-Wind Cave Approach Road” to Jewel Cave National Monument as a

project to be funded by the Emergency Relief and Construction Act and carried out by CCC 

23 USDA Bureau of Public Roads, District No. 3, “Final Construction Report on Custer-Wind Cave Approach 

Road ‘E’ Grading, Section A,” 4, eTIC.
60 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

laborers on July 29, 1932.24 In early 1933, the secretary of the Interior signed a cooperative 

agreement with the South Dakota State Highway Commission, which further clarified that the DOI 

would construct the remaining 8.6 miles of the road as a National Park Approach Road, while the 

state of South Dakota would be responsible for subsequent repair and maintenance.25

During the planning process, US Senator Peter Norbeck (R-SD) proposed that the road include 

a suspension bridge to span Hell Canyon. BPR engineers estimated that the bridge would cost 

$500,000, and it would require revamping the already-developed park approach road plans, which 

did not include a bridge. They delayed the project briefly in case federal funding came through for 

the bridge, but when it did not, the NPS continued with a plan that did not require a suspension 

bridge over Hell Canyon.26

The NPS hired S. J. Groves and Sons Company of Minneapolis, Minnesota, to grade the 

highway bed (see Figure 17). In 1932, the company erected “a very modern contractor’s camp” in 

Hell Canyon, about a mile north of the current Highway 16, in a clearing with asphalt, concrete 

pads, and a nearby water cistern. The camp included year-round quarters for 100 to 150 workers, a 

kitchen, and dining room. The contractor rigged the camp with electric lights and running water and 

built a machine shop. Workers were paid between 35 and 45 cents an hour, funded through the

Emergency Relief and Construction Act.27

Figure 17. Crews grade 

the new road between 

Custer and Newcastle 

(now known as 

Highway 16) near 

Jewel Cave NM, ca. 

1932.

Source: NPS, Jewel 

Cave NM.

24 USDA Bureau of Public Roads, District No. 3, “Final Construction Report on Custer-Wind Cave Approach 

Road ‘E’ Grading, Section A,” 3–4, eTIC.

25 USDA Bureau of Public Roads, District No. 3, “Final Construction Report on Custer-Wind Cave Approach 

Road ‘E’ Grading, Section A,” 5, eTIC.

26 A. E. Palen, Acting District Engineer, to H. K. Bishop, Chief, Division of Construction, October 15, 1932, 

Cabinet 3, Drawer 1, Folder H14 Area and Service History Cultural Park Hist. Research Documents, Jewel Cave NM 

CF.

27 USDA Bureau of Public Roads, District No. 3, “Final Construction Report on Custer-Wind Cave Approach 

Road ‘E’ Grading, Section A,” 6–8, eTIC.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 61

Workers employed “team and hand methods” to excavate ground for the graded roadway.28

During this excavation, Groves and Sons found mostly “irregular and broken” rock ledges. The 

BPR noted in its geology report,

Comparatively few solid rock ledges were encountered, the general formation being irregular and 

broken. Where the surfaces would indicate considerable rock, many times the material at these 

locations would be common with only a few [scattering?] boulders, and vice versa. The best 

illustration of this was in the heavy cut between stations 376 and 379 [just west of the turnoff to the 

Jewel Cave historic entrance]. At this location, where the road cut through a ridge just before entering 

Hell Canyon on the east side, there was every indication that the material would be largely rock. The 

maximum cut was approximately 42 feet on the centerline, the slope cuts increasing on the left to 53 

feet. After breaking through a crust of rock at the edges, the material became a red clay and gray loam 

with practically no rock. The clay lies in a bed near the bottom of the cut on the left, with a heavy 

overburden composed of gray loam. Shortly after this cut had been excavated and nearly sloped, a 

heavy slide occurred in the left cut bank which entirely closed the road.29

After enduring landslides and a 

violent storm that blew down trees 

but only minimally damaged the 

new road, Groves and Sons 

completed the highway bed grading 

on September 30, 1933 (see Figure 

18).

30 The final road was dirt, but 

the BPR planned to pave it to 

reduce wear and tear. The BPR 

noted, “the alignment and grades 

are designed for fairly high speed 

which will rapidly wear away any 

earth road. Until the next step in 

improvement can be applied, it 

should be insisted that the project 

be covered with intensive 

maintenance.”31 Construction of 

the 8.6 miles of National Park Approach Road cost the NPS a total of $272,001.84.32

28 USDA Bureau of Public Roads, District No. 3, “Final Construction Report on Custer-Wind Cave Approach 

Road ‘E’ Grading, Section A,” 9–10, eTIC.

29 USDA Bureau of Public Roads, District No. 3, “Final Construction Report on Custer-Wind Cave Approach 

Road ‘E’ Grading, Section A,” 12–13, eTIC. The slide occurred because the rock is shale and is located adjacent to a 

fault line. Mike Wiles, comments on draft administrative history, April 7, 2020. 

30 USDA Bureau of Public Roads, District No. 3, “Final Construction Report on Custer-Wind Cave Approach 

Road ‘E’ Grading, Section A,” 6–8, eTIC.

31 USDA Bureau of Public Roads, District No. 3, “Final Construction Report on Custer-Wind Cave Approach 

Road ‘E’ Grading, Section A,” 6, eTIC.

32 DOI, NPS, “The Master Plan for Jewel Cave National Monument,” 1942, 3002-D-9, Cabinet 3, Drawer 3, Folder 

D18 JECA Master Plan 1942, Jewel Cave NM CF.

Figure 18. Looking out over Hell Canyon, new road between Custer and 

Newcastle after being graded, ca. 1933.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.
62 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Development by the CCC

From 1935 until 1939, the CCC constructed a variety of improvements at Jewel Cave, including 

a water and sewer system, a ranger cabin, and roads and trails within the monument. The Jewel Cave 

CCC camp was a side camp of the Wind Cave CCC camp. The physical camp was located near the 

current historic area parking lot (a different location from the Groves and Sons temporary camp).33

In 1935, approximately 20 CCC laborers lived in this camp in what one worker called “old square 

army tents . . . pitched where ever there was a place” and slept on army cots.34 During autumn and 

winter 1935–1936, CCC workers added to the Hell Canyon camp with the construction of barracks 

and a mess hall from salvaged lumber.35 For the next three years, workers lived in the barracks from 

Monday to Friday, working from 7:00 am to 5:00 pm, and then returned to the Wind Cave CCC 

camp for the weekends (see Figure 19).36

Figure 19. Civilian Conservation Corps crews pictured at Jewel Cave, ca. 1935.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

Water and Sewer System 

In 1935 and 1936, CCC crews built a water and sewage control system at Jewel Cave. Foreman 

Bill Engelbert, a local plumber, and CCC leader A. E. Tucholke supervised crews as they dug a 

reservoir, lined it with concrete, dug ditches from the spring (now known as Jewel Cave Spring) to 

33 Evans-Hatch and Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages, 205.

34 ____ [first name unknown] Schaffer, Answers to questionnaire, undated [ca. 1995], in Jewel Cave Corporation, 

Historic Area Information Including Civilian Conservation Corps Documents and Jewel Cave During the 1940s, Interpretation 

Division Binder, Jewel Cave NM Visitor Center, Custer, SD.

35 DOI, NPS, Wind Cave National Park, NP-1, Project completion chart, Sixth Enrollment Period, March 31, 1936, 

and Wind Cave National Park, Justifications for Individual Projects, ECW Program, Sixth Enrollment Period, August 

27, 1935, 5, National Parks and Monuments Central Classified Files (1936–52), Box 128, Folder 621 CCC Program, 

Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

36 Schaffer, Answers to questionnaire, undated [ca. 1995]; Conrad Wirth to Regional Director, Region II, February 

10, 1938, National Parks and Monuments Central Classified Files (1936–52), Box 128, Folder 621 CCC Program, 

Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC; Acting Assistant Director, NPS, to 

Superintendent, Wind Cave National Park, May 11, 1937, National Parks and Monuments Central Classified Files (1936–

52), Box 128, Folder 621 CCC Program, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 63

the reservoir for pipes, laid the pipes, and built a septic tank and filter trench.37 The US Public 

Health Service developed plans for the septic system, which included a corrugated half circle of iron, 

a redwood two-by-four below it, and a sand and gravel backfilled area above the half-circle.38

The water supply reservoir was completed in February 1936. This was later than anticipated,

because plans changed to accommodate a larger reservoir (3,000 gallons) with adequate storage for 

drinking water and fire protection.39 Crews also built a drinking fountain in 1936.40 Perhaps as a 

result of the water improvements at Jewel Cave in 1935 and 1936, the NPS formally acquired water 

rights from the Forest Service for the Jewel Cave land area on August 8, 1937. It is not clear why the 

water rights transfer occurred four years after the land transfer.41

Ranger Cabin

The NPS Branch of Plans and Design drew up the plan for an administration building in 

February 1935.42 At the time, JCC guides lived in a tent to the northeast of the proposed building

(near where the campground was eventually built).

43 CCC crews built the administration cabin and 

had completed it by February 1936 (see Figures 20 and 21). Estimated costs for CCC labor and 

supervision were around $600.44 The interior was likely not completed until 1938, in order to give 

the logs “time to season.”45

37 A. E. Tucholke to Bruce Bitz, March 15, 1995, in Jewel Cave Corporation, Historic Area Information Including Civilian 

Conservation Corps Documents and Jewel Cave During the 1940s, Interpretation Division Binder, Jewel Cave NM Visitor 

Center, Custer, SD; Schaffer, Answers to questionnaire, undated [ca. 1995]; DOI, NPS, Wind Cave National Park, NP-1, 

Project completion chart, Sixth Enrollment Period.

38 U.S. Treasury Department, U.S. Public Health Service, “Septic Tank & Filter Trench, Sewage Disposal Plant, 

Jewel Cave National Monument South Dakota,” November 14, 1935, eTIC. 

39 Wind Cave National Park, Justifications for Individual Projects, ECW Program, Sixth Enrollment Period; DOI, 

NPS, Wind Cave National Park, NP-1, Project completion chart, Sixth Enrollment Period; Development Outline, Jewel 

Cave National Monument, Headquarters Area – Utilities, May 15, 1952, Cabinet 3, Drawer 3, Folder D18 Master Plan, 

Jewel Cave NM CF.

40 Conrad L. Wirth, Assistant Director, to Superintendent, Wind Cave National Park, May 14, 1936, National Parks 

and Monuments Central Classified Files (1936–52), Box 128, Folder 621 CCC Program, Records of the National Park 

Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC; Wind Cave National Park, Project Application and Accomplishment, 

Emergency Conservation Work, NPS, undated [1936?], National Parks and Monuments Central Classified Files (1936–

52), Box 128, Folder 621 CCC Program, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

41 DOI, NPS, “Land Ownership Record,” September 1944. 

42 DOI, NPS, Jewel Cave National Monument Ranger’s Cabin, blueprint, February 1935, eTIC. 

43 DOI, NPS, “Jewel Cave National Monument: Proposed Foot Trail and Masonry Steps,” September 1935, eTIC; 

Quinn Evans Architects, Cultural Landscape Report and Environmental Assessment: Jewel Cave Historic Area, Jewel Cave National 

Monument, March 2005, 47, 50, map of the ranger’s tent at 82.

44 Schaffer, Answers to questionnaire, undated [ca. 1995].

45 Alan W. Bright, “Rugged Charm: Ranger Cabin (HS-1) Historic Structure Report, Jewel Cave National 

Monument, Custer, South Dakota,” November 1999, 18–19, Cabinet 3, Drawer 1, Folder H4219 Historic Structure 

Report, Jewel Cave NM CF. 
64 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Figure 20. CCC crews constructing the ranger cabin at 

Jewel Cave, ca. 1933.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

Figure 21. The nearly completed ranger cabin in Jewel 

Cave, ca. 1936.

Source: NPS.

Roads 

CCC crews built the access road connecting the cave development area with the new CusterNewcastle highway. Years later, one worker remembered the road as “quite crude.”46 Crews also 

assisted with side work for the Highway 16 project, including sloping the road shoulder to reduce 

erosion and fixing guardrails that had settled.47 In 1939, the JCC paid Lea Hosback for “services for 

team of horses at Jewel Cave on construction of roads.”

48 While it is not clear which monument 

roads Hosback and his team of horses worked on, the payment demonstrates that the JCC provided 

some assistance with development of the entry area for tourism, even while the CCC was on site.

Surface Trails 

During summer 1936, the CCC constructed a new foot trail from the entry road, past the 

planned administration building, and down the limestone cliffs to the cave entrance (see Figures 22

and 23).49 CCC crews built a stairway with wooden steps in a rock crevice in the cliff, with a width of 

two to six feet.50 The wooden steps quickly fell into disrepair, and in 1938, the NPS recommended 

that the CCC update the stairway.51 The following year, CCC crews replaced the wooden steps with 

46 Schaffer, Answers to questionnaire, undated [ca. 1995].

47 National Park Service, Seventh Period ECW Program, Wind Cave, Camp No. NP-1, April 7, 1936; and NPS, 

Justifications for Proposed New ECW Projects, February 12, 1936, both in National Parks and Monuments Central 

Classified Files (1936–52), Box 128, Folder 621 CCC Program, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest 

Region), NARA KC.

48 Jewel Cave Corporation meeting, minutes, September 26, 1939, File 49bb, Jewel Cave NM MF.

49 DOI, NPS, Wind Cave National Park, NP-1, Project completion chart, Sixth Enrollment Period; Development 

Outline, Jewel Cave National Monument, May 15, 1952, 2, Cabinet 3, Drawer 3, Folder D18 Master Plan, Jewel Cave 

NM CF.

50 DOI, NPS, “Jewel Cave National Monument: Proposed Foot Trail and Masonry Steps,” September 1935, eTIC. 

51 Howard W. Baker, Regional Landscape Architect, “Jewel Cave National Monument Report,” June 5–6, 1938, 

Cabinet 3, Drawer 1, Folder H14 Area and Service History Cultural Park Hist. Research Documents, Jewel Cave NM 

CF.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 65

sandstone steps. Landscaping included placing a “large native rock” on the slope-slide of the 

stairway and addition of a mounted pipe handrail.52

Figure 22. The CCC built a

retaining wall and wooden 

stairs to the cave entrance, 

pictured here in partial 

completion. CCC crews 

eventually covered the 

retaining well with dirt to 

provide a more natural 

appearance. They also 

removed all wooden 

structures, including the 

stairs, and left only a steel 

gate at the rectangular cave 

entrance. 1935.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave 

NM.

Figure 23. Map showing 

the existing trail from the 

entry road to the cave 

entrance and the proposed 

new trail, which the CCC 

eventually built. It also 

shows the existing ranger’s 

tent and the proposed 

cabin, 1935.

Source: NPS, Western 

Office of Design and 

Construction.

52 DOI, NPS, Stone Trail Steps, eTIC. 
66 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Cave Trails

Inside the cave, the JCC maintained existing wooden ladders, stairways, and cave trails.53 When 

NPS Regional Geologist J. Volney Lewis visited in 1935, he reported on the status of cave trails: 

The trails and stairways in the cave will call for improvement in many places as development 

proceeds. Some of the old wooden stairs are too steep for comfort; and in places they are unsafe, 

especially for elderly people and for ladies, some of whom still wear high-heel shoes, even in caves. 

Improved stairways can probably be designed without injury to any of the essential features of the 

cave. A geologist should study the cave with a view to the underground improvements and also in 

order to determine, if possible, its origin and the conditions under which the crystals were formed, so 

that the story of the cave may be related to the visitors.54

Wind Cave managers recommended that the CCC assist with cave trail maintenance, but it does not 

appear that CCC crews ever conducted significant trail maintenance work.55

Figure 24. CCC workers wrote their names on the walls of the cave in the Kittycombs area. Pictured here in 2017.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

53 Superintendent Harry J. Liek to Region Two Director, memorandum, March 16, 1942, National Parks and 

Monuments Central Classified Files (1936–52), Box 192, Folder 600-01 Master Plan, Records of the National Park 

Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

54 J. Volney Lewis, “Jewel Cave National Monument: Geologic Memoranda,” July 25, 1935, File 3449zze, Jewel 

Cave NM MF. 

55 Wind Cave National Park, Justifications for Individual Projects, ECW Program, Sixth Enrollment Period.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 67

NPS Chief Engineer Frank A. Kittredge visited Jewel Cave with Lewis in July and recommended 

“that a survey be made to determine the extent and exact location of existing trails and major 

passageways in Jewel Cave, so that an accurate map of this cave may be made.”56 CCC crews 

completed the survey in March 1936 and sent the data to the chief engineer’s office, where staff 

drew a detailed map showing the location of ladders and other built infrastructure on the cave tour 

route.57 When CCC crews improved cave trails, they explored some of the passages. Decades later, 

cavers found the names of CCC workers and their friends on the wall in the Kittycombs area (see 

Figure 24).58 The CCC surveys remained an important resource decades later.59

Entry and Approach Signs 

Before the NPS took over, the 

JCC had erected “small roadside 

signs” advertising Jewel Cave to 

motorists passing by the 

monument.60 In 1936, CCC workers 

built a new entry sign, designed by 

the NPS Branch of Plans and 

Design, and installed it at the point 

where the monument road from the 

ranger cabin intersected with 

Highway 16 (see Figure 25).61 CCC 

workers also constructed warning 

signs along monument roads and 

installed landscaping in the traffic 

island around the entry sign.62

56 Wind Cave National Park, Justifications for Individual Projects, ECW Program, Sixth Enrollment Period.

57 DOI, NPS, Office of the Chief Engineer, “Map of Jewel Cave Showing Underground Passages and Trails,” July 

1936, eTIC; DOI, NPS, Wind Cave National Park, NP-1, Project completion chart, Sixth Enrollment Period.

58 Dwight Deal, “Jewel Cave Exploration late 1800s through 1962,” talk, Jewel Cave 200-mile Reunion, Custer, SD, 

June 29, 2019.

59 Alex Mitich, “Cave Questions – Little Jewels,” Bits and Pieces 7, no. 2 (March–April 1971): 19, in Cabinet 3, 

Drawer 1, Folder H14 Area and Service History Cultural Park His. Research Documents, Jewel Cave NM CF; Dwight 

Deal, interview by Jackie Gonzales, June 30, 2019, Custer, SD. 

60 Wind Cave National Park, Justifications for Individual Projects, ECW Supplemental Work Program Plan, Sixth 

Enrollment Period, December 12, 1935, National Parks and Monuments Central Classified Files (1936–52), Box 128, 

Folder 621 CCC Program, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

61 DOI, NPS, Jewel Cave National Monument Proposed Information Sign, April 1936, eTIC. 

62 Wind Cave National Park, Justifications for Individual Projects, ECW Supplemental Work Program Plan, Sixth 

Enrollment Period; DOI, NPS, Stone Trail Steps, September 1939, eTIC. 

Figure 25. Design of the entrance sign for Jewel Cave, drawn by NPS 

Branch of Plans and Design, 1936.

Source: NPS.
68 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Boundaries 

NPS officials wanted a boundary fence and a complete survey of the monument’s boundaries.63

Wind Cave officials explained the need: 

The boundaries of Jewel Cave National Monument have never been completely surveyed or marked. 

As a result, hunters frequently trespass on this monument unintentionally, and occasionally some 

livestock graze on the area. For these reasons it is considered necessary to fence the entire monument, 

and an accurate survey is a necessary preliminary to undertaking this work. . . . erection of a 4-wire 

barbed wire fence will definitely prevent trespassing by either persons or livestock, and will serve also 

to increase the number of game animals living within this refuge. The fence can be erected at low cost 

by using posts salvaged from old game fences which are being removed in Wind Cave National Park, 

leaving only the barbed wire to be purchased.64

By 1939, CCC crews had fenced the original rectangular boundary of the national monument with a 

barbed wire fence, including the right-of-way along Highway 16.65

Campground 

Wind Cave’s CCC funding requests 

for Jewel Cave first included a 

campground in 1936, but work on it did 

not begin until 1938.66 The campground, 

which also included a small picnic area, 

was located to the northeast and across a 

ravine from the ranger cabin (see Figure 

26).67 Crews defined a roadbed (but did 

not grade it) for the campground loop 

road and seven spurs, designed under the 

“Meinecke system of control,” 

developed by E. P. Meinecke in the 

1920s as a way to manage automobile 

traffic at campgrounds while also 

mitigating damage to trees and other 

63 National Park Service, Seventh Period ECW Program, Wind Cave, Camp No. NP-1.

64 NPS, Justifications for Proposed New ECW Projects, February 12, 1936, National Parks and Monuments Central 

Classified Files (1936–52), Box 128, Folder 621 CCC Program, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest 

Region), NARA KC.

65 Development Outline, Jewel Cave National Monument, May 15, 1952, 1; DOI, NPS, Stone Trail Steps, eTIC.

66 National Park Service, Seventh Period ECW Program, Wind Cave, Camp No. NP-1.

67 DOI, NPS, Proposed Campground: Jewel Cave National Monument, July 14, 1937, eTIC. 

Figure 26. Plan of the proposed campground at Jewel Cave NM, 

drawn by NPS Branch of Plans and Design, 1937.

Source: NPS.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 69

vegetation.68 Crews then surfaced the rough road with a “very loose material” and lined it with 

boulders, some of which Region Two Landscape Architect Howard W. Baker thought “were placed 

in rather dangerous positions.” Pit toilets were constructed to serve visitors at the campground and 

picnic area.69

Natural Resource Management 

Since the NPS did not expend any funds specifically for Jewel Cave, and Wind Cave rarely sent 

staff to Jewel Cave, very little natural resource management occurred at the monument. In 1935, J. 

Volney Lewis completed a geologic report, in which he described geology in and above the cave.70

Other than Lewis’ report, there was virtually no management activity regarding the cave resource. 

Aboveground, NPS officials and visitors commented on the high quality of the ponderosa forest 

on monument grounds. Regional Forester Frank Childs attributed this condition to a lack of 

commercial logging near the monument. “The pines are especially outstanding,” he wrote, “because 

no timber cutting operations have been allowed on the area except for that which was necessary and 

recommended by the Bureau of Entomology for the control of the Black Hills beetle infestations.” 

Along with fire protection, insect damage spreading through the forest was a major management 

issue. Childs explained that “this higher percentage of mature to overmature ponderosa pine stand 

offers a choice breeding ground for the Black Hills beetle.”71

The NPS first recognized the beetle infestation in 1938, when it threatened “total destruction of 

the mature and near-mature ponderosa pines on the Monument and lands adjacent to the area.” In 

the past, beetles had killed millions of trees throughout the Black Hills. The response to the 1938 

threat included a complete survey of the monument’s trees, first in mid-winter 1939 and then again 

in the spring, after which all infected trees were felled and treated. In total, CCC crews removed 932 

affected trees, amounting to approximately 48,000 board feet of timber. This controlled the spread 

of the beetle for the time being, and the NPS recommended at least one thorough annual survey in 

subsequent years.72

68 Development Outline, Jewel Cave National Monument, May 15, 1952, 2; “E. P. Meinecke and Campground 

Planning,” in Linda Flint McClelland, Presenting Nature: The Historic Landscape Design of the National Park Service, 1916–1942

(National Park Service, 1993), https://www.nps.gov/parkhistory/online_books/mcclelland/mcclelland4e.htm.

69 Howard W. Baker, Regional Landscape Architect, “Jewel Cave National Monument Report,” June 5–6, 1938, 

Cabinet 3, Drawer 1, Folder H14 Area and Service History Cultural Park Hist. Research Documents, Jewel Cave NM 

CF.

70 Lewis, “Jewel Cave National Monument: Geologic Memoranda,” File 3449zze. 

71 Frank W. Childs, “Forest Protection Requirements Report for Jewel Cave National Monument,” November 

1939, 1, Box 192 National Parks and Monuments Central Classified Files (1936–52), Box 192, Folder 207-01 Annual 

Report, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

72 Childs, “Forest Protection Requirements Report for Jewel Cave National Monument,” November 1939, 2; 

Stricklin, Superintendent’s Annual Report, Wind Cave National Park, Fiscal Year 1939, October 7, 1939, 4; 

Superintendent’s Annual Report, Wind Cave National Park, Fiscal Year 1940, July 12, 1940, 3, National Parks and 

Monuments Central Classified Files (1936–52), Box 125, Folder 207-01.4 Superintendents Annual Reports, Records of 

the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA, KC.
70 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Tours, Surveys, and Exploration 

From 1936 to 1939, the JCC ran guided tours of Jewel Cave during June, July, and August, led 

by William A. Nevin (the head guide) and S. E. Ainslie of Custer.73 One source notes that the NPS 

funded a temporary “ranger in charge” position at the site “for public contact duties,” but it is not 

clear what that role entailed or who occupied it. As Jewel Cave received no direct federal 

appropriations in the 1930s, funding for the position would have had to come through Region Two, 

Wind Cave, or from private funds.

74 The JCC paid its guides $405.24 in 1938 and $680.50 in 1939.75

Adult visitors paid 50 cents to enter the cave, and children under 16 got in for free.76 Through these 

fees, the JCC made enough in 1937 and 1938 to warrant $10 payouts to each of the corporation’s 

shareholders.77 In 1939, 4,003 people visited Jewel Cave, a 39 percent increase over the previous 

year. Wind Cave Superintendent Howard B. Stricklin attributed the increase to the JCC, which had 

hired a third guide for the 1938 season, “permit[ing] visitors to enter the cave in small parties 

without having to wait for a trip.”78

JCC guided tours followed two routes (see 

Figures 27 and 28). The first was a little over a 

quarter mile long and consisted of narrow, 

limestone passages that, according to a 1938 NPS 

report, “do not especially appeal to the ordinary 

observer.” The tour then passed through Flat Top 

Room, Broken Chamber, Ragged Top Room, and 

Gothic Dome (a room “23 feet high, lined with a 

thick scale of crystalline calcite”).79 The second 

route was longer than the first and took visitors 

past Milk River, beyond which there were no 

ladders, and then on to Junction Chamber. 

According to a 1938 NPS report, guides knew 

about passages beyond Junction Chamber: 

73 Liek to Region Two Director, memorandum, March 16, 1942; Jewel Cave Corporation meeting, minutes, March 

9, 1937, File 49w, Jewel Cave NM MF; Jewel Cave Corporation meeting, minutes, September 26, 1939, File 49bb, Jewel 

Cave NM MF.

74 Summary of Activities at Wind Cave National Park, Fiscal Year 1940, November 15, 1940, 10, National Parks and 

Monuments Central Classified Files (1936–52), Box 125, Folder 207-01.4 Superintendents Annual Reports, Records of 

the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

75 Jewel Cave Corporation meeting, minutes, September 26, 1939, File 49dd, Jewel Cave NM MF.

76 DOI, NPS, “Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota,” March 1938, Cabinet 3, Drawer 1, Folder H14 

Area and Service History Cultural Park Hist. Research Documents, Jewel Cave NM CF.

77 Jewel Cave Corporation meeting, minutes, October 20, 1938, File 49y, Jewel Cave NM MF; Jewel Cave 

Corporation meeting, minutes, December 12, 1937, File 49x, Jewel Cave NM MF.

78 Stricklin, Superintendent’s Annual Report, Wind Cave National Park, Fiscal Year 1939, October 7, 1939, 14. 

79 Some of these room names have changed over the years.

Figure 27. The Jewel Cave Corporation gave tours 

from the entrance in Hell Canyon, pictured here from 

inside the cave, ca. 1946.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 71

unexplored passages lead in many directions, the walls are honeycombed. Some distance farther the 

largest and most picturesque chambers of the cave are entered. Their walls are lined with a thick scale 

of calcite, giving the appearance of a room formed of the confection “Cracker Jack.” Most of the 

passages leading from Milk River to the explored end of the cave are relatively small. . . . there is every 

probability that some of the numerous passages which radiate from the end [of the second route] and 

from various places along the route will be found to lead to additional galleries and chambers. 80

Guides also pursued unexplored passages leading out of Gothic Dome “in every direction” but had 

not found substantial passages from there as of 1938. The NPS was aware of several openings where 

the wind blew strongly, and “many small holes have been found into which rocks may be dropped 

and no sound of their hitting bottom can be heard.”81

Figure 28. “Map of Jewel Cave Showing Underground Passages and Trails,” Office of the Chief Engineer, NPS, July 1936.

Source: NPS.

80 DOI, NPS, “Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota,” March 1938. 

81 DOI, NPS, “Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota,” March 1938. Apart from “Milk River” and 

“Junction Chamber,” many of these early names for Jewel Cave passageways did not persist to the present, an indication 

there was no standardization of names due to lack of continuity in management. Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 

2020. 
72 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

End of the CCC and JCC Era

In April 1939, the JCC board decided to conclude the affairs of the corporation. It charged 

Nevin with “cooperat[ing] with the Wind Cave National Park officials to the fullest in bringing 

about a successful and amicable conclusion” to the corporation and its affairs.82 After paying out its 

shareholders, the JCC retained a net profit from 1936 to 1939 of $299.78, which it sent to the 

Agent-Cashier at Wind Cave National Park, as per the 1939 special use permit.83 To close out the 

1930s, the CCC officially abandoned the Jewel Cave side camp on September 1, 1939.84

National Park Service Management (ca. 1940–1959) 

Starting in 1940, the NPS managed Jewel Cave on its own. Underfunding of the NPS during the 

war years led a gap in staffing from 1944 to 1945. After the war concluded, tourists again rushed to 

parks, and in greater numbers than in the 1930s. Wind Cave managers oversaw Jewel Cave and 

staffed it with a few rangers each summer, with duties of interpretation, maintenance, and 

protection. Rangers spent most of their time giving cave tours and maintaining the cave and surface 

trail system. When the NPS launched the Mission 66 program in 1956, managers at Jewel Cave, 

Wind Cave, and the Region Two Office prepared development plans for the monument. But not 

everyone supported development at Jewel Cave: the planning process gave rise to arguments about 

whether the cave merited inclusion in the National Park System at all. 

Staffing 

1940 was the first year in which Jewel Cave was “entirely under the operation of the National 

Park Service.”85 With the JCC and CCC no longer at the monument, vandalism and poaching again 

became a problem, as had been the case during the years of absentee Forest Service management.86

Wind Cave Superintendent Howard Stricklin recommended establishing a permanent ranger 

position and two temporary ranger positions at Jewel Cave to keep an eye on the monument and to 

replace the JCC cave tour guides. He thought that the money raised in ticket sales would pay for 

most of the salaries of the new NPS staff.87 The next Wind Cave superintendent, Harry J. Liek, 

agreed that adding a ranger position would pay for itself, since people faced with waiting for the next 

tour often chose to get back in their cars and leave, rather than staying.

88

82 Jewel Cave Corporation meeting, minutes, April 4, 1939, File 49z, Jewel Cave NM MF.

83 Jewel Cave Corporation meeting, minutes, September 26, 1939, File 49dd, Jewel Cave NM MF; Jewel Cave 

Corporation meeting, minutes, September 26, 1939, File 49aa–49bb, Jewel Cave NM MF.

84 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Wind Cave National Park, Fiscal Year 1940, July 12, 1940, 3. 

85 Summary of Activities at Wind Cave National Park, Fiscal Year 1940, November 15, 1940, 9. 

86 Summary of Activities at Wind Cave National Park, Fiscal Year 1940, November 15, 1940, 10. 

87 Stricklin, Superintendent’s Annual Report, Wind Cave National Park, Fiscal Year 1939, October 7, 1939, 15–16.

88 Summary of Activities at Wind Cave National Park, Fiscal Year 1940, November 15, 1940, 10; Stricklin, 

Superintendent’s Annual Report, Wind Cave National Park, Fiscal Year 1939, October 7, 1939, 1.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 73

During June, July, and August 1940 and 1941, two temporary rangers conducted cave tours and 

performed basic maintenance and protection duties.89 Liek noted that the JCC had employed three 

guides and that the NPS would need to increase its staffing of the site to maintain a similar level of 

service: 

In previous years when the Jewel Cave Corporation operated in the monument, two men and when 

necessary three rendered guide service, in addition to the temporary ranger in charge who was 

employed by the [N]ational Park Service for public contact duties. If adequate guide service to the 

public is to be given, a larger appropriation must be provided for Jewel Cave national monument so 

that four rangers may be on duty during the tourist season—Three as guides and one for public 

contacts—so that at least thirty-minute rather than hourly scheduled trips may be maintained.90

In September 1941, Liek hired Elwood K. Wolfe Jr. as a permanent “Park Ranger” (grade level 8 on 

the federal pay scale) at Jewel Cave.

91 Wolfe transferred from Yosemite National Park, where he had 

been a museum assistant.92 Liek noted that Wolfe’s presence remedied the issues of understaffing 

and vandalism, since the “appointment of a permanent ranger made it possible to afford year-round 

protection to the monument and also guide service to the public at all times.”93 Liek soon realized 

that Wolfe spent most of his time on “public contact work” and suggested hiring a separate ranger 

for law enforcement, but no funding was allocated for the position.94

In the summer, Wolfe and his wife Shirley lived at Jewel Cave in the cabin built by the CCC, and 

in the winter, they lived at Wind Cave.

95 Wolfe performed ongoing maintenance as part of his duties, 

such as removing unstable rocks along the cave tour route.96 Shirley planted a Victory Garden in 

Hell Canyon with permission from Liek, who required that it remain out of public view.97 Shirley 

89 Summary of Activities at Wind Cave National Park, Fiscal Year 1940, November 15, 1940, 9; DOI, NPS, “The 

Master Plan for Jewel Cave National Monument,” 1942, D-6.

90 Summary of Activities at Wind Cave National Park, Fiscal Year 1940, November 15, 1940, 10.

91 Liek to Region Two Director, memorandum, March 16, 1942; Elwood K. Wolfe Jr., Monthly Report for 

September 1941, October 1, 1941, in Jewel Cave Corporation, Historic Area Information Including Civilian Conservation Corps 

Documents and Jewel Cave During the 1940s, Interpretation Division Binder, Jewel Cave NM Visitor Center, Custer, SD; 

DOI, NPS, “The Master Plan for Jewel Cave National Monument,” 1942; Elwood K. Wolfe Jr., “Jewel Cave National 

Monument Vegetation Cover Type Map, Narrative Description,” May 12, 1942, Records of Wind Cave National Park, 

General File, Box 6, Folder Y18 Forestry & Range Conservation, Records of the National Park Service Region II 

(Midwest Region), NARA KC. 

92 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Wind Cave National Park, Fiscal Year 1941, August 18, 1941, 3, National Parks 

and Monuments Central Classified Files (1936–52), Box 125, Folder 207-01.4 Superintendents Annual Reports, Records 

of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region). 

93 Harry J. Liek, Superintendent’s Annual Narrative Report, Wind Cave National Park, Fiscal Year 1942, October 

31, 1942, 4, National Parks and Monuments Central Classified Files (1936–52), Box 125, Folder 207-01.4 

Superintendents Annual Reports, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

94 DOI, NPS, “The Master Plan for Jewel Cave National Monument,” 1942, 2501-C.

95 Shirley Wolfe, interview, undated, in Jewel Cave Corporation, Historic Area Information Including Civilian Conservation 

Corps Documents and Jewel Cave During the 1940s, Interpretation Division Binder, Jewel Cave NM Visitor Center, Custer, 

SD.

96 Wolfe Jr., Monthly Report for September 1941, October 1, 1941.

97 Notes from conversation with Shirley Wolf[e], author unnamed, January 13, [1989?], in Jewel Cave Corporation, 

Historic Area Information Including Civilian Conservation Corps Documents and Jewel Cave During the 1940s, Interpretation 

Division Binder, Jewel Cave NM Visitor Center, Custer, SD.
74 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

assisted Elwood with duties as needed. She remembered years later, “My job, more or less was to 

greet people when they came and try to get them to wait to take a tour through the cave.”98 The 

Wolfes remained at Jewel Cave until 1944, when Elwood took a position with the US military. Liek 

then closed the monument to visitors for the rest of the year.99 For the remainder of the war, no one 

staffed Jewel Cave. This was typical across the country after Congress slashed funding to the 

National Park System to accommodate wartime military expenses.100

In 1946, Acting Region Two

Director Howard Baker wrote to Liek, 

“it appears that a temporary ranger will 

be available after July 1 if the Congress 

appropriates the funds,” but no funding 

for that permanent position came 

through.101 Instead, the NPS stationed 

Wind Cave Park Ranger Lyle Linch at 

Jewel Cave over the summer months 

from 1946 to 1948 (see Figure 29). 

Linch spent winters either at Wind Cave 

or at Badlands National Monument 

(another unit under the Wind Cave 

superintendent’s jurisdiction).102 Linch 

had a degree in geology and “a great 

deal of enthusiasm” for Jewel Cave.103

He gave tours, provided basic 

protection for the cave, and performed 

general maintenance under the 

supervision of the Wind Cave 

98 Shirley Wolfe, interview, undated.

99 Harry J. Liek to Region Two Director, July 3, 1944, National Parks and Monuments Central Classified Files 

(1936–52), Box 125, Folder 207-01.4 Superintendents Annual Reports, Records of the National Park Service Region II 

(Midwest Region), NARA KC.

100 Richard West Sellars, Preserving Nature in the National Parks: A History (New Haven and London: Yale University 

Press, 1997), 150–51. 

101 Howard W. Baker to Wind Cave National Park Superintendent, March 8, 1946, National Parks and Monuments 

Central Classified Files (1936–52), Box 125, Folder 205 Instructions & Orders, Records of the National Park Service 

Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC. 

102 Monthly Narrative Report for Wind Cave National Park November 1946, December 3, 1946, National Parks and 

Monuments Central Classified Files (1936–52), Box 125, Folder 207-01.4 Superintendents Annual Reports, Records of 

the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

103 Regional Director Lawrence C. Merriam to files, memorandum, June 20, 1947, National Parks and Monuments 

Central Classified Files (1936–52), Box 192, Folder 204 Inspections & Investigations, Records of the National Park 

Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

Figure 29. Ranger Lyle Linch, pictured here in front of the entrance 

to Jewel Cave.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 75

maintenance foreman.104 Linch left in mid-1948, after which point two seasonal rangers took over 

operations.105

Jewel Cave remained under the jurisdiction of Wind Cave, but starting in the early 1950s, the 

NPS inserted another layer of management between Jewel Cave and Region Two in Omaha: the 

Black Hills Area Office in Rapid City. The Black Hills Area Office resulted from earlier efforts to 

create a large-scale national park in the Black Hills. The process had started in 1939, when the South 

Dakota State Legislature authorized the state to transfer Custer State Park to the federal 

government, to turn it into a national park. The NPS then quietly began studying the possibility of 

combining a number of parks in the Black Hills into one unit. A 1940 NPS report described the 

hypothetical Black Hills National Park, which would encompass 174,000 acres and would include 

Wind Cave National Park, Custer State Park, Custer State Game Sanctuaries, parts of Harney 

National Forest, and some private land. However, the report’s authors opposed the creation of such 

a park, in light of the already extensive federal and state conservation measures in the area. 

Furthermore, residents of the Black Hills expressed opposition to transferring Custer State Park to 

the federal government. In 1941, South Dakota Governor Harlan J. Bushfield announced he did not 

want Custer State Park to be managed by the federal government, and the state legislature repealed 

the act allowing the transfer.106

In 1942, with Custer State Park no longer part of NPS plans in Region Two, Assistant Chief of 

Planning William G. Carnes proposed a Black Hills-Great Plains National Park, which would tie 

together Jewel Cave, Wind Cave, Mount Rushmore National Memorial, Badlands National 

Monument, Devils Tower National Monument, and Theodore Roosevelt National Park. Wind 

Cave’s superintendent already managed Badlands, Mount Rushmore, and Jewel Cave.107 Carnes 

claimed his plan went “a step beyond the coordinating superintendency idea,” creating not one park 

that managed other parks, but rather one park that spanned several noncontiguous land areas.108 An 

engineer in the Region Two Office was “rather doubtful as to the advisability of trying to combine 

104 Jewel Cave NM, Annual Report of Motor Vehicles, FY 1944, National Parks and Monuments Central Classified 

Files (1936–52), Box 192, Folder 207-01 Annual Report, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest 

Region), NARA KC; Automotive Equipment Use Report, June 30, 1945, National Parks and Monuments Central 

Classified Files (1936–52), Box 192, Folder 207 Reports - General, Records of the National Park Service Region II 

(Midwest Region), NARA KC; Master Plan Development Outline, Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota; 

Monument Operation Prospectus, April 1952, 1, Cabinet 3, Drawer 3, Folder D18 Master Plan, Jewel Cave NM CF. 

105 Coordinating Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, Fiscal Year 1948, National Parks 

and Monuments Central Classified Files (1936–52), Box 125, Folder 207-01.4 Superintendents Annual Reports, Records 

of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC. 

106 Recreation Planning Division Chief George Ingalls, memorandum for file, April 16, 1942, 1–3, National Parks 

and Monuments Central Classified Files (1936–52), Box 125, Folder 201 Administration - General, Records of the 

National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

107 NPS, “Wind Cave National Park Timeline,” accessed December 13, 2019, 

https://www.nps.gov/wica/learn/historyculture/wica-time-line.htm. 

108 Regional Biologist to Regional Director, May 22, 1942, National Parks and Monuments Central Classified Files 

(1936–52), Box 125, Folder 201 Administration - General, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest 

Region), NARA KC. 
76 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

the several proposed and rather widely separated areas as one national park.”109 Regional Geologist 

Caroll H. Wegemann thought that as separated units of one park, the areas slated for inclusion 

would “lose much of their value,” for there was “much of geologic interest in the area of the 

proposed park, but there is more outside.”110

Carnes envisioned the Black Hills-Great Plains National Park as having offices in Rapid City. 

George F. Ingalls, chief of the Region Two Recreation Planning Division, was conflicted as to 

whether coordinated administration of the parks from Rapid City would increase efficiency: 

A Rapid City office presumably could take over certain fiscal and clerical work now performed in the 

areas. This might result in a saving in expense of that type of work. On the other hand, it would 

almost surely result in certain delays. There also might be justification for a central technical staff 

which no one of the areas could support individually. . . . 

The purpose in setting up a coordinating superintendency presumably would be to bring about a 

better protection and management of the areas, and, if possible, to do so more economically than at 

present. Other than possible advantages in consolidating clerical, fiscal, and technical staffs and in 

supplying a Park Service ‘focal point’ in the heart of an important travel area where the publicrelations phase could be particularly important, it is not quite clear to me what benefits would result 

from a coordinating superintendency.111

NPS Region Two Forester Frank W. Childs believed that a Rapid City headquarters “would be 

considerably more costly than would an administrative control such as is now in effect.”112 Liek, on 

the other hand, argued that the central position of Rapid City would save travel costs to most parks, 

including Jewel Cave (which was a slightly shorter drive to Rapid City than to Wind Cave), as well as 

providing staff with access to 24-hour telephone service, travel information services, supplies, 

equipment rentals, state agency officials, and the press.113

Region Two Director Baker concluded that a Rapid City office would likely increase expenses 

(there were already offices at Wind Cave, and they would need to rent new space in the city), and he 

109 Regional Engineer to Regional Director, memorandum, May 22, 1942, National Parks and Monuments Central 

Classified Files (1936–52), Box 125, Folder 201 Administration - General, Records of the National Park Service Region 

II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

110 Regional Geologist Caroll H. Wegemann to Regional Director, May 19, 1942, National Parks and Monuments 

Central Classified Files (1936–52), Box 125, Folder 201 Administration - General, Records of the National Park Service 

Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC. 

111 George F. Ingalls to Regional Director, memorandum, May 27, 1942, National Parks and Monuments Central 

Classified Files (1936–52), Box 125, Folder 201 Administration - General, Records of the National Park Service Region 

II (Midwest Region), NARA KC. 

112 Frank W. Childs, “Forestry Comment with Reference to Mr. Carnes’ Report on the Proposed Black Hills-Great 

Plains National Park,” June 5, 1942, National Parks and Monuments Central Classified Files (1936–52), Box 125, Folder

201 Administration - General, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

113 Exhibit ‘C’: Comparative Travel Time and Mileage Table Between Coordinated Areas from Wind Cave 

Headquarters and Proposed Rapid City Headquarters, undated [c. 1949], National Parks and Monuments Central 

Classified Files (1936–52), Box 125, Folder 201 Administration - General, Records of the National Park Service Region 

II (Midwest Region), NARA KC; Harry J. Liek to Region Two Director, memorandum, August 13, 1949, 3, National 

Parks and Monuments Central Classified Files (1936–52), Box 125, Folder 201 Administration - General, Records of the 

National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 77

acknowledged that local opinion was “very much against any such proposal.”

114 Instead, Baker 

argued, Wind Cave Superintendent Liek should continue managing Jewel Cave, Mount Rushmore, 

and Badlands as coordinating superintendent. He later added Devils Tower to that grouping and 

suggested increasing Liek’s salary to reflect the additional responsibilities.115

Despite this continued concern that a Rapid City office might be more expensive, in 1950, Baker 

approved transfer of the Wind Cave coordinating superintendent’s offices to Rapid City.116 This 

followed, in the words of Childs, an NPS-wide trend “to centralize and consolidate administrative 

activities in a large town or city.”117 Staff who moved with Liek (who was a GS-11 superintendent) 

included a chief clerk (GS-7), clerk (GS-4), clerk-stenographer (GS-4), clerk-typist (GS-2), and 

ungraded mechanic (the Wind Cave shop moved to Rapid City, too).118

As part of the move, Liek became the Black Hills Area Superintendent, and he hired separate 

superintendents for Mount Rushmore, Badlands, Devils Tower, and Wind Cave. The new Wind 

Cave superintendent was Earl M. Semingsen, who had previously been chief ranger at Everglades 

National Park. Semingsen supervised Jewel Cave’s “administrative, maintenance, interpretation and 

protection activities” and reported to Liek, rather than directly to the Region Two director as 

previous Wind Cave superintendents had done.119 The area office coordinated correspondence 

between the units and the regional office, which meant any correspondence regarding Jewel Cave 

would go through Wind Cave and then to the Black Hills Area Office before proceeding to the 

114 Regional Director to Director, memorandum, June 5, 1942, National Parks and Monuments Central Classified 

Files (1936–52), Box 125, Folder 201 Administration - General, Records of the National Park Service Region II 

(Midwest Region), NARA KC.

115 Regional Director to Director, memorandum, June 5, 1942; Frank W. Childs, “Forestry Comment Re Proposal 

to Move Wind Cave and Coordinated Areas Headquarters to Rapid City, South Dakota,” undated [ca. 1947?], 2, 

National Parks and Monuments Central Classified Files (1936–52), Box 125, Folder 201 Administration - General, 

Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

116 Lawrence C. Merriam to Superintendent, Wind Cave National Park, telegram, March 31, 1950; and Stanley C. 

Joseph, “Comment Regarding Proposal to Move Headquarters of Wind Cave and Coordinated Areas to Rapid City, 

South Dakota,” September 25, 1947, both in National Parks and Monuments Central Classified Files (1936–52), Box 

125, Folder 201 Administration - General, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA 

KC.

117 Childs, “Forestry Comment Re Proposal to Move Wind Cave and Coordinated Areas Headquarters.”

118 Harry J. Liek to Region Two Director, memorandum, February 17, 1950, National Parks and Monuments 

Central Classified Files (1936–52), Box 125, Folder 201 Administration - General, Records of the National Park Service 

Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

119 Harry J. Liek to Region Two Director, memorandum, March 17, 1952, 1–2, National Parks and Monuments 

Central Classified Files (1936–52), Box 125, Folder 0-1 Mtg and Conferences, Records of the National Park Service 

Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC; NPS, “Earl M. Semingsen Named Superintendent of Wind Cave National 

Park, South Dakota,” press release, July 27, 1951, National Parks and Monuments Central Classified Files (1936–52), 

Box 125, Folder 201 Administration - General, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), 

NARA KC.
78 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

regional office.120 Liek held area superintendent meetings “quarterly or oftener,” to keep in touch 

“and better understand the area picture as a whole.”121

Semingsen recommended that Jewel Cave have its own superintendent, as Mount Rushmore, 

Devils Tower, and Badlands then had, but Liek and Baker denied his request.122 Instead, Semingsen 

renamed one of the seasonal (GS-4) positions at Jewel Cave as “Ranger-in-Charge” and appointed 

Harold Jones to fill the role. Jones was on duty at Jewel Cave for three months a year, with 

“responsibility for coordination and supervision of monument management, protection, 

interpretation, maintenance and construction programs,” and supervision of three other seasonal 

park rangers.123 Semingsen continued to supervise overall administration, maintenance, 

interpretation, and protection of Jewel Cave.124

In 1952, Joseph L. Orr took over as the ranger-in-charge at Jewel Cave for the season.125 As 

Jones had, Orr staffed Jewel Cave only in the summer and was supported by three other seasonal 

park rangers. Wind Cave permanent park rangers and maintenance staff assisted with maintenance 

and managed fiscal and clerical functions. (Wind Cave had requested additional clerical staff to make 

up for the positions that had been transferred to the area office.)

126 The Black Hills Area Office had 

responsibility for hiring and accounting functions for all parks under its purview.127 In 1952, Liek 

transferred management of Jewel Cave directly to the area office, removing oversight from the Wind 

Cave superintendent.128

Then, in 1953, the Black Hills Area Office in Rapid City closed suddenly, less than three years 

after it had opened. Fiscal management of Jewel Cave transferred to the Region Two Office at that 

120 Liek to Region Two Director, memorandum, March 17, 1952, 3.

121 Black Hills Area Superintendent to Region Two Director, memorandum, November 16, 1951, National Parks 

and Monuments Central Classified Files (1936–52), Box 125, Folder 0-1 Mtg and Conferences, Records of the National 

Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

122 Master Plan Development Outline, Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota; Monument Operation 

Prospectus, April 1952, 1. 

123 Park Warden Elvin T. Aaberg Jr. to Wind Cave National Park Superintendent, memorandum, August 10, 1951, 

National Parks and Monuments Central Classified Files (1936–52), Box 125, Folder 0-1 Mtg and Conferences, Records 

of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC; Earl M. Semingsen, Organization and Function as 

of Feb. 1, 1952, approved by Harry J. Liek March 12, 1952, National Parks and Monuments Central Classified Files 

(1936–52), Box 125, Folder 201-13.1 Organization Charts, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest 

Region), NARA KC.

124 Master Plan Development Outline, Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota; Monument Operation 

Prospectus, April 1952, 1. 

125 Wind Cave National Park Superintendent Earl M. Semingsen to Superintendent, Black Hills Areas, 

memorandum, August 6, 1952, National Parks and Monuments Central Classified Files (1936–52), Box 192, Folder 208-

01.3 Annual Report, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

126 Harry J. Liek, Superintendents Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument South Dakota, 1953, 2, files 

provided by Katie Atkins, Folder A2621 Narrative Reports: Annual, Superintendent’s Annual 1953, Jewel Cave NM CF; 

Master Plan Development Outline, Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota; Monument Operation Prospectus, 

April 1952, 2–3. 

127 Liek to Region Two Director, memorandum, March 17, 1952, 2.

128 Liek, Superintendents Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument South Dakota, 1953, 2.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 79

point, rather than reverting back to the Wind Cave superintendent.129 Baker explained to Semingsen 

how this new arrangement would work: 

Your position description is not to include any responsibility for Fossil Cycad or Jewel Cave National 

Monuments. You will continue to be responsible for the areas however, through a delegation from 

me. This responsibility will be one of the “other duties as assigned.”130

Meanwhile, Semingsen continued to argue for the need of a permanent ranger at Jewel Cave, but 

without success. In 1953, Semingsen successfully advocated for converting one of the seasonal park 

ranger positions to a seasonal park naturalist (GS-5), whose duties would “include the usual guiding, 

as well as interpretive duties, such as helping set up, care for, and explain special exhibits, conducting 

wild-life tours, and giving lectures.”131

Richard Hart, a Wind Cave seasonal park ranger, became the seasonal ranger-in-charge (May 18 

to September 8) at Jewel Cave in 1953. Seasonal park rangers Bruce Allen and Harold S. Hanson 

assisted him until the monument closed at the end of the season, during which time Hart was 

furloughed. Hart remained ranger-in-charge until 1956, and he and Semingsen continued to argue to 

the Region Two Office that Jewel Cave needed additional funding and staff to manage the site 

adequately.132 After Hart left, John Shepherd became ranger-in-charge (subject to furlough) and 

Semingsen secured five seasonal rangers, the most ever up to that point.133 Seasonal staff were 

generalist rangers who gave guided tours of the cavern, as well as performing other routine 

maintenance, interpretation, and protection duties.134

129 Harry J. Liek, Earl M. Semingsen, and Richard T. Hart, 1954 Superintendents Annual Report for Jewel Cave 

National Monument South Dakota, May 25, 1954, 1, files provided by Katie Atkins, Folder A2621 Narrative Reports: 

Annual, Superintendent’s Annual 1954, Jewel Cave NM CF.

130 Howard W. Baker to Superintendent, Wind Cave, November 22, 1954, General Files 1952–1963, Box A52, 

Folder A6435 WICA May 1956 to 1961, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

131 Liek to Region Two Director, memorandum, March 17, 1952, 1–2; Master Plan Development Outline, Jewel 

Cave National Monument, South Dakota; Monument Operation Prospectus, April 1952, 2.

132 Liek, Semingsen, and Hart, 1954 Superintendents Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument South 

Dakota, May 25, 1954, 1, 3; Earl M. Semingsen and Richard T. Hart, 1955 Superintendents Annual Report for Jewel 

Cave National Monument South Dakota, July 1, 1955, 1, files provided by Katie Atkins, Folder A2621 Narrative 

Reports: Annual, Superintendent’s Annual 1955, 1–2, Jewel Cave NM CF; Earl M. Semingsen to Director, 

memorandum, June 30, 1954, files provided by Katie Atkins, Folder A2621 Narrative Reports: Annual, Superintendent’s 

Annual 1954, Jewel Cave NM CF.

133 Acting Regional Director John S. McLaughlin to Wind Cave National Park Superintendent, memorandum, July 

26, 1955, General Files 1952–1960, Box A-33, Folder A98 Mission 66, Records of the National Park Service Region II 

(Midwest Region), NARA KC; Earl M. Semingsen to Director, July 3, 1956, files provided by Katie Atkins, Folder 

A2621 Narrative Reports: Annual, Superintendent’s Annual 1955, Jewel Cave NM CF; John S. Shepherd to 

Superintendent, Wind Cave National Park, August 31, 1956, 4, files provided by Katie Atkins, Folder A2621 Narrative 

Reports: Annual, Superintendent’s Annual 1956, Jewel Cave NM CF.

134 Liek, Semingsen, and Hart, 1954 Superintendents Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument South 

Dakota, May 25, 1954, 3; Earl M. Semingsen, Superintendent, Wind Cave National Park, to All employees, Wind Cave 

National Park, Jewel Cave National Park, memorandum, July 13, 1956, 4, General Files 1952–1963, Box A52, Folder

A6435 WICA May 1956 to 1961, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.
80 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Throughout the 1940s and 1950s, managers complained that Jewel Cave lacked sufficient funds 

to meet public demand for cave tours or to complete basic administrative functions. In 1952, Liek 

reported, 

It was again experienced this fiscal year that insufficient funds were available for administration of the 

area. The Monument should be open to the public for a longer period each season, from May 1 to 

October 30, to adequately meet the public demand.135

In 1954, Hart, Liek, and Semingsen again complained that “insufficient funds were available for all 

activities.”

136 Yet the entrance fees collected at the cave exceeded park expenditures as visitation rose 

in the late 1940s.

137 By the late 1950s, budget appropriations began to provide funds for additional 

activities, and in 1956, cave tour fee revenue was 36 percent of the monument’s expenditures.138

Tours and Interpretation 

As of 1942, the NPS held cave tours on the hour and charged 50 cents per person (see Figure 

30).139 Ranger-in-Charge Wolfe suggested lowering the entry fee, since many potential cave visitors 

balked at the 50-cent cost.140 Guides used Coleman lanterns, and tours usually lasted 45 minutes to 

an hour.141 Tours usually followed one of the two standard routes that the JCC had established, but 

Wolfe sometimes varied the route based on “physical ability and interest” of the tour group. Wind 

Cave Superintendent Liek explained, “As a rule most parties are taken on the left hand trail as it is 

on this route that the best crystals are found. For those interested in stalactites and wishing a longer 

trip the right hand trail is used,” a route that went as far as Onyx Hall and Milk River.142

In 1942, the NPS completed an Interpretive Statement for Jewel Cave as part of the master 

planning process. It recommended emphasizing Jewel Cave’s geologic features, the high-quality 

stand of ponderosa pines, and the wildflowers on the monument grounds. The prospectus did not 

mention Jasper Cave.143 The NPS took no action on the master plan, and visitation plummeted 

135 Liek, Superintendents Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument South Dakota, 1953, 3.

136 Liek, Semingsen, and Hart, 1954 Superintendents Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument South 

Dakota, May 25, 1954, 3.

137 Coordinating Superintendent’s Annual Narrative Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, Fiscal Year 1946, 

National Parks and Monuments Central Classified Files (1936–52), Box 125, Folder 207-01.4 Superintendents Annual 

Reports, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC; Coordinating Superintendent’s 

Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, Fiscal Year 1948.

138 Shepherd to Superintendent, Wind Cave National Park, August 31, 1956, 3.

139 Liek to Region Two Director, memorandum, March 16, 1942; Summary of Activities at Wind Cave National 

Park, Fiscal Year 1940, November 15, 1940, 10, NARA KC.

140 Wolfe Jr., Monthly Report for September 1941, October 1, 1941; 6 Fed. Reg. 1633 (March 26, 1941).

141 DOI, NPS, “The Master Plan for Jewel Cave National Monument,” 1942, 2501-C. 

142 Liek to Region Two Director, memorandum, March 16, 1942. 

143 Liek to Region Two Director, memorandum, March 16, 1942; Regional Geologist Caroll H. Wegemann, 

“Preliminary Draft of Interpretive Statement for the Master Plan of Jewel Cave,” February 1942, National Parks and 

Monuments Central Classified Files (1936–52), Box 192, Folder 600-01 Master Plan, Records of the National Park 

Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 81

during the war years, due to gasoline rations and most Americans being busy with military or civilian 

service in support of the war effort. The monument was closed to visitation for most of 1945.144

Figure 30. Jewel Cave tour tickets, 1942.

Source: NARA KC. 

144 Coordinating Superintendent’s Annual Narrative Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, Fiscal Year 1946.
82 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

In 1946, Linch developed five cave tours: Hell

(now known as the Dungeon Room), P.E.O. 

(undefined acronym), Milk River, Heaven (now 

Heavenly Room), and Temple Dome. He also 

sometimes gave the “P.E.O. Special.”145 Linch and the 

other seasonal ranger in 1946 gave these tours for 60 

cents per person, and Linch prepared “running 

comments” for the tour to assist with training new 

guides (see Figure 31).146 As before the war, Linch 

took most tours on the left-hand spur, avoiding the 

right-hand side, which was often wet due to seepage 

and had stairs in need of repair.147 He established a 

small exhibit in the first passageway to the left when 

entering the cave, as well as one in front of the ranger 

station, both of which allowed those not physically 

able to take the tour to see cave specimens.148 Linch 

promoted Jewel Cave as home to the “greatest variety 

of cave formations of any Black Hills Cave” and the 

“most outstanding collection of cave geodes 

reported.”149

During this era, the NPS promoted Jewel Cave’s 

appeal to people interested in “primitive cave exploration” and “primitive cavern tours.”150

Semingsen and Region Two leadership agreed that Jewel Cave’s minimal development was a selling 

point: tour parties experienced lanterns instead of electric lights, wooden stairs instead of elevators, 

145 Lyle K. Linch, “Jewel Cave National Monument Work Program, Summer 1946,” October 21, 1946, and Lyle K. 

Linch, Jewel Cave Prospectus, summer 1946, both in Jewel Cave Corporation, Historic Area Information Including Civilian 

Conservation Corps Documents and Jewel Cave During the 1940s, Interpretation Division Binder, Jewel Cave NM Visitor 

Center, Custer, SD.

146 Linch, “Jewel Cave National Monument Work Program, Summer 1946,” October 21, 1946, 2–3; Linch, Jewel 

Cave Prospectus, summer 1946; Coordinating Superintendent’s Annual Narrative Report, Jewel Cave National 

Monument, Fiscal Year 1946.

147 Coordinating Superintendent’s Annual Narrative Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, Fiscal Year 1946.

148 Linch, “Jewel Cave National Monument Work Program, Summer 1946,” October 21, 1946; Lyle K. Linch, 

“Rough Draft: Running Comment for Jewel Cave Tour,” Summer 1946, 2–3, Jewel Cave Corporation, Historic Area 

Information Including Civilian Conservation Corps Documents and Jewel Cave During the 1940s, Interpretation Division Binder, 

Jewel Cave NM Visitor Center, Custer, SD.

149 Lyle K. Linch to Regional Director, memorandum, June 25, 1947, National Parks and Monuments Central 

Classified Files (1936–52), Box 192, Folder 207 Reports - General, Records of the National Park Service Region II 

(Midwest Region), NARA KC. 

150 NPS, “Jewel Cave National Monument,” informational brochure, 1949, National Parks and Monuments Central 

Classified Files (1936–52), Box 192, Folder 0-6 Printing, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest 

Region), NARA KC; Semingsen and Hart, 1955 Superintendents Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument 

South Dakota, July 1, 1955, 2.

Figure 31. A tour through Jewel Cave, ca. 1950.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 83

and passageways often too small to walk upright in.151 These qualities set Jewel Cave apart from 

other NPS-managed caves, including Wind Cave, where the CCC had installed an elevator in 1935, 

and Carlsbad Caverns, where an elevator had run since 1932.152 Linch emphasized the old-fashioned 

nature of Jewel Cave tours, writing that they were “definitely for the young and virile—for those 

who love and appreciate the old Tom Sawyer thrill of flickering shadows and exploration.”153

Linch explored new areas of the cave in partnership with Ben Burma, a geologist at the 

University of Nebraska. Burma joined Linch on several occasions in 1947. The two encountered an 

area previously unknown to them. Linch wrote, 

This latest discovery lies directly below the North-South passageway of the Milk River entrance 

approximately 50 feet. It is the most extensive passageway yet found on the Heaven route. Seasonal 

ranger Don Farrell was one of the first three persons to enter this passageway. . . . We agree that Jewel 

Cave has the greates[t] variety of formations of any cave in the Black Hills and that with a minimum 

of development it could be made one of the five most accessible and interesting caves in America.154

Linch tried to incorporate these new sections into the existing cave tour.155

Throughout the 1940s and 1950s, the entry fee remained 50 or 60 cents (the 1949 informational 

brochure and Linch said it was 60 cents, but in 1952 and 1955, the superintendent reported it was 50 

cents).156 Whatever the exact price, the Wind Cave superintendent thought that the fee was “too 

small a charge for the services rendered the public.” He thought that the NPS could increase the 

cost to 75 cents or even one dollar without deterring visitors, and that raising the fee would put 

Jewel Cave more on par with prices at other caves in the Black Hills.157

In the 1940s and 1950s, the NPS repeatedly reported that staffing was insufficient to meet the 

demand for cave tours. Some people who visited the cave had a considerable wait for a tour. Those 

who were unwilling to wait left the monument without ever going on the tour, thus depriving the 

151 NPS, “Jewel Cave National Monument,” informational brochure, 1949.

152 NPS, Carlsbad Caverns National Park, “Elevator Excitement,” accessed December 13, 2019, 

https://www.nps.gov/cave/blogs/elevator-excitement.htm, 

153 Linch to Regional Director, memorandum, June 25, 1947.

154 Lyle K. Linch to the Director, memorandum, August 1, 1947, 2, File 1706zd, Jewel Cave NM MF. 

155 Lyle Linch, “Summary of the July 1947 Monthly Narrative report for Jewel Cave National Monument,” August 

1, 1947, File 1706zb, Jewel Cave NM MF; Harry J. Liek, Coordinating Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave 

National Monument, Fiscal Year 1947, June 1, 1948, National Parks and Monuments Central Classified Files (1936–52), 

Box 125, Folder 207-01.4 Superintendents Annual Reports, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest 

Region), NARA KC.

156 DOI, NPS, “Jewel Cave National Monument,” informational pamphlet, undated [ca. 1950], Files 708a–b, Jewel 

Cave NM MF; Liek, Semingsen, and Hart, 1954 Superintendents Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument 

South Dakota, May 25, 1954, 3; NPS, “Jewel Cave National Monument,” informational brochure, 1949.

157 Liek, Semingsen, and Hart, 1954 Superintendents Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument South 

Dakota, May 25, 1954, 3.
84 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

NPS of fee revenue it would have otherwise collected.158 Visitors and local businesses complained 

about this issue.159 In 1952, NPS officials reported, 

Local tourist businessmen at Custer, South Dakota, and Newcastle, Wyoming are hesitate [sic] to send 

tourist[s] to the area because of back firing complaints resulting from the publics failure to be 

conducted on cavern tours. This situation is an embarrassing situation to all National Park Service 

employees in the Black Hills that have to answer to this complaining public problem.160

Jewel Cave and Wind Cave managers proposed arranging a concessionaire to sell snacks and drinks

at the site, to give people something to do while they waited.161 It does not appear that such an 

arrangement was made. 

In 1956, rangers started selling tickets outside, rather than inside the office.162 Otherwise, the 

tour was largely the same. To engage people while they waited for the cave tour, Park Naturalist

Wesley de Coursey developed a display of some of the common wildflowers around the cave. For 

those who chose not to go on a cave tour because of claustrophobia or physical issues, interpreters 

suggested that the NPS develop surface nature walks.163 De Coursey planned to add a cabinet 

exhibiting mineral specimens just inside the cave entrance, something that Linch had reported doing 

but that must not have lasted, as 1956 reports do not mention an existing display.164 Other staff 

began an experimental campfire program in 1956 and planned a slide program, while Ranger-inCharge Joseph Orr developed a written version of the tour route in 1952, to update Linch’s previous 

version. Liek mimeographed Orr’s commentary to use for training new staff as tour guides.165

158 Summary of Activities at Wind Cave National Park, Fiscal Year 1940, November 15, 1940, 10; Mission 66 

Prospectus for Jewel Cave National Monument, July 15, 1955, 1, National Parks and Monuments Central Classified Files 

(1936–52), Box 125, Folder 207-01.4 Superintendents Annual Reports, Records of the National Park Service Region II 

(Midwest Region), NARA KC.

159 Acting Regional Director James V. Lloyd to Black Hills Areas Superintendent, memorandum, July 25, 1952, 

National Parks and Monuments Central Classified Files (1936–52), Box 192, Folder 208-01.3 Annual Report, Records of 

the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

160 “General Information,” Master Plan Development Outline, Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota, 

April 1952, 3, Records of Wind Cave National Park, General File, Box 1, Folder D18 Plan. Prog. & Master Plan - JECA, 

Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

161 “General Information,” Master Plan Development Outline, Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota, 

April 1952, 4; Liek, Semingsen, and Hart, 1954 Superintendents Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument 

South Dakota, May 25, 1954, 2.

162 Wayne W. Bryant, Black Hills Natural History Association, Annual Report of the Executive Secretary, 

November 13, 1956, 2, General Files 1952–1963, Box A44, Folder A42 Black Hills Natural Historic Association Jan. 

1953–Jan. 1963, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

163 Shepherd to Superintendent, Wind Cave National Park, August 31, 1956, 2.

164 Earl M. Semingsen, and John S. Shepherd, 1957 Superintendents Annual Report for Jewel Cave National 

Monument South Dakota, 3, files provided by Katie Atkins, Folder A2621 Narrative Reports: Annual, Superintendent’s 

Annual 1957, Jewel Cave NM CF; DOI, NPS, Rock and Mineral Display and Cave Museum Room, Jewel Cave National 

Monument, September 7, 1956, eTIC. 

165 Earl M. Semingsen, and John S. Shepherd, 1957 Superintendents Annual Report for Jewel Cave National 

Monument South Dakota, 3; Black Hills Area Superintendent Harry J. Liek to Region Two Director, memorandum, 

November 13, 1952, Cabinet 3, Drawer 1, Folder H14 Area and Service History, Cultural Park Hist. Research 

Documents, Jewel Cave NM CF. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 85

Informational Brochure 

Figure 32. Jewel Cave NM informational brochure, 1947.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

In 1947, the NPS printed an informational brochure for Jewel Cave (see Figure 32). Wind Cave 

and Region Two staff helped with the wording.166 The brochure called Jewel Cave “a small but 

interesting cavern.” It included a map of the monument and sections on geological history, history, 

wildlife, plant life, wildflowers, accommodations, administration, cave trips, and nearby points of 

interest.167 In 1947, Jewel Cave rangers gave out approximately 2,500 of the 5,000 brochures they 

received at the beginning of the season.168

166 Jewel Cave National Monument, May 12, 1945, National Parks and Monuments Central Classified Files (1936–

52), Box 192, Folder 504 Publications, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

167 DOI, NPS, “Jewel Cave National Monument,” informational pamphlet, undated [ca. 1945], Files 707a–b, Jewel 

Cave NM MF. 

168 William J. Watson to Region Two Director, October 15, 1947, National Parks and Monuments Central Classified 

Files (1936–52), Box 192, Folder 0-6 Printing, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA 

KC. 
86 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

In 1948, Willett Keyser of the Sundance, Wyoming, Commercial Club, complained to US 

Representative Frank A. Barrett (R-WY) that the Jewel Cave informational folder “advertises 

Highway 16 as much or more than Jewel Cave.” The NPS Acting Director A. E. Demaray agreed 

and assured Barrett that the NPS would revise the publication.169 A revised version, completed in 

1949, added “beautiful” between the qualifiers “small” and “interesting” and reminded visitors not 

to take anything out of the cave.170 The revised brochure emphasized the “primitive cave 

exploration” available at Jewel Cave.171

The brochure underwent further changes in 1952, when Semingsen requested revisions in 

response to frequent complaints. For instance, a man from Bismarck wrote that he had arrived at 

the monument in May but found the cave closed, in contradiction of the pamphlet that said it would 

be open from May to September.172 Others complained that tours were not always offered on the 

hour, as the brochure advertised. At the suggestion of Acting Chief of Information Isabelle F. Story, 

the NPS used vaguer wording in the next version of the Jewel Cave brochure. It read, “The cave is 

open to visitors every day during the summer months, and several cave trips are made daily,” to 

avoid setting expectations that the underfunded monument could not always meet.173

Cooperating Associations and Partnerships 

Linch promoted partnerships with area organizations and other state and federal agencies. He 

spoke at the Custer Rotary Club, developed relationships with reporters at the Custer Chronicle, and 

reached out to other civic groups in Custer and Newcastle.174 He partnered with local historian Eric 

Heideman to assemble some of the site’s early history and continued cooperation with the Forest 

Service and South Dakota state parks and state forests.175 Linch worked with the National Parks 

169 A. E. Demaray to Frank A. Barrett, September 13, 1948, National Parks and Monuments Central Classified Files 

(1936–52), Box 192, Folder 0-6 Printing, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

170 Director to Superintendent, Wind Cave, memorandum, May 6, 1949, National Parks and Monuments Central 

Classified Files (1936–52); NPS, “Jewel Cave National Monument,” informational brochure, 1949; and NPS Director 

Newton B. Drury to Superintendent, Wind Cave, May 6, 1949, all in National Parks and Monuments Central Classified 

Files (1936–52), Box 192, Folder 0-6 Printing, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA 

KC.

171 DOI, NPS, “Jewel Cave National Monument,” informational pamphlet, undated [ca. 1950], Files 708a–b, Jewel 

Cave NM MF. 

172 Acting Chief of Information Isabelle F. Story to Region Two Director, memorandum, August 20, 1952, National 

Parks and Monuments Central Classified Files (1936–52), Box 192, Folder 0-6 Printing, Records of the National Park 

Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

173 Story to Region Two Director, memorandum, August 20, 1952; Acting Assistant Regional Director George P. 

Ingalls to the Director, memorandum, August 26, 1952, National Parks and Monuments Central Classified Files (1936–

52), Box 192, Folder 0-6 Printing, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

174 Linch, “Jewel Cave National Monument Work Program, Summer 1946,” October 21, 1946; Lyle K. Linch, 

“Foreword: Summary Accomplishments Summer of 1946,” October 21, 1946, in Jewel Cave Corporation, Historic Area 

Information Including Civilian Conservation Corps Documents and Jewel Cave During the 1940s, Interpretation Division Binder, 

Jewel Cave NM Visitor Center, Custer, SD.

175 Ranger in Charge Lyle K. Linch to the Director, memorandum, June 1, 1947, 3–4, Files 1706p–1706q, Jewel 

Cave NM MF. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 87

Association (a DC-based nonprofit), publisher of a book called Exploring Our National Parks and 

Monuments, to improve the entry on Jewel Cave when the book was updated.176 Linch also 

encouraged local cavers (unsuccessfully at the time) to form a Black Hills Grotto of the National 

Speleological Society (NSS) and joined NSS members on tours of other caves in the Black Hills.177

The park naturalist at Wind Cave started the Wind Cave Library Association in 1946.178 At the 

time, park cooperating associations were usually run by a park naturalist, while the park 

superintendent sat on the board.179 In 1952, Mount Rushmore Park Naturalist Robert F. Upton 

expanded the Wind Cave Library Association into a cooperating organization that served all parks 

under the Black Hills Area Office and changed the name to the Black Hills Area Association 

(BHAA).180 The nonprofit organization aimed to stimulate scientific research; assist in establishing 

“museums, observation stations, trail-side exhibits, and other interpretive and educational devices”;

develop and maintain libraries; publish booklets about area parks; assist with audiovisual 

development; and assist with obtaining land or buildings as needed.

181 It held its first annual meeting 

in 1953 and spent most of its first several years discussing sales at Mount Rushmore, Wind Cave, 

and Devils Tower.182

The BHAA sold merchandise at Jewel Cave starting in 1953, but it sold the most material at 

Mount Rushmore, which accordingly received the “lion’s share” of proceeds raised through sales.183

None of the books listed in the BHAA inventory had anything to do with caves until 1956, when it 

started selling a book called Cave Life.

184 In part because tickets were sold outside the administrative 

office starting in 1956 and the books were sold inside the building, Jewel Cave sales came to just 

176 Devereux Butcher to Lyle Linch, September 10, 1947, File 1706zk, Jewel Cave NM MF. 

177 Linch, “Jewel Cave National Monument Work Program, Summer 1946,” October 21, 1946; Regional Director 

Lawrence C. Merriam to Wind Cave National Park Superintendent, memorandum, August 6, 1946, National Parks and 

Monuments Central Classified Files (1936–52), Box 192, Folder 204 Inspections & Investigations, Records of the 

National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

178 Black Hills Parks and Forests Association, “History of BHPFA,” accessed July 2, 2019, 

https://blackhillsparks.org/about-us/. 

179 Ernest Ortega, interview by Jackie Gonzales, April 22, 2019, Santa Fe, NM; Al Hendricks, interview by Emily 

Greenwald, May 16, 2019, Ennis, MT. 

180 Liek to Region Two Director, memorandum, March 17, 1952, 4.

181 Articles of Incorporation, Black Hills Natural History Association, March 31, 1955, amended December 6, 1956, 

General Files 1952–1963, Box A44, Folder A42 Black Hills Natural Historic Association Jan. 1953–Jan. 1963, Records 

of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

182 Executive Secretary Robert F. Upton to Howard W. Baker, December 14, 1953, General Files 1952–1963, Box 

A44, Folder A42 Black Hills Natural Historic Association Jan. 1953–Jan. 1963, Records of the National Park Service 

Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC. 

183 Wayne W. Bryant, Black Hills Natural History Association, Annual Report of the Executive Secretary, February 

1, 1958, 3, General Files 1952–1963, Box A44, Folder A42 Black Hills Natural Historic Association Jan. 1953–Jan. 1963, 

Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

184 Bryant, Annual Report of the Executive Secretary, November 13, 1956, 3; Publications for Sale by the Black 

Hills Areas Association, November 20, 1953; and Executive Secretary Robert F. Upton to Association Member,

November 20, 1953, both in General Files 1952–1963, Box A44, Folder A42 Black Hills Natural Historic Association 

Jan. 1953–Jan. 1963, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.
88 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

$63.45 in 1956 and $174.05 for 1957, much less than the approximately $1,000 in sales at Wind Cave 

and over $3,000 at Mount Rushmore.185

The organization changed its name again in 1956, to the Black Hills Natural History 

Association.186 Headquarters shifted depending on which park naturalist ran the organization; when 

Robert Upton was transferred away from Mount Rushmore, Wind Cave Park Naturalist Wayne 

Bryant took over and moved the association’s headquarters to Wind Cave with him.187 Devils Tower 

and Mount Rushmore separated from the organization in 1957 and formed their own cooperating 

associations, leaving just Jewel Cave, Wind Cave, and Badlands in the Black Hills Natural History 

Association. In late 1957, Bryant left, and Wind Cave Ranger Dick Hart took over management of 

the association.188

Belowground Resource Management 

Most of Jewel Cave’s limited staff and financial resources in this period went to the cave tour 

program and security of the site. Outside researchers occasionally visited the cave.189 Staff initiated 

minor resource management projects in their free time, but such activities were secondary to giving 

tours and managing the monument’s day-to-day operations, and resource management projects were 

usually in service of interpretive goals. 

Resource projects involved biological and geological aspects of the caves. Staff kept an eye on 

bats and reported in annual reports when their numbers went up or down.190 In 1942, Wolfe

compiled a list of mammals at Jewel Cave and sent 35 specimens to the University of California 

Museum of Vertebrate Zoology. The specimens represented six species, recorded as cave bat, Say’s 

bat, pallid lump-nosed bat, northern chipmunk, Osgood’s white-footed mouse, and fuscous bushytailed wood rat.

191 Walt Lineau sought input from Dr. Edward H. Stevens at the South Dakota 

School of Mines for a report he wrote on mineral deposits in Jewel Cave.192 In 1956, RangerNaturalist de Coursey conducted a study of cave mineral fluorescence. He found colors including 

pale yellow, blue, and bright green in small amounts when minerals were exposed to ultraviolet light, 

but he determined that the limited array of colors did not warrant installing ultraviolet lights in the 

185 Bryant, Annual Report of the Executive Secretary, November 13, 1956, 2; Bryant, Annual Report of the 

Executive Secretary, February 1, 1958, 2.

186 Annual Narrative Report of the Black Hills Natural History Association, Wind Cave National Park, December 3, 

1962, General Files 1952–1963, Box A44, Folder A42 Black Hills Natural Historic Association Jan. 1953–Jan. 1963, 

Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC. 

187 Bryant, Annual Report of the Executive Secretary, November 13, 1956, 1. 

188 Bryant, Annual Report of the Executive Secretary, February 1, 1958, 1. 

189 Edward L. Tullis and John Paul Gries, “Black Hills Caves,” Black Hills Engineer 24, no. 4 (December 1938): 233–

71.

190 Coordinating Superintendent’s Annual Narrative Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, Fiscal Year 1946.

191 Park Ranger Elwood K. Wolfe Jr. to Wind Cave Superintendent, June 30, 1942, File 1656, Jewel Cave NM MF.

192 Walter Lienau to Earl Semingsen, undated [ca. 1956], Files 1984b–1784c, Jewel Cave NM MF.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 89

cave. Instead, he recommended that staff leave an ultraviolet flashlight in the cave to demonstrate 

the phenomenon during guided tours.193

Aboveground Resource Management

Open forest of virgin ponderosa pine, 

interspersed with grassy clearings, 

characterized much of the surface landscape 

at Jewel Cave (see Figure 33). While Childs 

described the forest as “outstanding,” it was 

small. Its small size and lack of lakes or large 

enough streams for fishing limited the 

recreational opportunities available to the 

public.194 Rocky Mountain juniper grew on 

rocky slopes and birch, box elder, and aspen 

grew in the canyon bottoms. A large variety 

of shrubs and grasses covered the forest 

floor, and wildflowers bloomed from May 

through September. Childs explained that 

“the area, though comparatively small in size, 

is nevertheless an important sector of the 

Black Hills watershed.”195 Local wildlife was 

“not as important a feature of Jewel Cave 

National Monument as at neighboring Wind 

Cave National Park,” but naturalists 

recognized that “animals do play an 

important role in the ecological story of the 

area.” The most conspicuous animals were 

“chipmunks, red squirrels, mule deer, 

whitetail deer, and a few birds.”196

The extent and condition of forest cover on the monument’s surface landscape required the 

NPS to consider forest management and fire protection. There were no records of recent fires, but 

fire scars on mature pines and charred logs evidenced “large and damaging fires having occurred at 

some earlier date.” Potential threats came from lightning strike fires, which were “common to the 

193 Ranger Naturalist DeCoursey to Park Naturalist, Wind Cave, memorandum, August 7, 1956, File 1784d, Jewel 

Cave NM MF.

194 Childs, “Forest Protection Requirements Report for Jewel Cave National Monument,” November 1939, 2.

195 Childs, “Forest Protection Requirements Report for Jewel Cave National Monument,” November 1939, 3.

196 DOI, NPS, “Master Plan Development Outline Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota,” August 1958, 

5, Jewel Cave NM CF.

Figure 33. Ponderosa pine forests at Jewel Cave NM, ca. 

1950s.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.
90 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

entire Black Hills,” and from outside fires spreading into the monument.197 Wolfe explained that the 

“large amount of dead standing and down trees, . . . combined with the heavy reproduction, and tall 

grasses, make for a rather high fire hazard throughout the monument.”198

Infrastructure for fire protection was limited. The 3,000-gallon storage reservoir supplied water 

at low pressure through a one-inch pipe to the ranger station and campground, with sufficient water 

flow for domestic supply “but of little value for fire protection.”199 The monument lacked 

firefighting equipment but had an unwritten agreement for the use of Forest Service tools, which 

were stored about seven miles both east and west of the monument. A limited amount of fire 

equipment was also available at the forest supervisor’s headquarters in Custer, and at Wind Cave.200

As of 1940, the monument lacked radio or telephone service. The nearest phone was five miles 

away, and the year-round fire protection organization for the monument was at Wind Cave 

headquarters, 34 miles away by road. The need for fire protection was one rationale for a permanent 

ranger position at Jewel Cave.201

By 1942, Wolfe had arrived, and the monument received a telephone connection for the first 

time, but other on-site fire protection needs remained. The 1942 Master Plan recommended 

establishing a tool cache for six men, as well as a dedicated “patrolman-fireguard” on duty during 

the three-month summer fire season. “The assignment of a guard is essential,” the report noted, 

“since the permanent ranger’s time is taken up with public contact work,” and Harney National 

Forest and Wind Cave firefighting crews were too distant to serve as lookouts.202 Fire suppression 

activities that year included burning slash piles in Hell Canyon during January and February, and 

Wolfe attended the Yellowstone Fire School for training and participated in Harney National 

Forest’s fire warden and cooperator training program.203

In 1947, Wind Cave organized a local, three-day, fire training conference for staff from Wind 

Cave, Jewel Cave, Mount Rushmore, and Badlands. Topics included fire danger, cooperation with 

other agencies, fire equipment and tool use, planning, and reporting.204 Linch attended, but Wind 

Cave staff remained “responsible for initial action on any fires occurring on Jewel Cave National 

Monument.” Wind Cave crews also had responsibility for fire protection at Fossil Cycad National 

197 Childs, “Forest Protection Requirements Report for Jewel Cave National Monument,” November 1939, 5.

198 Wolfe Jr., “Jewel Cave National Monument Vegetation Cover Type Map, Narrative Description,” May 12, 1942.

199 Childs, “Forest Protection Requirements Report for Jewel Cave National Monument,” November 1939, 4–6.

200 Childs, “Forest Protection Requirements Report for Jewel Cave National Monument,” November 1939, 7.

201 “Memorandum for the Director,” December 27, 1940, 4, Records of Wind Cave National Park, General File, 

Box 6, Folder Y2621 Forestry Reports-Annual, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), 

NARA KC.

202 DOI, NPS, “The Master Plan for Jewel Cave National Monument,” 1942, D-10. 

203 “Annual Forestry Report for Jewel Cave National Monument, 1942,” 1, Records of Wind Cave National Park, 

General File, Box 6, Folder Y2621 Forestry Reports-Annual, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest 

Region), NARA, KC.

204 Harry J. Liek, “Memorandum for the Regional Director, Region Two,” February 1, 1947, National Parks and 

Monuments Central Classified Files (1936–52), Box 125, Folder 0-1 Mtg and Conferences, Records of the National Park 

Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 91

Monument, but because of the distances involved, “local cooperators” at each unit took “initial 

action on fires starting on either of these monument areas.”205 Firefighting equipment stored at 

Wind Cave included a 1948 Jeep equipped with a 42-gallon tank, a 1944 Chevrolet truck with a 

pump for a 300-gallon tank, and a 150-gallon trailer tank. Any fire requiring further equipment 

would have to draw on the resources of Custer State Park or neighboring fire departments.206

After the 1938–1939 pine beetle infestation, the NPS checked for signs of the beetle, but 

incident rates were low. A 1942 annual survey found only two trees heavily infected and reported, 

“The general condition of the forest is good. Reproduction is heavy, soil erosion is negligible, and 

porcupine damage is not excessive.”207 The following year, Liek noted, “It seems certain that the 

Black Hills beetle infestation, that at one time threatened the entire forest stand, is under complete 

control and almost eradicated. Only two infested trees were found during the fiscal year.”208 By 

1949, however, beetle activity had increased in the Black Hills area. NPS personnel and Forest 

Service control crews located all the infected trees within the monument and sprayed them with a 

solution of orthodichlorobenzene.209 Acting Region Two Director Baker commended their 

continuing efforts and forwarded information about forest insects from the Annual Forestry 

Reports to the Bureau of Entomology and Plant Quarantine in Fort Collins, Colorado.210 Baker 

acknowledged that “follow-up checks” would be necessary to coordinate further control treatments. 

He wrote, “We assume you will work closely with the Forest Service on this problem.”211

Other than the trees felled as part of the beetle control program and perhaps some earlier 

lumber poaching, there had been no logging in the forest overlying Jewel Cave. This area of the 

205 “Forest Protection Requirements Report for Wind Cave National Park, 1951,” 12, Records of Wind Cave 

National Park, General File, Box 6, Folder Y14 Forest Fire Control, Records of the National Park Service Region II 

(Midwest Region), NARA KC. President Warren G. Harding established Fossil Cycad National Monument through the 

authority of the Antiquities Act on October 21, 1922,to protect significant exposures of fossilized specimens from a 

Cretaceous-era forest. Fossil Cycad NM was administered through Wind Cave National Park. Congress de-authorized 

the monument on September 1, 1957. Vincent Santucci and Cassi Knight, “Fossil Cycad National Monument,” National 

Park Service, April 13, 2020. 

206 “Forest Protection Requirements Report for Wind Cave National Park, 1951,” 12, Records of Wind Cave 

National Park, General File, Box 6, Folder Y14 Forest Fire Control, Records of the National Park Service Region II 

(Midwest Region), NARA KC.

207 Elwood K. Wolfe Jr., “Memorandum for the Superintendent, Wind Cave National Park,” November 13, 1942, 

National Parks and Monuments Central Classified Files (1936–52), Box 125, Folder 0-1 Mtg and Conferences, Records 

of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

208 Superintendent’s Annual Narrative Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, Fiscal Year 1943, National Parks 

and Monuments Central Classified Files (1936–52), Box 192, Folder 207-01 Annual Report, Records of the National 

Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

209 Harry J. Liek, “Annual Forest Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1949,” 2, Cabinet 2, Drawer 2, Folder 

Y26 Reports, Jewel Cave NM CF.

210 Howard W. Baker, “Memorandum for the Superintendent, Wind Cave National Park,” January 6, 1949, Wind 

Cave National Park, General File, Box 6, Folder Y2621 Forestry Report-Annual, Records of the National Park Service 

Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

211 Baker, “Memorandum for the Superintendent, Wind Cave National Park,” January 6, 1949.
92 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Black Hills had no history of commercial timber harvesting.212 In 1943, the Warren-Lamb Lumber 

Company asked for the forest be opened to commercial logging, but this request was refused.213 A 

few trees exhibited some evidence of beetle infestation in the 1950s, but it was not regarded as 

abnormal activity and did not merit corrective action.214

A windstorm “of tornado proportions” hit the monument on November 2, 1956.215 Regional 

Forester Frank Childs estimated that the storm toppled some 600 ponderosa pines.216 A contract for 

salvage logging was approved in March 1957 to clean up wind-thrown trees throughout the 

monument.217 The NPS sent invitations to bid on salvage logging to 30 timber companies and 

awarded the contract to the Mountain Sawmill Company. The contract called for Mountain Sawmill 

to pay the NPS in dimensional lumber from the operation.218

Harney National Forest issued grazing permits to livestock operators, and occasionally cattle 

wandered from Forest Service lands into the monument. In 1947, Region Two Director Lawrence 

C. Merriam commended Jewel Cave staff for “the excellent relationship that is being maintained 

with officials of Harney National Forest and adjacent ranchers.” He noted that this kind of 

cooperation was valuable in the long run and especially useful for areas with limited staffing.219 The 

monument encompassed only 120 acres of grassland and attracted no applications for grazing 

permits from local ranchers.220 Because of this, the Forest Service used the monument as a check site 

in 1950 to compare with the forage on grazing allotments that were considered overgrazed.221

212 Childs, “Forest Protection Requirements Report for Jewel Cave National Monument,” November 1939, 1; Wolfe 

Jr., “Jewel Cave National Monument Vegetation Cover Type Map, Narrative Description,” May 12, 1942.

213 Superintendent’s Annual Narrative Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, Fiscal Year 1943.

214 Gale H. Wilcox to Regional Director, “Memorandum: Annual Forestry Report, Jewel Cave National 

Monument,” January 4, 1951, Records of Wind Cave National Park, General File, Box 6, Folder Y2621 Forestry ReportAnnual, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

215 Earl M. Semingsen to Regional Director, “Memorandum: Record of Action Taken Regarding Disposition and 

Cleanup of Wind Thrown Trees at Jewel Cave National Monument,” March 15, 1957, Records of Wind Cave National 

Park, General File, Box 6, Folder Y3415 Forestry Products, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest 

Region), NARA KC.

216 Frank W. Childs to Regional Director, “Memorandum: Inspection of Tornado Damaged Trees, Jewel Cave 

National Monument,” Records of Wind Cave National Park, General File, Box 6, Folder Y3415 Forestry Products, 

Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

217 Earl M. Semingsen to Korczk Ziolkowaski, March 20, 1957, Records of Wind Cave National Park, General File, 

Box 6, Folder Y3415 Forestry Products, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

218 Semingsen to Regional Director, “Memorandum: Record of Action Taken Regarding Disposition and Cleanup 

of Wind Thrown Trees at Jewel Cave National Monument,” March 15, 1957; Semingsen to Ziolkowaski, March 20, 

1957.

219 Lawrence C. Merriam, “Memorandum for the Superintendent, Wind Cave National Park,” February 4, 1947, 

Records of Wind Cave National Park, General File, Box 6, Folder Y2621 Forestry Report-Annual, Records of the 

National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

220 Harry J. Liek, “Memorandum for the Director,” January 20, 1943, National Parks and Monuments Central 

Classified Files, Wind Cave National Park, Box 130, Folder 710-05 Grazing General, Records of the National Park 

Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC. 

221 William J. Watson to Regional Director, “Memorandum: Annual Forestry Report, Jewel Cave National 

Monument, 1950” January 5, 1951, National Parks and Monuments Central Classified Files (1936–52), Box 125, Folder
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 93

Water Rights

In the 1940s, minor issues arose with Jewel Cave’s water rights deed. The rights should have 

carried over when the monument transferred from the Forest Service to the NPS purview, but an 

engineer noted in 1944 that the deed “lacks a copy of the formal declaration of intent to 

withdraw.”222 Wind Cave staff sent official assemblies of the deed to Washington to take care of this. 

The package included a drawing of the Jewel Cave Pipe Line, an undated “Notice of Appropriation 

of Water by the United States for Jewel Cave National Monument,” a 1939 letter of authorization 

from a state engineer to the NPS to inspect the water system, a 1939 “Certificate of Examination of 

Works,” and a 1939 “Certification of Construction of Works under U. S. Water Right No. 32, at 

Jewel Cave National Monument,” by Dean W. Loucks, state engineer.223 The NPS Washington

Office resolved the issue in 1946.224

Planning for the Future: Develop or Deauthorize?

From 1945 into the early 1960s, NPS administrators at the regional and national levels alternated 

between planning for Jewel Cave’s future and questioning whether the monument merited inclusion

in the National Park System. Planning for the future of the monument began in 1940, when Liek 

submitted a “Project Construction Program” that included a visitor contact station, employee 

housing, a boundary fence to keep cattle out of the monument, and sewer and water connections to 

the new construction.225

First Master Plan (1942)

In 1941, the Region Two Office began drafting a full master plan for Jewel Cave—the site’s 

first.226 Wind Cave personnel assisted in the process and completed detailed topographical maps of 

Jewel Cave. Regional Geologist Carroll Wegemann prepared a preliminary interpretive statement to 

207-01.4 Superintendents Annual Reports, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA 

KC.

222 A. van V. Dunn, Hydraulic Engineer, to the Director, memorandum, March 7, 1944, National Parks and 

Monuments Central Classified Files (1936–52), Box 192, Folder 660–05.7 Water Rights, Records of the National Park 

Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

223 A. van V. Dunn, Chief, Water Rights Division, to Region Two Director, December 6, 1945, National Parks and 

Monuments Central Classified Files (1936–52), Box 192, Folder 660–05.7 Water Rights, Records of the National Park 

Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

224 Wind Cave Superintendent Harry J. Liek to Region Two Director, January 22, 1946; and Regional Director 

Lawrence C. Merriam to the Director, February 6, 1946, both in National Parks and Monuments Central Classified Files 

(1936–52), Box 192, Folder 660–05.7 Water Rights, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), 

NARA KC.

225 Regional Engineer, comment, February 29, 1940, National Parks and Monuments Central Classified Files (1936–

52), Box 192, Folder 120 Legislation, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

226 Howard W. Baker to Regional Director, December 5, 1941, National Parks and Monuments Central Classified 

Files (1936–52), Box 192, Folder 600-01 Master Plan, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), 

NARA KC.
94 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

accompany the master plan.227 The 1942 plan for Jewel Cave was similar to Liek’s: it retained the 

existing residence/administration building and campground, and it proposed a maintenance storage 

building and an employee residence.228 The new employee house would be about 250 feet from the 

existing ranger station, would have running water, and be connected to the sewage system, but 

neither the house nor the existing administration building would be rigged with electricity.229 Water 

would continue to come from the 3,000-gallon reservoir built by the CCC, and the campground 

would have pit latrines and additional picnic areas.230

The plan proposed keeping the existing CCC-built trail from the administration building to the 

cave entrance (gravel, surfaced with a clay binder), expanding the trail from the parking area to the 

administration building to 10 feet wide, and building an additional 140 feet of trail to connect the 

new employee residence to the existing trail.231 Inside the cave, the 1942 plan proposed no electric 

lighting, but it suggested replacing wooden stairways with concrete steps and metal handrails for 

safety purposes.232

Figure 34. An existing truck trail 

through the monument.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

227 Assistant Regional Director to Superintendent, Wind Cave National Park, February 27, 1942, National Parks and 

Monuments Central Classified Files (1936–52), Box 192, Folder 600-01 Master Plan, Records of the National Park 

Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC; Liek, Superintendent’s Annual Narrative Report, Wind Cave National 

Park, Fiscal Year 1942, October 31, 1942, 3. 

228 DOI, NPS, “The Master Plan for Jewel Cave National Monument,” 1942; DOI, NPS, Headquarters Area Plan 

Part of the Master Plan, Jewel Cave National Monument, January 1, 1942, eTIC.

229 Baker to Regional Director, December 5, 1941; DOI, NPS, “The Master Plan for Jewel Cave National 

Monument,” 1942. 

230 DOI, NPS, Headquarters Area Utilities Layout, Part of the Master Plan, Jewel Cave National Monument, 

January 1, 1942, eTIC; DOI, NPS, “The Master Plan for Jewel Cave National Monument,” 1942. 

231 DOI, NPS, “The Master Plan for Jewel Cave National Monument,” 1942, 3003-D-1–D-2.

232 DOI, NPS, “The Master Plan for Jewel Cave National Monument,” 1942, 2501-C.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 95

The plan retained existing truck trails in Hell Canyon, South Hell Canyon, and from the north to 

the south boundaries (of the original rectangular boundary), as well as the 600-foot-long entry road, 

the parking lot at its terminus with 20 spots, and the 550-foot-long campground road (see Figure 

34).233 The Hell Canyon Road sustained erosion damage from floods during the planning process 

and needed improvements to keep it in shape.234 The plan proposed six cattle guards, which, in 

addition to the boundary fencing installed by the CCC, aimed to prevent cattle from trespassing on 

monument grounds. The plan also provided for additional signage on Highway 16, to alert visitors 

that the cave was ahead. Wolfe had heard complaints that both east and westbound travelers saw the 

existing signs too late to make the turn into the monument.235

In 1943, Region Two engineers determined where the proposed roads, housing, and 

maintenance garage would be located, but no further action was taken, as non-military agency 

funding plummeted during World War II.236 After Linch arrived in 1946, he performed several 

stopgap maintenance tasks that supported the master plan’s goals: 

- Renovated the ranger cabin, including addition of a back porch. 

- Repaired signs on monument. 

- Resurfaced the trail to cave with new gravel and performed other trail maintenance, 

including water drainage and debris clearing. 

- Maintained the campground. 

- Removed talus slides that had blocked the cave entrance and removed rocks in cave that 

posed safety hazards. 

- Repaired the boundary fence.

- Removed marks and names from cave passages.

- Removed a pile of calcite crystals outside the cave entrance, to discourage visitors from 

removing crystals from cave.

- Repaired wooden steps and replaced three wooden stairways with rock ramps.237

233 DOI, NPS, “The Master Plan for Jewel Cave National Monument,” 1942, 3002-D-9.

234 Elwood K. Wolfe Jr. to Superintendent, April 19, 1942, Cabinet 2, Drawer 2, Folder Y1815 Trees and Forest, 

Jewel Cave NM CF. 

235 Wolfe Jr., Monthly Report for September 1941, October 1, 1941; DOI, NPS, “The Master Plan for Jewel Cave 

National Monument,” 1942, 3002-D-11.

236 Superintendent’s Annual Narrative Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, Fiscal Year 1943; Sellars, Preserving 

Nature in the National Parks, 151. 

237 Linch, “Jewel Cave National Monument Work Program, Summer 1946”; Linch “Summary Accomplishments 

Summer of 1946,” October 21, 1946; Coordinating Superintendent’s Annual Narrative Report, Jewel Cave National 

Monument, Fiscal Year 1946; Jerome C. Miller, memorandum for file, June 4, 1947, National Parks and Monuments 

Central Classified Files (1936–52), Box 192, Folder 240 Inspections & Investigations, Records of the National Park 

Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC; Lyle K. Linch to the Director, memorandum, September 1, 1947, 1, 

File 1706zi, Jewel Cave NM MF; Lyle K. Linch to the Director, memorandum, September 30, 1947, 1, File 1706zv, Jewel 

Cave NM MF.
96 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

The monument still needed a few major improvements that Linch could not complete, such as 

installing a larger parking area, erecting better signage, and paving the entry road.238

Assessing Jewel Cave’s Significance 

Around 1946, the NPS headquarters in Chicago (where it was located during the war and 

immediately after) suggested that Jewel Cave be eliminated from the National Park System.239 To 

make this determination, Howard Baker, at the time a Region Two landscape architect, asked Linch 

to write a report on the significance of Jewel Cave as compared to other caves in the Black Hills (see 

Figure 35).240 Linch emphasized Jewel Cave’s primitive “rugged and primitive character” and 

recommended retaining Jewel Cave and its “universal ‘Tom Sawyer’ appeal to the general public”: 

In considering Mr. Baker’s request for a statement regarding the significance of Jewel cave in relation 

to and comparison with other caves in the Black Hills to use in preparing the Region’s report on 

abolishment of Areas, you and Mr. Baker should bear in mind that at present Jewel Cave is the dirtiest 

cave in the Hills (it is impossible to make a full tour of the cave without soiling good clothes); it has 

many crude wooden stairs that should and could be eliminated with stone-dirt ramps, much of the 

present trail system is somewhat hazardous; the best stalactites, exceptional occurrences of ribbon 

calcite, druses, alcoves, geodes, Bye-Bye Canyon, and the largest room are unavailable to the public; 

the cave is only meagerly explored (not to mention the nine other known caves on the Monument) 

and the known portions less than half mapped; the campground and parking lots are inadequate; no 

modern conveniences except running water and accompanying appliances are available for the 

protection staff; I have operated the Monument the last two years with an entirely inadequate staff 

and worn out equipment; the monument is without protection much of the year; it is inadequately 

advertised and our public folder is both inaccurate and insufficient. Worst of all, Jewel Cave’s 

potentialities are still unappreciated by both our citizen neighbors and Park Service Officials.241

Linch argued that if the NPS wanted to keep the cave in the system, it should provide adequate 

funding to manage the cave properly. Linch quoted former Wind Cave Superintendent Stricklin, 

who wrote, 

The National Park Service should either fittingly develop Jewel Cave to demonstrate its rugged and 

primitive character in contrast to and to abet Wind Cave’s modern commercialized presentation of an 

electric-lighted, elevator-serviced cavern, or transfer it to some other agency, or return it to private 

interests that will do so.242

Region Two Naturalist Carl Swartzlow believed that Jewel Cave should remain in the system: 

238 Regional Director Lawrence C. Merriam to files, September 1, 1948, National Parks and Monuments Central 

Classified Files (1936–52), Box 192, Folder 204 Inspections & Investigations, Records of the National Park Service 

Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC; Lyle K. Linch to the Director, memorandum, August 1, 1947, 1, File 1706zc, 

Jewel Cave NM MF. 

239 Ranger in Charge Lyle K. Linch to Coordinating Superintendent Liek, September 14, 1947, File 1706zzm, Jewel 

Cave NM MF.

240 Lyle K. Linch, “The Significance of Jewel Cave in Relation to Other Caves of the Black Hills,” September 11, 

1947, National Parks and Monuments Central Classified Files (1936–52), Box 192, Folder 602 Boundaries - General, 

Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC. 

241 Linch, “The Significance of Jewel Cave in Relation to Other Caves of the Black Hills,” September 11, 1947, 2. 

242 Linch, “The Significance of Jewel Cave in Relation to Other Caves of the Black Hills,” September 11, 1947, 1. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 97

From personal observation, I rate it much superior to Oregon Caves N.M., and from the description 

in the files it has much more to offer than Shoshone Caverns. It would also appear that if we are to 

maintain areas in a nearly natural state, Jewel Cave offers accessibility and natural conditions in a high 

degree.243

Swartzlow, echoing Linch and Stricklin, argued that “one of our many cave areas should offer 

visitors the sense of exploration. This is possible at Jewel.”244

Figure 35. There were 

many caves in the Black 

Hills, as this map by 

Lyle Linch shows, 1946.

Source: NPS, Jewel 

Cave NM.

243 Carl Swartzlow to George F. Ingalls, September 23, 1947, National Parks and Monuments Central Classified 

Files (1936–52), Box 192, Folder 602 Boundaries - General, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest 

Region), NARA KC. 

244 Swartzlow to Ingalls, September 23, 1947. 
98 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Coordinating Superintendent Liek disagreed that Jewel Cave had value as a primitive cave that 

offered visitors an exploratory experience. He argued that Jewel Cave was similar to other crystallined caves in the Black Hills (he called it a “representative crystal cave”) and that it was actually 

most valuable in its potential as a “trading asset” in Forest Service negotiations: 

The monument includes 2 sections of land, of which only 160 acres are needed for the purpose of 

protecting the cave and the surface area surrounding the cave. The rest of the area lies out of sight of 

both the highway and the cave and has one of the best stands of ponderosa pine in the Black Hills. 

However, this stand is even-aged and mature, possibly past maturity, and in the event of a severe 

insect infestation it would be lost, and even now secondary insects remove a few each year. An 

infestation of Black Hills Beetle would call for a heavy expenditure for control and pressure from 

both the Forest Service and local lumbering firms to carry out such control. Inasmuch as this land and 

forest stand are not needed in connection with the cave, we suggest that the matter of using such land 

as trading stock for any future, or present, contemplated land exchanges between the Forest Service 

and the National Park Service be explored.245

Before reaching a final decision, Liek argued, the NPS would need to study further whether a 

“representative” cave merited protection, whether the cave should be retained, and if so, what 

improvements would need to be made to bring the cave up to NPS standards and how the 

monument could become self-sustaining through infrastructure improvements and increased 

staffing. “The entire problem merits study,” Liek concluded. “It is believed that retention of the 

cave, and release or exchange of the mature timber land, is the most logical step.”246 The following 

year, Region Two Chief of Lands George F. Ingalls, with guidance from the NPS director’s office, 

recommended that Swartzlow conduct further study on the speleological value of Jewel Cave “to 

determine whether it has sufficient scientific value to warrant its retention in the National Park 

System.”247 There is no evidence that Swartzlow completed this study. 

Updated Master Plan (1952)

As of 1951, all of the monument’s buildings, trails, and utility and water systems pre-dated fulltime NPS management of the cave.248 The campground, where people usually stayed for only one 

night, had piped running water, pit toilets, outdoor tables and benches, outdoor cooking facilities, 

six individual campsites, two acres for trailer camping, and six individual spaces for trailer 

camping.249 In addition to the extant ranger cabin and the campground, the monument’s facilities 

245 Coordinating Superintendent Harry J. Liek to the Regional Director, September 25, 1947, 2, National Parks and 

Monuments Central Classified Files (1936–52), Box 192, Folder 602 Boundaries - General, Records of the National Park 

Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

246 Liek to the Regional Director, September 25, 1947, 3.

247 George F. Ingalls, Regional Chief of Lands, to the Regional Director, December 9, 1948, National Parks and 

Monuments Central Classified Files (1936–52), Box 192, Folder 602 Boundaries - General, Records of the National Park 

Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC. 

248 Development Outline, Jewel Cave National Monument, Headquarters Area – Utilities, May 15, 1952.

249 NPS, Facilities Available in Park Service Areas to Visitors Using Campgrounds and House Trailers, 1952 Season, 

National Parks and Monuments Central Classified Files (1936–52), Box 192, Folder 601 Lands - General, Records of the 

National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 99

included a small storage shed and an open pit for garbage disposal.250 The septic system and leach 

field still functioned near the ranger cabin.251

The NPS rewrote the master plan in 1952. Wind Cave Superintendent Semingsen noted that 

Jewel Cave had several facilities problems, foremost of which were “providing adequate 

administrative and protective facilities for proper housing and utility needs.”252 Semingsen identified 

the following as needs that drove the 1952 plan: 

1. Provide permanent administrative and protection and housing facilities for year around operation.

2. Develop cavern trails and lighting system for safe and enjoyable public visitation. 

3. Provide interpretive service and facilities portraying the cave history of the Black Hills. 

4. Provide concession snack bar and campground supply services for the one stop visitor and the 

overnight visitor. 

5. Provide a fire break and protection system in and around the area to assure 100% protection of the 

virgin ponderosa pine timber stands.253

The plan proposed an incinerator (to replace the open garbage pit), a fire cache building, a power 

plant building, and snow removal equipment. The existing CCC-built ranger quarters and office 

would be dedicated only to administration, with new buildings available for housing. Roads would 

be chipped and sealed, and six miles of three-strand barbed wire fencing would replace the existing, 

often-compromised boundary fencing.254

The 1952 plan acknowledged the poor condition of the cave trail system but proposed no 

changes: 

The trail system for the most part is of bad gradient. Numerous narrow passageways and low ceilings 

are encountered. Some of the stairways, most of which are of wood, are very steep and many of the 

units are none too rigid in their construction. However it is generally agreed that the cave should be 

allowed to remain “in the rough.” Therefore no improvement is contemplated at this time.255

One of the most novel ideas to emerge from the 1952 planning process was the possibility of a 

second entrance to the cave. At the request of Assistant Director James V. Lloyd, Orr developed 

two ideas: excavate under the parking lot, where there was a room along the tour route, or, extend a 

250 Master Plan Development Outline, Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota; Monument Operation 

Prospectus, April 1952. 

251 Chief Engineer to Region Two Director, July 6, 1951, National Parks and Monuments Central Classified Files 

(1936–52), Box 192, Folder 207-22 Rehabilitation, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), 

NARA KC.

252 “General Information,” Master Plan Development Outline, Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota, 

April 1952, 4.

253 Master Plan Development Outline, Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota, April 1952, Records of Wind 

Cave National Park, General File, Box 1, Folder D18 Plan. Prog. & Master Plan - JECA, Records of the National Park 

Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC. 

254 Master Plan Development Outline, Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota; Monument Operation 

Prospectus, April 1952, 2–4; DOI, NPS, Reconstruction of Entrance & Service Roads, Headquarters Area, Jewel Cave 

National Monument, June 1952, eTIC.

255 Development Outline, Jewel Cave National Monument, Headquarters Area – Utilities, May 15, 1952.
100 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

passage 65 feet from the bottom of an 80-foot stairway “and re-enter the existing passageway near 

the chamber called ‘Blue Heaven.’” (The name Blue Heaven is no longer used: the open lead in Blue 

Heaven goes to what is known today as “Deep Canyon.” See Figure 36).256

Figure 36. The NPS proposed blasting a new passageway to connect two existing passageways within the cave to 

create a loop tour, 1952.

Source: NARA KC.

A minor flurry of construction in 1953 followed the planning process. Maintenance crews 

installed four cattleguards on the Hell Canyon road and truck trail at monument boundaries to keep 

out cattle. They reconstructed and surfaced the entrance road off Highway 16 and added a spur to 

the proposed new residence area. At the ranger cabin, they added storm shutters, painted interior 

rooms, and tiled the floor in the public office portion. Crews stained the equipment shed, painted 

campground tables, erected an entrance control gate, and constructed and installed new campground 

signs.And, for the first time, the NPS installed a radio and telephone system at the monument, 

comprising a power house building, radio poles and antenna, three telephones in the cave, and one 

telephone in the ranger cabin. Water system improvements were delayed due to a suspected crack 

256 Jewel Cave Ranger-in-Charge Joseph L. Orr to Region Two Director, memorandum, August 16, 1952, National 

Parks and Monuments Central Classified Files (1936–52), Box 192, Folder 600-01 Master Plan, Records of the National 

Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 101

and subsequent moss growth that created a blockage in the main water line.257 Routine maintenance 

in subsequent years consisted of regular trail and road maintenance, replacement of wooden 

stairways in the cave, and the addition of a rock retaining wall on the trail to the cave entrance (see 

Figure 37).258

Wind Cave maintenance crews performed 

most of the non-routine maintenance, and 

Wind Cave superintendents complained that 

this arrangement was expensive and timeconsuming, because “[a]ll equipment, labor 

and supervision must travel 76 miles round 

trip.”259 Appropriations for Jewel Cave 

maintenance often did not cover these travel 

costs and the time of Wind Cave maintenance 

staff, so Wind Cave’s budget often 

supplemented the tiny Jewel Cave 

appropriations.260

In 1954–1955, the NPS finally addressed 

the problem of inadequate housing at Jewel 

Cave, when the US Bureau of Reclamation 

(BOR) donated a trailer house for seasonal ranger quarters, and Wind Cave moved a building to the 

area. Both were hooked up to the sewer, water, and electric systems.261 The BOR trailer was a 

“Transa-House,” built by the Kit Manufacturing Company. Transa-Houses, which the federal 

government used for rural housing for brief period in the 1950s, had a trailer-like center and panels 

on either side to open up into rooms, so the entire house when opened resembled an “H.”262

257 Liek, Superintendents Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument South Dakota, 1953, 5. 

258 Liek, Semingsen, and Hart, 1954 Superintendents Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument South 

Dakota, May 25, 1954, 2; Semingsen and Hart, 1955 Superintendents Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument 

South Dakota, July 1, 1955, 3; Earl M. Semingsen, and Richard T. Hart, 1956 Superintendents Annual Report for Jewel 

Cave National Monument South Dakota, 3, files provided by Katie Atkins, Folder A2621 Narrative Reports: Annual, 

Superintendent’s Annual 1956, Jewel Cave NM CF; Earl M. Semingsen, and John S. Shepherd, 1957 Superintendents 

Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument South Dakota, 3, files provided by Katie Atkins, Folder A2621 

Narrative Reports: Annual, Superintendent’s Annual 1957, Jewel Cave NM CF.

259 Liek, Semingsen, and Hart, 1954 Superintendents Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument South 

Dakota, May 25, 1954, 3. 

260 Semingsen and Hart, 1955 Superintendents Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument South Dakota, 

July 1, 1955, 2.

261 Semingsen and Hart, 1955 Superintendents Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument South Dakota, 

July 1, 1955, 3; Superintendent Earl M. Semingsen to Region Two Director, memorandum, June 22, 1954, General Files, 

Box F-7, Folder F7423 Book #1. Sept 1952 – Jan. 1962. WICA, Records of the National Park Service Region II 

(Midwest Region), , NARA KC.

262 Richa Wilson, “Cozy Cabins and A Hyperbolic Paraboloid” (Ogden, UT: US Forest Service, 2015), 55; S. Alan 

Higgins, “Modern Residential Architecture in South Dakota, 1950–1975: A Thematic Context Study” (Pierre: South 

Dakota State Historical Society, 2017), 115.

Figure 37. Trail to the cave entrance, 1958.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.
102 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Mission 66 Prospectus (1955)

In July 1955, Wind Cave staff completed a prospectus for Jewel Cave, as part of the NPS’s 

national Mission 66 Program to revitalize park infrastructure.263 All parks completed these 

prospectuses, which detailed development plans for the park over a 10-year period, and then the 

NPS Washington Office prioritized the order in which parks received funding.264 The Mission 66 

Prospectus for Jewel Cave proposed the following: 

• Buildings (for visitor use and housing)

o Build two quadplex seasonal quarters along new residence road. 

o “Obliterate” the existing CCC-built headquarters building. 

o Build near the cave entrance a combination administration, visitor center, and 

elevator building, to be open year-round, to “become the heart center of the area.”

o Construct adjacent to the new visitor center a day-use ranger office and ticket 

building. 

o Construct a ranger office and quarters at Jasper Cave.

o Buildings all “to be constructed of reinforced concrete with natural stone masonry 

facing.”

• Cave Management

o Reconstruct cave trails: “replace all wood constructed stairways with concrete 

stairways having safety hand rails and other protection features,” “lower all trail 

treads along the trail routes, at points where inadequate head room exists, to at least 

a minimum of 7 ft. from trail tread to the cavern ceiling,” and “oil surface all cave 

trails.”

o Initiate cave research project to “survey, map and determine the extent of the Jewel 

Cave – Jasper Cave system in their relation to the Black Hills geological structure.”

o “Clean out trails at Jasper Cave sufficient for passage of a 200# man leaving this 

cave to be ‘the primitive cave’ of the National Park System for scientific research, 

exploration, etc.”

• Surface Resource Management

o Lay a self-guided nature trail through the forest, with the plan to later make it a “oneway vehicular nature drive.”

o Install “adequate trail-side interpretive exhibits along the Jewel Cave trail system.”

o Expand existing campground and build modern restrooms.

263 Acting Regional Director E. J. Castro to Wind Cave National Park Superintendent, memorandum, May 23, 1956, 

General Files 1952–1960, Box A-33, Folder A98 Mission 66, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest 

Region), NARA KC; Earl M. Semingsen to NPS Director, memorandum, July 15, 1955, General Files 1952–1960, Box 

A-33, Folder A98 Mission 66, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC. 

264 NPS, Advance Copy – Summary of Mission 66 Objectives and Program for Jewel Cave National Monument, 

June 15, 1956, General Files 1952–1960, Box A-33, Folder A98 Mission 66, Records of the National Park Service Region 

II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 103

o Add cattle guards on highways.

o Create a 16-foot boundary fire break.

o Reconstruct boundary fence with woven wire.

• Roads, Parking, and Utilities

o Construct bypass highway (“top priority”—“required to divert and eliminate all 

commercial highway travel through the Monument”) and a “clover leaf” approach.

o Construct 200-car parking area.

o Construct a road to Jasper Cave.

o Construct a utility area and residence road near monument’s south boundary, away 

from public access points, to include a fire cache building, maintenance shop, car 

storage area, incinerator, and sewer and water access.

o Construct new signage for roads and trails. 

o Extend to cave power line and telephone line (including “mine-type” telephones in 

the cave).

o Drill water well with electric pumping station near Jewel Cave entrance and drill a 

water well near Jasper Cave. 

o Extend water line to campground and new buildings.

o Install electric lights in Jewel Cave, install telephone in cave and all buildings.

• Staffing requirements

o Ranger in Charge or Superintendent (GS-9, year-round).

o Supervisory Park Ranger (GS-7, year-round).

o Maintenance man (GS-6, six months at Jewel Cave, six months at Wind Cave).

o Seasonal Park Naturalist (GS-6, five months, supervised by Wind Cave park 

naturalist).

o Seasonal Park Naturalist (GS-5, five months).

o Seasonal Park Ranger (GS-5, five months).

o Five Seasonal park rangers (GS-4, five months).

o Watchman-janitor (GS-5, year-round).

o Laborers (two positions, ungraded, six months).

o Wind Cave Fire Chief to assist with forestry and fire control.265

The Region Two Office and the NPS Washington Office responded to the Jewel Cave Mission 

66 Prospectus. Assistant Region Two Director John S. McLaughlin opposed elevator service at 

Jewel Cave, enlargement of Jewel Cave passageways, and opening Jasper Cave to the public: 

265 Mission 66 Prospectus for Jewel Cave National Monument, July 15, 1955, 1–5.
104 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

While Jewel Cave is unique, its charm is derived from the intimacy of its passages and rooms. It is a 

small cave and to place an elevator and full height passages in it would alter it entirely. It should 

remain as a primitive cave and while we agree improvement is necessary on the trails, we do not think 

elevator service is necessary, indeed, it would be contrary to the primitive aspect we should endeavor 

to continue at the Monument. We suggest that Jasper Cave be kept as a research cavern and that it be 

closed to the general public.266

The Washington Office agreed that Jasper Cave should not be opened but rather be used as a 

research area.267 The regional director also opposed the bypass highway, cloverleaf, improvement of 

the existing trail structures, the fire break, the road to Jasper Cave, expansion of the campground, 

and plumbing at the campground.268

E. T. Scoyen, Associate Director of the NPS, agreed that expanding passageways in Jewel Cave

to allow for seven-foot clearances “cannot be justified” and no elevator should be built: 

You need a new but modest visitor center-administration building. Please plan to have your 

orientation, information, interpretation and administration center in this one building. . . . 

We do not concur in provision of elevators or of Jewel Cave lights at this time. It is our belief that 

one of the charms of Jewel Cave is the experience of visiting a cave without all of the “modern” 

improvements.269

A majority of Region Two and Washington Office officials agreed that the Mission 66 Prospectus

was overkill. “As a whole,” Acting Region Two Director E. J. Castro wrote, “the Jewel Cave 

estimates seem unrealistic and excessively high in light of the proposed staff and probable 

visitation.”270 Robert G. Hall, acting chief of the Western Office of Design and Construction 

(WODC), agreed, and he opposed “Mr. Semingsen’s general approach to the development of Jewel 

Cave.” Instead, he wrote, “We believe this cave should remain primitive and shown in much the 

same manner as at present in order to be of highest value to park visitors.”271

In light of these sentiments, Wind Cave Park Naturalist Wayne Bryant edited the “statement of 

significance” in Jewel Cave’s Mission 66 Prospectus. He explained,

I find myself at a loss at describing any real national significance. True, it may have some crystalline 

calcite lining the passages, but so do many of the commercial caves of the Black Hill region. 

Furthermore, a memorandum by Volney Lewis dated July 25, 1935 regarding the geological features 

of the cave states that much of the calcite incrustation has been removed by souvenir collectors. . . . 

I had heard several people express great disappointment in Jewel Cave, including certain National 

Park Service officials, none of whom believe it to be of national significance. Should not the Area 

266 John S. McLaughlin to Wind Cave National Park Superintendent, memorandum, July 26, 1955. 

267 Associate Director E. T. Scoyen, NPS, Wind Cave National Park Superintendent, March 5, 1956, General Files 

1952–1960, Box A-33, Folder A98 Mission 66, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), 

NARA KC. 

268 McLaughlin to Wind Cave National Park Superintendent, memorandum, July 26, 1955; Castro to Wind Cave 

National Park Superintendent, memorandum, May 23, 1956, 2–3. 

269 Scoyen, NPS, Wind Cave National Park Superintendent, March 5, 1956. 

270 Castro to Wind Cave National Park Superintendent, memorandum, May 23, 1956, 2. 

271 Acting Chief, WODC, Robert G. Hall, to NPS Director, memorandum, August 20, 1955, General Files 1952–

1960, Box A-33, Folder A98 Mission 66, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 105

Investigations Branch of the Service look into this matter before large sums of money are spent 

through MISSION 66 for developing the area? Isn’t there a danger of degrading our national 

monument standards? Is it not possible that this monument was set aside before more outstanding 

caves, in our system today, were discovered or at least well known, or before our qualification 

standards were set high enough?272

Bryant admitted these were “strong statements to make in view of the fact that I have not taken a 

trip through the cave yet myself.” He recommended the cave be made a state park, where it could 

still be useful in “taking off some of the pressure on Wind Cave.”273 Region Two Chief of 

Interpretation H. Raymond Gregg replied to Bryant that his “perceptive thoughts on this matter are 

by no means out of order or without sympathy on the part of many people who have studied such 

matters,” but he asked Bryant to refrain from “any rationalizing or justification of national 

significance.”274

Revised Master Plan and Prospectus (1957–1958) 

Little discussion of declassifying the monument followed Gregg’s response to Bryant. It appears 

that by this point, the Region Two Office had determined that Jewel Cave should remain within a 

national monument, but that development of the site should be minimal. Instead of delisting Jewel 

Cave, the acting regional director suggested its master plan be “restudied with a view to the 

possibility of certain changes in the location and scope of development.”275 To that end, in October 

1957, a landscape architect from the WODC met with Semingsen and a Forest Service official at 

Jewel Cave to discuss a revised master plan for the headquarters.276 They considered the idea of

placing most of the Monument’s development down in Hell Canyon with the possibility in mind of an 

eventual rerouting of Highway 16 to run outside of the Monument down Lithograph Canyon and 

make possible an approach to the development from the lower level and through a new entrance from 

the relocated highway. A visitor center and parking area placed in the canyon would mean walking 

part way up the side of the canyon instead of coming down from above as they do now. Development 

possibility in the canyon, to include a residential area and campground, seem limited from the 

standpoint of space between canyon walls and the need to stay above the possible range of those up 

where the views are better, the grounds dry more rapidly, and the sunlight is longer. Mr. Axline has 

already investigated in some detail the problem of bringing an access road from the present entrance 

272 Park Naturalist Bryant to Regional Chief of Interpretation Gregg, memorandum, March 29, 1956, 1–2, General 

Files 1952–1960, Box A-33, Folder A98 Mission 66, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), 

NARA KC. 

273 Bryant to Regional Chief of Interpretation Gregg, memorandum, March 29, 1956, 1. 

274 Regional Chief of Interpretation H. Raymond Gregg to Superintendent, Wind Cave National Monument (Attn: 

Naturalist Bryant), memorandum, April 10, 1956, General Files 1952–1960, Box A-33, Folder A98 Mission 66, Records 

of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC. 

275 Acting Regional Director M. H. Harvey to Wind Cave National Park Superintendent, memorandum, July 25, 

1958, 1–2, General Files 1952–1960, Box A-33, Folder A98 Mission 66, Records of the National Park Service Region II 

(Midwest Region), NARA KC.

276 Robert G. Hall to Superintendent, Wind Cave National Park, memorandum, May 27, 1958, Records of Wind 

Cave National Park, General File, Box 1, Folder D18 Plan. Prog. & Master Plan - JECA, Records of the National Park 

Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC; Region Two Director Howard W. Baker to Chief, WODC, 

memorandum, December 7, 1957, Records of Wind Cave National Park, General File, Box 1, Folder D18 Plan. Prog. & 

Master Plan - JECA, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.
106 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

down to a canyon development. Much of it would involve rock excavation and its estimated cost is 

$100,000.277

Region Two Landscape Architect Weldon Gratten thought that development down in Hell Canyon 

should work out all right on the ground but it tends to crowd development in a rather limited area 

above the cave and does not provide for needed campground expansion. Nor does it eliminate the 

problem of a rather poor existing entrance intersection.278

Planners ultimately opposed development at the floor of Hell Canyon because “development 

possibilities were too limited from the standpoint of space requirements between the canyon walls 

and the added hazards from flash floods in the canyon bottom.”279 The South Dakota State Highway 

Department told the NPS that it was not planning to relocate the portion of Highway 16 that passed 

through the monument, but it might consider doing so if the NPS thought such a rerouting would 

be “desirable.” Ultimately, Gratten concluded, “It seems more likely that the State would prefer to 

stay with the existing road and some day raise its standards by simply easing curvature by cutting 

further into the side banks.”

280

Semingsen approved the draft master plan in December 1957 with headquarters development in 

the same area as the park’s existing buildings.281 During the review, the question arose of whether 

Jewel Cave should continue to provide camping facilities.282 Those at the October meeting had 

concluded that Jewel Cave should retain a campground, since nearby Forest Service options were 

not expansive and new developments by the Forest Service would not be “designed to the standards 

usually found in areas of the National Park System.”283 However, Region Two Director Howard 

Baker argued against a campground.284 The WODC completed drawings in May 1958, one with 

camping and one without, keeping the entrance and development in the existing footprint.285 The 

277 Regional Landscape Architect Weldon W. Gratton to Regional Chief of Operations, memorandum, November 

13, 1957, 2, Records of Wind Cave National Park, General File, Box 1, Folder A9815 Conservation-Mission 66-JECA, 

Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC. 

278 Gratton to Regional Chief of Operations, memorandum, November 13, 1957, 2. 

279 Earl M. Semingsen and Walter Lienau, 1958 Superintendents Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument 

South Dakota, 2, files provided by Katie Atkins, Folder A2621 Narrative Reports: Annual, Superintendent’s Annual 

1958, Jewel Cave NM CF.

280 Gratton to Regional Chief of Operations, memorandum, November 13, 1957, 2. 

281 Wind Cave National Park Superintendent Early M. Semingsen to Chief, WODC, memorandum, December 6, 

1957, Records of Wind Cave National Park, General File, Box 1, Folder D18 Plan. Prog. & Master Plan - JECA, 

Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC; Semingsen and Lienau, 1958 

Superintendents Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument South Dakota, 2.

282 Hall to Superintendent, Wind Cave National Park, memorandum, May 27, 1958. 

283 Quotes from Gratton to Regional Chief of Operations, memorandum, November 13, 1957, 1. See also 

Semingsen and Lienau, 1958 Superintendents Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument South Dakota, 2.

284 Acting Regional Director, Region Two, M. H. Harvey to Wind Cave National Park Superintendent, 

memorandum, May 22, 1958, Records of Wind Cave National Park, General File, Box 1, Folder D18 Plan. Prog. & 

Master Plan - JECA, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC. 

285 Hall to Superintendent, Wind Cave National Park, memorandum, May 27, 1958. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 107

NPS ultimately opted to wait until the Forest Service released its forthcoming “Operation 

Outdoors” plan, before deciding on whether to include a campground.

286

 

Semingsen submitted a revised Mission 66 Prospectus to the Washington Office on October 1, 

1958, to reflect the revisions to the monument’s master plan. He again recommended not 

developing Jasper Cave and keeping the Jewel Cave tour primitive:

Jewel Cave is the only cave in the National Park Service which is not lighted by electricity. Here the 

guided tour is led by a Park Ranger with gasoline lanterns along rather primitive trails and provides 

the visitor with a more primitive cave experience which has the flavor of adventure. Such an 

experience to most of the visitors makes up for the lack of large spectacular formations in the cave. 

However, this kind of tour and the narrowness of the passages can permit a limited number of 

visitors, ten to fifteen, per ranger guide, so the park ranger staffing cannot be judged by the number of 

visitors per guide as in other caves. Two similar cave tour routes are available for guiding up to four 

cave trips at one time.287

The revised prospectus echoed earlier requests for a new visitor center, more staff, a self-guided 

surface trail, cattle guards, fencing, a new water well, and additional employee housing.288

Acting NPS Director E. T. Scoyen, the Region Two director, and the WODC chief approved 

the revised Jewel Cave Mission 66 Prospectus in February 1959.289 The final prospectus planned 

$65,000 for the visitor center/administration building and 5.5 full-time equivalent (FTE) staff (one 

permanent management and protection, one permanent maintenance and rehabilitation, three 

seasonal management and protection, and 0.5 seasonal maintenance and rehabilitation) at a total cost 

of $309,604.290

Wind Cave staff also completed a museum prospectus, which set a goal for Jewel Cave 

interpretation to “emphasize formation of the cave and its decorative formations, with some 

treatment of the significance of the virgin pine forest.”291 A proposed visitor center, incorporating a 

small museum, would serve the following functions:

(1) interpret area story by exhibits and possible audio-visual program; (2) provide information service 

and sales publications to area visitors; (3) serve as operating headquarters for cave guide personnel; (4) 

serve as waiting room and gathering place for cave tour visitors; (5) provide necessary administrative 

office space.292

286 NPS, Jewel Cave National Monument Mission 66 Prospectus (revised), October 1, 1958, 6, 8, General Files 

1952–1960, Box A-33, Folder A98 Mission 66, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), 

NARA KC. 

287 NPS, Jewel Cave National Monument Mission 66 Prospectus (revised), October 1, 1958, 6. 

288 NPS, Jewel Cave National Monument Mission 66 Prospectus (revised), October 1, 1958, 6. 

289 Acting NPS Director E. T. Scoyen to Region Two Director, memorandum, February 4, 1959; and NPS, Notice 

of Approval: Jewel Cave National Monument Prospectus, February 4, 1959, Records of Wind Cave National Park, 

General File, Box 1, Folder A9815 Conservation-Mission 66-JECA, Records of the National Park Service Region II 

(Midwest Region), NARA KC. 

290 NPS, Notice of Approval: Jewel Cave National Monument Prospectus, February 4, 1959.

291 Edwin C. Alberta and Wayne W. Bryant, “Museum Prospectus,” 6, Cabinet 2, Drawer 4, Folder D62 Museum 

and Exhibits, Jewel Cave NM CF.

292 Alberta and Bryant, “Museum Prospectus,” 13.
108 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

The museum would be a space for protecting objects, such as calcite crystal specimens or any 

archeological material that turned up over time, and making them available “for reference by 

traveling scientists, research workers, and Service personnel.” The proposed exhibits included local 

geology of the Limestone Plateau, forestry values of the surface land, history of the cave’s discovery,

display and explanation of crystal formation, description of the guided tours, and promotion of 

other attractions in the greater Black Hills area.293 The Region Two Office approved the museum 

prospectus, and by July 1959, Semingsen, Keith E. Miller, and Hart had formed a group to begin 

planning specific exhibits.294

With approved plans, it appeared that the NPS might finally begin construction on Jewel Cave. 

Other parks had already received infusions of Mission 66 funding, with new visitor centers and 

other facilities to show for it. Regional Director Baker visited Jewel Cave on June 26, 1959, and 

reported favorably on his visit and cave tour: 

This was the first time I had been in Jewel Cave for a good many years and I was glad to have the 

opportunity to refresh my memory of its fine qualities. It is certainly a trip requiring much more 

exertion and stamina on the part of the visitor than at Wind Cave. I do think we have to watch the 

steps, stairs, and structures very, very carefully so that there will be no opportunity for failure which 

would cause accidents. I have the feeling that someday we should take steps to lower some of the 

floors and make it easier for the average person to walk along a trail. At least I believe most people 

would get more out of the trip if they didn’t have to be continuously watching so they wouldn’t bump 

their heads.295

In addition to still backing a plan to enlarge cave passageways, Baker suggested retaining the 

campground and declared his hope of realizing the Mission 66 developments at Jewel Cave.296 To 

move forward, Jewel Cave needed an updated master plan (which the WODC was already working 

on), in addition to the approved Mission 66 Prospectus. Baker was optimistic about the schedule 

and commented, “Generally we feel we have more or less agreed on a plan and on that basis have 

programmed the construction of facilities in the 1962 and 1963 fiscal years.”297 Semingsen wrote in 

293 Alberta and Bryant, “Museum Prospectus,” 14.

294 Earl M. Semingsen to Regional Director, “Memorandum: Exhibit Planning, Jewel Cave National Monument,” 

July 15, 1959, General Files, Box D96, Folder D6215 Book #1. June 1953 – Dec. 1959. WICA., Records of the National 

Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC; Earl M. Semingsen to Ranger-in-Charge, Jewel Cave National 

Monument, “Memorandum: Jewel Cave National Monument Interpretation Studies and Research Projects,” June 29, 

1959, Cabinet 3, Drawer 1, Folder H14 Area and Service History Cultural Park Hist. Research Documents, Jewel Cave 

NM CF.

295 Regional Director Howard W. Baker to Superintendent, Wind Cave National Park, memorandum, June 26, 1959, 

1, General Files 1952–1963, Box N-10, Folder Book #1 JECA June 1958–June 1964, Records of the National Park 

Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

296 Baker to Superintendent, Wind Cave National Park, memorandum, June 26, 1959, 2.

297 Regional Director Howard W. Baker to Jess H. Lombard, December 23, 1959, 5, General Files 1952–1963, Box 

A52, Folder A6435 WICA May 1956 to 1961, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA 

KC.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 109

late 1959, “Jewel Cave is presently programmed for heavy construction in about two or three 

packages in the next two or three years and should end up as a completed area prior to 1966.”298

During the ongoing planning process, Jewel Cave and Wind Cave maintenance crews improved 

existing cave trails. In 1957, maintenance crews laid an asphalt tread and made other improvements 

on the “Heavenly” cave route, which Semingsen described: 

A crew of three men worked on cave trails from the last week in July until the first of September 

laying an asphalt tread on the cave trail within the cave for about four hundred feet of the distance 

which is taken by the regular cave tours. The remainder of the distance on the “heavenly” route was 

improved by using natural materials which could be found handy in the cave to improve the tread on 

the trail. Steep inclines were improved by constructing wooden stairways in several places. This 

improvement work makes the trail much easier and safer for the visitors and it is possible for the 

ranger guides to get farther into the cave with the average group of visitors and show them more of 

the cave.299

Maintenance employee Clarence Kelsey also worked on the Dungeon Route, where he reconstructed 

a flight of stairs and added new handrails.300

Figure 38. New entrance sign 

for Jewel Cave NM, ca. 1958.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

298 Earl M. Semingsen to Superintendent, Dinosaur National Monument, memorandum, November 19, 1959, 4, 

General Files 1952–1963, Box A52, Folder A6435 WICA May 1956 to 1961, Records of the National Park Service 

Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC. 

299 JECA Annual Report 1957–1958, files provided by Katie Atkins, Folder A2621 Narrative Reports: Annual, 

Superintendent’s Annual 1957, Jewel Cave NM CF.

300 JECA Annual Report 1957–1958; Semingsen and Lienau, 1958 Superintendents Annual Report for Jewel Cave 

National Monument South Dakota, 4–5. Note that this is one of the earliest mentions of the “Dungeon Room,” which 

was previously referred to as “Hell.” The term “Dungeon Room” became standardized, as did other names given to cave 

rooms in the late 1950s, likely because of the continuity of exploration and management from the late 1950s on. Mike 

Wiles, comments on draft administrative history, April 7, 2020. 
110 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

As plans for the monument progressed, the sign shop at Mount Rushmore created 26 new signs 

for Jewel Cave (see Figure 38).301 Wind Cave crews erected the signs in 1957 and 1958.302 One of 

them was a “routed wood sign” installed near the cave entrance. The new sign “briefly summarize[d] 

important features of the cave story.” The NPS placed a similar sign near the parking area that 

introduced the public to Jewel Cave and Jasper Cave (see Figure 39).

303 Both of these signs called 

Jewel Cave a “small cave.” No one could have anticipated that within the year, three rock climbers 

would prove that description wrong and change everything. 

Figure 39. A new sign at Jewel Cave erected in 1958 called Jewel Cave and Jasper Cave “small caves.” This sign was 

near the park entrance and was in addition to the sign in front of the cave entrance that also called Jewel Cave a 

“small cave.” Richard Hart, 1958.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM. 

301 Byrum C. Waller, Chief, Maintenance, Jewel Cave Sign Construction Narrative Report, June 1958, Cabinet 2, 

Drawer 3, Folder 523.2–Signs Construction JECA ’58, Jewel Cave NM CF.

302 JECA Annual Report 1957–1958; Semingsen and Lienau, 1958 Superintendents Annual Report for Jewel Cave 

National Monument South Dakota, 5.

303 Master Plan Development Outline, Jewel Cave National monument, South Dakota: Interpretation, August 1958, 

20, Cabinet 3, Drawer 3, Folder D18 Master Plan, Jewel Cave NM CF.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 111

Conclusion

After the NPS took over full management of Jewel Cave in 1939, it emphasized the “primitive” 

nature of its cave tours, as compared to Wind Cave and others with electric lighting, elevators, and 

other modern infrastructure. The NPS wrestled with whether to keep Jewel Cave in the National 

Park System, wondering whether it held enough significance to warrant inclusion. By the time the 

NPS began Mission 66 planning, delisting appears to have been taken off the table. But the debate 

continued over whether to maintain Jewel Cave as a “primitive” cave or to implement its Mission 66 

Prospectus, which called for significant new infrastructure, including installing an elevator.

A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 113

Chapter 4: Investment in Visitor Services 

and Cave Exploration (ca. 1957–1972) 

Jewel Cave National Monument (Jewel Cave) underwent a massive transformation between 1959 

and 1972. Seasonal staff, followed by Herb Conn, Jan Conn, and other individuals unaffiliated with 

the National Park Service (NPS), discovered and mapped new cave passageways. Their explorations 

proved that Jewel Cave was not a “small cave,” but that it contained at least tens of miles of 

passageways, if not more. Visitation skyrocketed as news of the discoveries spread. The resulting 

publicity shifted NPS attitudes toward Jewel Cave. Within a few years, NPS administrators went 

from debating whether Jewel Cave should be eliminated from the National Park System to planning 

a new cave entrance and other high-impact developments. To facilitate the development, the NPS 

exchanged land with the Forest Service through an act of Congress. By 1972, Jewel Cave had new 

boundaries, two new cave entrances, a new visitor center, and many leads (unexplored passages) for 

further cave exploration. 

Management and Staffing 

Jewel Cave seasonal staff grew in the 

late 1950s. In 1957, there were four GS-4 

seasonal park rangers, as well as a seasonal 

full-time maintenance person—the first 

time the monument had a dedicated 

maintenance employee.1 The following 

year, Walt Lienau (a former seasonal 

ranger) became the ranger-in-charge, and 

the NPS hired six seasonal rangers (GS-4), 

one seasonal naturalist (GS-4), a fire 

control aid, and an ungraded maintenance 

employee (see Figure 40). Lienau reported 

to Wind Cave Superintendent Earl M. 

Semingsen, while the maintenance 

employee reported to the Wind Cave 

1 Earl M. Semingsen and John S. Shepherd, 1957 Superintendents Annual Report for Jewel Cave National 

Monument South Dakota, 1, files provided by Katie Atkins, Folder A2621 Narrative Reports: Annual, Superintendent’s 

Annual 1957, Jewel Cave National Monument Central Files, Custer, SD (hereafter Jewel Cave NM CF); Earl M. 

Semingsen and Walter Lienau, 1958 Superintendents Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument South Dakota, 

Figure 40. Seasonal staff at Jewel Cave, ca. 1959/1960.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.
114 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

maintenance supervisor.2 Wind Cave Administrative Assistant J. W. Warner managed Jewel Cave 

personnel issues, procurement, property management, billing, and files.3

In 1958 and 1959, Region Two Director Howard W. Baker and Semingsen planned long-term 

staffing changes for Jewel Cave. Baker asked Semingsen to include a superintendent position (GS-9) 

for Jewel Cave in the 1961 budget.4 Baker explained how Semingsen’s role functioned and how the 

new position would change that: 

For all intents and purposes, Mr. Semingsen functions as Coordinating Superintendent of Jewel Cave. 

He looks after all area activities, including management, protection, interpretation, and maintenance. 

Under delegation from me, he is responsible for the control of the area’s funds; for the preparation of 

its budgets; for processing its personnel actions; for procuring its supplies and materials; for 

answering correspondence relating to the area, etc.

Mr. Semingsen’s position description contains this statement: “By delegation of authority and 

responsibility from the Regional Director, the Superintendent is assigned full responsibility and 

control of Jewel Cave National Monument.” This part of his position description, as well as another 

part relating to Jewel Cave, will need amending if you approve this recommendation. . . . [to] establish 

. . . a Superintendent’s position for Jewel Cave in fiscal 1961. This being so, the arrangement 

recommended herein will hold only until such time as we fill the position.5

Director Conrad Wirth opposed “creating any more coordinating superintendencies than is 

absolutely necessary,” but he did not object to changing Semingsen’s title to “Superintendent of 

Wind Cave and Jewel Cave.” The title change took effect in April 1959.6

In June 1959, Baker secured funding for a permanent, non-furloughed ranger position at Jewel 

Cave—not a full superintendent, but a ranger who was permanent and year-round. Baker explained 

his plan for the position to Semingsen: 

I would like to fill this position as soon as we can. It should be filled by an experienced National Park 

Service man, preferably someone who has had an opportunity to go through the Yosemite Ranger 

4, files provided by Katie Atkins, Folder A2621 Narrative Reports: Annual, Superintendent’s Annual 1958, Jewel Cave 

NM CF.

2 Semingsen and Shepherd, 1957 Superintendents Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument, 1; Semingsen 

and Lienau, 1958 Superintendents Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument, 4. 

3 NPS, Wind Cave, Position Description for “Administrative Assistant (J. W. Warner),” July 17, 1958, General Files 

1952–1963, Box A52, Folder A6435 WICA May 1956 to 1961, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest 

Region), National Archives and Records Administration, Kansas City, MO (hereafter NARA KC).

4 “Notes on Discussions Mr. Baker had with Mr. Semingsen at Rapid City on October 24,” November 4, 1958, 

General Files 1952–1963, Box A52, Folder A6435 WICA May 1956 to 1961, Records of the National Park Service 

Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

5 Regional Director Howard W. Baker to the Director, memorandum, November 10, 1958, General Files 1952–

1963, Box A52, Folder A6435 WICA May 1956 to 1961, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest 

Region), NARA KC.

6 Acting Associate Director Hillary A. Tolson to Region Two Director, memorandum, December 11, 1958; Acting 

Regional Director M. H. Harvey to Superintendent, Wind Cave National Park, memorandum, April 1, 1959; and 

Regional Director Howard W. Baker to Superintendent, Wind Cave National Park, memorandum, December 23, 1958, 

all in General Files 1952–1963, Box A52, Folder A6435 WICA May 1956 to 1961, Records of the National Park Service 

Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 115

School. The man should be stationed at Jewel Cave and in the winter time he can be used at Wind 

Cave, or perhaps we would need to borrow him from time to time for special type of assignment. 

However, generally he would be under your direction. I want him to report directly to you as 

Superintendent of Wind Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument, for he should be 

responsible for all activities at Jewel Cave.7

In July, Baker and Semingsen hired Keith E. Miller from Glacier National Park into the new, fulltime ranger-in-charge position (see Figure 41).8 Miller managed day-to-day operations, reports, and 

public relations in Custer and Newcastle, while the Wind Cave administrative officer and 

superintendent continued to manage the rest.9 Under Miller were the assistant ranger-in-charge 

(Lienau), four seasonal rangers, a park naturalist, a fire control aid, and a laborer.10

Figure 41. Park Ranger Keith Miller 

stands next to a patrol car, ca. 1950s.

Source: NPS, Harpers Ferry Center.

Later that year, Semingsen left Wind Cave for another assignment, and Jess H. Lombard 

replaced him. Lombard’s title remained “Superintendent of Wind Cave National Park and Jewel 

Cave National Monument.”11 In his introductory letter to Lombard, Baker pushed back the goal for 

7 Regional Director Howard W. Baker to Superintendent, Wind Cave National Park, memorandum, June 26, 1959, 

2, General Files 1952–1963, Box N-10, Folder N3023 Book #1 JECA June 1958–June 1964, Records of the National 

Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

8 Keith E. Miller, 1960 Ranger-in-Charge’s Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument, 2, files provided by 

Katie Atkins, Folder A2621 Narrative Reports: Annual, Superintendent’s Annual 1961, Jewel Cave NM CF.

9 Earl M. Semingsen to Superintendent, Dinosaur National Monument, memorandum, November 19, 1959, 4, 

General Files 1952–1963, Box A52, Folder A6435 WICA May 1956 to 1961, Records of the National Park Service 

Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC. 

10 Earl M. Semingsen to All Employees, Wind Cave National Park, Jewel Cave National Monument, memorandum, 

July 20, 1959, 4, General Files 1952–1963, Box A52, Folder A6435 WICA May 1956 to 1961, Records of the National 

Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

11 Regional Director Howard W. Baker to Jess H. Lombard, December 23, 1959, 1, General Files 1952–1963, Box 

A52, Folder A6435 WICA May 1956 to 1961, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA 

KC.
116 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

a separate Jewel Cave superintendent to 1962.12 Baker explained his vision the Jewel Cave ranger-incharge position: 

We have a Park Ranger assigned to Jewel Cave to be stationed at the area during the summer when 

the Monument is open. The remainder of the year he can be moved to Wind Cave to assist with such 

work as you consider desirable. He should be kept generally informed on what is happening at Jewel 

Cave and be your principal representative for that area. However, while he is at Wind Cave he can be 

assigned to the ranger staff and can report to the Chief Ranger except when handling Jewel Cave 

matters. Furthermore, we consider this man as available for special assignments in case we need 

assistance at other places in the Region during the winter season.13

Miller remained the ranger-in-charge at Jewel Cave through 1961. He went on several cave 

exploration trips with the Conns during his tenure.

14

When Miller left in 1962, Homer A. 

(Pete) Robinson served as ranger-in-charge 

for less than a year. After Robinson

departed, Lombard and the Region Two 

Office reallocated funds to change the 

position from a GS-7 to a GS-9 and 

retitled it “Management Assistant.” 

Wallace (Wally) Elms became the first to 

fill the new position on May 5, 1963 (see 

Figure 42).

15 Lombard clarified that while 

he (Lombard) was superintendent of Jewel 

Cave, Elms was “in direct charge of the 

Monument.”16 The management assistant 

remained the only permanent position at 

Jewel Cave, but the non-permanent 

maintenance man lived at Jewel Cave in 

the winter starting in 1964.

17

12 Baker to Lombard, December 23, 1959, 5.

13 Baker to Lombard, December 23, 1959, 1.

14 Jess H. Lombard to Director, memorandum, July 7, 1960, files provided by Katie Atkins, Folder A2621 Narrative 

Reports: Annual, Superintendent’s Annual 1960, Jewel Cave NM CF; Wind Cave National Park Superintendent to 

Regional Director, undated [ca. 1961], Cabinet 3, Drawer 1, Folder H14 Area and Service History, Cultural, Park Hist. 

Research Documents, Jewel Cave NM CF; Herb and Jan Conn, Jewel Cave Exploration Cave Trip Log, Special Use 

Permit JECA-1-60, Sept. 26, 1959 to March 31, 1960, File 3449zp, Jewel Cave National Monument Museum Files, 

Custer, SD (hereafter Jewel Cave NM MF); Herb and Jan Conn, Jewel Cave Exploration, Special Use Permit JECA-1-60, 

Descriptive Report, 1, File 3449zj, Jewel Cave NM MF.

15 Jess H. Lombard, 1963 Superintendent’s Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument, 2, files provided by 

Katie Atkins, Folder A26, Jewel Cave NM CF.

16 Jess H. Lombard, 1964 Superintendent’s Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument, 2, files provided by 

Katie Atkins, Folder A26, Jewel Cave NM CF.

17 Jess H. Lombard and James B. Thompson, 1965 Superintendent’s Annual Report for Jewel Cave National 

Monument, 2, 6, files provided by Katie Atkins, Folder A26, Jewel Cave NM CF.

Figure 42. Wally Elms, the first person to hold the title 

“management assistant” at Jewel Cave. Pictured here at Wind 

Cave, ca. 1963.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 117

In February 1965, Lombard hired James B. Thompson to replace Elms as management assistant 

(still GS-9). Under Thompson were eight seasonal rangers, two laborers, one maintenance worker,

and one ranger-naturalist.18 Thompson prepared the Jewel Cave budget and had relative autonomy

while at Jewel Cave, but anything that needed to go to the Region Two Office had to pass through 

Lombard.19 Thompson left in summer 1966, and Donald F. Gillespie, a ranger at Wind Cave 

replaced him, first in a temporary capacity and then permanently, but at a lower grade level (GS-7).20

In 1967, the permanent staff expanded to include a management assistant and maintenance 

employee, and the seasonal staff increased to ten rangers, three laborers, and a clerk-stenographer.21

The naturalist position was “dropped for administrative reasons.”22 In 1968, a woman joined the

seasonal staff for the first time, working in the ticket booth.23 In 1969, the staff consisted of one 

management assistant (GS-9), three supervisory seasonal park rangers (GS-5), seven general seasonal 

park rangers (GS-4), three seasonal maintenance employees (ungraded), four seasonal laborers, and 

one maintenance foreman (no grade listed).24 Seasonal staff in 1970 included several Newcastle High 

School teachers on their summer break, along with a teacher from Minnesota.25 Dave Todd took 

over as management assistant in March 1969 and remained in that position through the opening of 

the new visitor center in 1972.

26

Effects of Exploration on NPS Planning and Management

As of 1959, the NPS Washington Office had approved Wind Cave Superintendent Semingsen’s 

Mission 66 Prospectus for Jewel Cave, and the Western Office of Design and Construction 

(WODC) was working on a master plan to accompany it.27 While the NPS considered where to 

develop additional visitor services at Jewel Cave, the seasonal staff spent their non-working hours 

18 Lombard and Thompson, 1965 Superintendent’s Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument, 2.

19 James B. Thompson, interview by Jackie Gonzales, April 18, 2019, Estes Park, Colorado. 

20 Warren D. Hotchkiss, Jewel Cave National Monument Annual Narrative Report, 1967, 2, files provided by Katie 

Atkins, Folder A26, Jewel Cave NM CF; Thompson, interview. 

21 Hotchkiss, Jewel Cave National Monument Annual Narrative Report, 1967, 2.

22 Donald F. Gillespie, Annual Report of Information and Interpretive Services—NPS(OI)-2, Jewel Cave National 

Monument, 1967, 2, Cabinet 1, Drawer 2, Folder 6.A.1 Annual Interpretive Reports 1960–1979, Jewel Cave NM CF.

23 The report did not include the woman’s name. Donald F. Gillespie, Annual Report of Information and 

Interpretive Services—NPS(OI)-2, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1968, 2, Cabinet 1, Drawer 2, Folder 6.A.1 Annual 

Interpretive Reports 1960–1979, Jewel Cave NM CF.

24 “Organization Chart of Wind Cave National Park,” April 4, 1969, Cabinet 3, Drawer 3, Folder D18 JECA Master 

Plan, Jewel Cave NM CF. 

25 Alex Mitich, “Cave Questions – Little Jewels,” Bits and Pieces 7, no. 2 (March–April 1971): 21–22, in Cabinet 3, 

Drawer 1, Folder H14 Area and Service History, Cultural, Park Hist. Research Documents, Jewel Cave NM CF. 

26 Dave Todd, Information and Interpretive Services, NPS(I)-2, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1969, 4, Cabinet 1, 

Drawer 2, Folder 6.A.1 Annual Interpretive Reports 1960–1979, Jewel Cave NM CF; Robert A. Martin to David Todd, 

Park Manager, Jewel Cave NM, March 4, 1970, Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, Folder N1427 Bats Jewel Cave Pre-1980, Jewel 

Cave NM CF; Dave Todd, Annual Budget Request, for Informational Printing (Free and Sales), Jewel Cave National 

Monument, February 17, 1972, Cabinet 1, Drawer 2, Folder 6.A.2 Annual Budget Requests Printing 10-81, Jewel Cave 

NM CF.

27 Baker to Lombard, December 23, 1959, 5.
118 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

exploring the cave, and they invited friends to join them. These individuals, and others unaffiliated 

with the NPS, made discoveries that dramatically changed the understanding of Jewel Cave’s size 

and importance, which in turn shifted NPS development plans for the monument. 

Exploration in the Late 1950s

Figure 43. Park Ranger P. J. Ryan leading a cave tour, 1961.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

Seasonal rangers Patrick J. (“P. J.”) Ryan, Clarence Kinzer, and Jimmie D. Hylton explored the 

cave during their free time in summer 1957 (see Figure 43). One day, as the story goes, Ryan was 

smoking a cigarette near Milk River, when he noticed the smoke drifting through the broken-down 

calcite piled nearby. Ryan, Kinzer, and Hylton cleared away some of the rubble, crossed a deep 

crevice beyond Milk River, and found passages that had not been previously known.28 Ryan and 

Kinzer wrote up a description of the passages they had found. Wind Cave Park Naturalist Richard 

Hart later tried but failed to retrace their steps using the writeup.29 In late August, Ryan and Kinzer 

28 Jewel Cave NM Management Assistant Wallace B. Elms to Wind Cave Superintendent, memorandum, February 

4, 1965, 1–2, Files 1661a–1661b, Jewel Cave NM MF; Dwight Deal, interview by Jackie Gonzales, June 30, 2019, Custer, 

SD. 

29 Park Naturalist Richard T. Hart, “JECA Research—Seasonal park rangers,” undated [1957], File 3449zza, Jewel 

Cave NM MF.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 119

wrote additional descriptions of their findings for Semingsen, which included a room that was one 

hundred feet from floor to ceiling. They began to speculate about what these discoveries could mean 

for the future of Jewel Cave: 

There is the possibility that Jewel Cave could be built up to where it could have a tour equal to that of 

Wind Cave, however, the expense of such a project would be terrific. For that reason the wisdom of 

attempting to improve that particular area at the present is questionable as we had some difficulty in 

reaching some of the remote areas discussed.30

Ryan was well-connected in caving circles and offered to promote Jewel Cave during an upcoming 

talk for a National Speleological Society (NSS) grotto in New Jersey.31

The next June, Delmer Brown, a student in geological engineering at the South Dakota School 

of Mines, requested a permit to survey Jewel Cave as part of his undergraduate work. Semingsen 

approved the permit, which was the first granted at Jewel Cave for surveying. Semingsen set the 

following conditions: 

In order for Mr. Brown to have access to the cave, we may designate him as a collaborator, without 

compensation, of the National Park Service. As a requirement of this collaboratorship, he is to furnish 

two copies of his manuscript and map to the Superintendent, Wind Cave. The Black Hills Natural 

History Association is to render some financial assistance in getting the manuscript typed. . . . 

Mr. Brown understands that he is under no circumstances to work alone in the cave and any 

assistance used by him must be cleared with the Superintendent, Wind Cave National Park, and the 

Officer-in-Charge, Walter Lienau, at Jewel Cave National Monument.32

The Region Two Office granted Semingsen permission to use some of the $500 that had been 

budgeted for natural history research at Wind Cave toward Brown’s survey.33

Brown explored and surveyed Jewel Cave during 1958 and 1959. Brown received help from his 

advisor, Stan Arlton (who later studied the relationship between Jewel Cave’s airflow and volume), 

and seasonal rangers, who made transit-tape surveys of the rooms beyond Milk River. Wind Cave 

Park Ranger Bill Eibert participated in the exploring, report writing, and mapping, work he 

performed outside of his normal duties.34 John Hannan and Gerald Wergadal of Jewel Cave assisted 

30 Patrick J. Ryan and Clarence M. Kinzer to Wind Cave National Park Superintendent, August 26, 1957, File 

3449zzc, Jewel Cave NM MF.

31 Patrick J. Ryan to Richard B. Hart, April 10, 1958, File 3449zzb, Jewel Cave NM MF.

32 Wind Cave Superintendent Earl M. Semingsen to Edward L. Tullis, South Dakota School of Mines and 

Technology, June 24, 1958, General Files 1952–1963, Box N-10, Folder N3023 Book #1 JECA June 1958–June 1964, 

Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC. 

33 Chief, Division of Interpretation, Ronald F. Lee, to Region Two Director, memorandum, September 24, 1958, 

General Files 1952–1963, Box N-10, Folder N3023 Book #1 JECA June 1958–June 1964, Records of the National Park 

Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC. 

34 Park Naturalist Richard B. Hart to Wind Cave Superintendent Earl M. Semingsen, June 24, 1958, General Files 

1952–1963, Box N-10, Folder N3023 Book #1 JECA June 1958–June 1964, Records of the National Park Service 

Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC; Earl M. Semingsen and Walter Lienau, 1959 Superintendents Annual Report 

for Jewel Cave National Monument South Dakota, 3, files provided by Katie Atkins, Folder A2621 Narrative Reports: 

Annual, Superintendent’s Annual 1959, Jewel Cave NM CF; G. William Eibert, “Jewel Cave Exploration (Beyond 

‘Badger-Hole’ Traverse),” August 25, 1959, Files 1695a–1695h, Jewel Cave NM MF; Wind Cave Superintendent Earl M. 

Semingsen to Region Two Director, memorandum, August 17, 1959, File 3449zw, Jewel Cave NM MF; Elms to Wind 

Cave Superintendent, memorandum, February 4, 1965, Files 1661a–1661b, Jewel Cave NM MF. 
120 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Eibert with mapping.35 (Eibert’s map lacked inclination measurements and was revised later.36) The 

group tied the new surveys to the earlier Civilian Conservation Corps surveys and one from 1938 

that Hart believed was completed by Frank Neighbor, an undergraduate student at South Dakota 

School of Mines and Technology.

37 They explored some of the areas that Lyle Linch had been 

through, but Brown had difficulty telling which chamber was which based on Linch’s notes (this 

may have had something to do with Linch’s exaggerated reports).

38

Brown submitted his thesis, “A Study of the Geology and a Description of a Portion of Jewel 

Cave,” on September 16, 1959. John Doerr, acting chief of interpretation at the NPS Washington 

Office, called Brown’s thesis “an unusually good contribution to cavern geology.” Doerr showed it 

to US Geological Survey (USGS) Geologist William Davies, editor of the NSS News, and Davies 

asked permission to publish Brown’s thesis in a future issue. Doerr commended Semingsen for 

“having created a work situation so favorable to this type of research.”39 Geological Engineering 

Professor John Paul Gries of the South Dakota School of Mines praised the effort: “This mapping 

project, and the exploratory work which preceded it, has greatly increased our knowledge of the size 

of the Cave; certainly it can no longer be considered one of the small caves of the Hills.”40

Word of Jewel Cave began to spread within the caving community. Geology students from the 

University of Wyoming and the South Dakota School of Mines joined Brown, Eibert, and others 

during the 1959 season, including Jim Thompson, who later would become the management 

assistant at Jewel Cave, and Dwight Deal, a student at the University of Wyoming and member of 

the NSS.41 Ryan had first introduced Deal to the cave. 

Deal knew Herb and Jan Conn, whom he had met when they visited South Dakota to rock 

climb in the Black Hills (see Figure 44). Herb Conn was from Geneva, New York, and Jan Conn 

was from Maryland. Herb had a degree in electrical engineering from the University of Colorado, 

and Jan was a composer and musician. Both were skilled climbers. Although they had been in a cave 

a few times before, including Schoolhouse Cave in West Virginia, the Conns’ real interest and claim 

to fame had always been their surface climbing. In particular, they were known for many first 

ascents and their limited use of technical equipment. While most climbers were content to rappel 

back to the ground after completing a climb, the Conns almost always climbed back down, which 

35 “Jewel Cave National Monument: Operation and Maintenance,” undated [ca. 1961], File 1679c, Jewel Cave NM 

MF.

36 Michael Wiles and Rene Ohms, “Jewel Cave National Monument Cave and Karst Management Plan,” 2007, 4, 

Jewel Cave National Monument Digital Files (hereafter Jewel Cave NM DF).

37 Hart to Semingsen, June 24, 1958; Mike Wiles, comments on draft administrative history, April 7, 2020. 

38 Delmer L. Brown to Keith E. Miller, August 19, 1959, 2–3, File 3449zv, Jewel Cave NM MF.

39 Acting Chief, Division of Interpretation, John E. Doerr, to Region Two Director, memorandum, October 15, 

1959, General Files 1952–1963, Box N-10, Folder N3023 Book #1 JECA June 1958–June 1964, Records of the National 

Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC. 

40 John Paul Gries to Earl Semingsen, August 8, 1959, File 1693, Jewel Cave NM MF.

41 Thompson, interview; Deal interview; Supervisory Park Ranger Keith E. Miller to Wind Cave National Park 

Superintendent, memorandum, June 5, 1960, 1, File 1785f, Jewel Cave NM MF. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 121

they considered the true test of their skills. When Deal asked the Conns if they would be interested 

in climbing underground in Jewel Cave, they said yes.42

Wind Cave Superintendent Jess 

Lombard issued Deal a special use 

permit for exploration and surveying of 

Jewel Cave, to build on Brown and 

Eibert’s surveys.43 Lombard discussed 

with the NPS Washington Office 

whether a permit or “use of Gratuitous 

Service (non-appointive)” was a better 

way to manage the exploration. The 

assistant director recommended using a 

permit for research purposes (since 

“the work is actually research and could 

be applied under that category”) and

suggested that the NPS add a section 

on surveying and mapping caves to its 

new handbook “on without 

compensation employment.”

44 Miller did not know the insurance requirements for caving, so he 

advised consulting with the NSS if the NPS needed to figure out how to procure insurance for cave 

exploration.45

On caving trips under his permit, Deal was often accompanied by Herb Conn, Jan Conn, and 

Wind Cave Ranger Dave Schnute. Miller praised their qualifications for this work: 

Mr. Deal has done extensive spelunking in caves throughout the country. Mr. & Mrs. Conn are well 

known for their rock climbing ability. Dave Schnute has been spelunking for several years. Both Deal 

and Conn have engineering backgrounds and this has enabled them to do an excellent mapping job 

to-date.46

Deal taught Herb Conn how to survey, and Herb joined Deal on every one of the trips from 

September 26, 1959, to March 1960. Jan joined all but one (see Figure 45). The Conns even went 

42 Dwight Deal, “Jewel Cave Exploration late 1800s through 1962,” talk, Jewel Cave 200-mile Reunion, Custer, SD, 

June 29, 2019; Don Hipschman, “South Dakota Couple Discovers... A New World Underground,” [Magazine title 

unknown], March 22, 1964, clipping, General Files 1952–1963, Box N-10, Folder N3023 Book #1 JECA June 1958–

June 1964, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC; Lorraine Collings, “The 

Conns of Jewel Cave,” Empire Magazine (March 18, 1973): 26; Jan Conn, “Jewel Cave Exploration from 1959–1979,” 

talk, Jewel Cave 200-mile Reunion, Custer, SD, June 29, 2019; Dwight Deal, “Foreword,” in Herb and Jan Conn, The 

Jewel Cave Adventure: Fifty Miles of Discovery Under South Dakota (St. Louis: Cave Books, 1977), 12–13; Deal, interview.

43 Miller to Wind Cave Superintendent, memorandum, June 5, 1960, 1, File 1785f, Jewel Cave NM MF; and Elms to 

Wind Cave Superintendent, memorandum, February 4, 1965, 2, File 1661b, Jewel Cave NM MF. 

44 Miller to Wind Cave Superintendent, memorandum, June 5, 1960, 2, File 1785g, Jewel Cave NM MF.

45 Miller to Wind Cave Superintendent, memorandum, June 5, 1960, 2, File 1785g, Jewel Cave NM MF.

46 Miller to Wind Cave Superintendent, memorandum, June 5, 1960, 1, File 1785f, Jewel Cave NM MF.

Figure 44. Herb and Jan Conn, ca. 1959.

Source: NPS.
122 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

without Deal on several trips.47 In some passages, they found evidence that they were not the first 

ones there. Lombard sent one such find, a Sears Roebuck catalog, to Sears and asked if they might 

be able to tell from the plow advertised on the page what year the catalog was from. Sears guessed 

1908, indicating the Michauds likely had been in some of these passages 50 years before.48

Figure 45. Jan Conn, 

Herb Conn, Dave 

Schnute, and 

Dwight Deal, 1959.

Source: NPS, Jewel 

Cave NM.

Mineral Withdrawal

Surveys of Jewel Cave, first by Brown and Eibert and then by Deal and the Conns, presented a 

management problem: the newly discovered portions of the cave were under Forest Service land, 

which, unlike the national monument land, was open to mining claims. On October 14, 1959, 

Semingsen asked the Region Two Director about

“freezing” the land area along the east monument boundary and subsequently acquiring sufficient 

land by exchange or otherwise from the United States Forest Service. . . . It is quite apparent that the 

Jewel Cave cavern system is of greater extent and significance than heretofore realized and we are 

anxious to protect the entire system from encroachments of any kind from adjoining United States 

Forest Service lands.49

47 Herb and Jan Conn, Jewel Cave Exploration Cave Trip Log, Special Use Permit JECA-1-60, Sept. 26, 1959 to 

March 31, 1960, File 3449zp, Jewel Cave NM MF; Deal, interview; Jan Conn, “Jewel Cave Exploration from 1959–

1979,” talk, Jewel Cave 200-mile Reunion, Custer, SD, June 29, 2019. 

48 G. D. Downey to Jess H. Lombard, April 11, 1960, File 3449zo, Jewel Cave NM MF.

49 Earl M. Semingsen to Region Two Director, memorandum, October 14, 1959, General Files 1952–1963, Box N10, Folder N3023 Book #1 JECA June 1958–June 1964, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest 

Region), NARA KC.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 123

Semingsen recommended that the NPS authorize additional research to determine the extent of the 

cave outside of monument boundaries.50

Semingsen and Region Two Office staff worked with Black Hills National Forest officials in 

Custer, who then cooperated with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to withdraw Forest 

Service lands above the known cave from mineral entry.51 The agencies agreed on terms needed to 

begin a withdrawal on January 4, 1960.52 The following year, the NPS made a formal application to 

withdraw 1,119.84 acres east of the Jewel Cave National Monument boundary from mineral 

exploitation for the purpose of “protection of extensive caverns and underground passages 

originating within Jewel Cave National Monument.”53

The NPS and Forest Service approved the final mineral withdrawal in 1961. After the approval, 

NPS Director Conrad Wirth, Region Two Director Baker, and other regional staff inspected the 

monument. They discussed the need for “studies relating to a reevaluation of the significance of 

Jewel Cave and future Service actions in regard to that area.”54 The new cave discoveries, the mineral

withdrawal, and the visit from Director Wirth confirmed that Jewel Cave was finally safe from losing 

its national monument status. 

Search for New Tour Routes

After the mineral withdrawal, Wind Cave superintendents and the Region Two Office supported 

continued exploration for the express purpose of locating potential tour routes. Ryan and Kinzer 

had already recommended against a tour in the area that they had explored beyond Milk River 

because of the “rough, low, and narrow” nature of the passageways.55 In June 1960, Regional Chief 

of Interpretation M. E. Beatty met Lombard, Miller, and the Conns to plan future exploration 

efforts. They agreed that the best place to explore would be 

in the Monument area westward from the large room known as “Penn Station.” It was suggested that 

an effort be made to find a connection with one of the passages used on conducted trips to permit 

making a loop trip, thus increasing the daily visitor use of the cave.56

50 Semingsen to Region Two Director, memorandum, August 17, 1959. 

51 Miller to Wind Cave National Park Superintendent, memorandum, June 5, 1960, 1, File 1785f, Jewel Cave NM 

MF; Miller, 1960 Ranger-in-Charge’s Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument, 4.

52 Elms to Wind Cave Superintendent, memorandum, February 4, 1965, 2, File 1661b, Jewel Cave NM MF.

53 Edgar I. Rowland, State Director, BLM, Notice of Proposed Withdrawal and Reservation of Lands, May 9, 1961, 

File 3397c, Jewel Cave NM MF. 

54 1961 Ranger-in-Charge’s Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument, 1, Jewel Cave NM CF; Regional 

Director to Director, memorandum, no date, 1, Cabinet 3, Drawer 3, Folder D18 JECA Master Plan, Jewel Cave NM 

CF.

55 Clarence M. Kinzer and Pat Ryan to Wind Cave National Park Superintendent, August 24, 1957, File 3449zzd, 

Jewel Cave NM MF.

56 Regional Chief of Interpretation M. E. Beatty to Region Two Director, memorandum, June 28, 1960, General 

Files 1952–1963, Box N-10, Folder N3023 Book #1 JECA June 1958–June 1964, Records of the National Park Service 

Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC. 
124 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Beatty wanted “to retain the visitor station . . . near the entrance to Jewel Cave.” He questioned 

whether other passageways contained more than the dogtooth spar formations, which, he felt, 

frankly do not live up to their name due to the heavy brown-stained coating and also fail to live up to 

the expectations of visitors as the cave name indicates. The principal attraction appears to be the 

primitive nature of the cave—wooden stairs and Coleman lanterns. If these were changed to concrete 

steps and electric lighting, I am of the opinion the cave would lose much of its interest for visitors.57

Beatty thus continued the argument from the previous decade that Jewel Cave was most valuable to 

the NPS as a primitive cave experience.

Figure 46. Jan Conn (far left) and Herb Conn (fourth from left standing) with cavers, including Jewel Cave Management 

Assistant Wally Elms (second from right) and his wife (far right). Photo taken by Seasonal Ranger Mike Kaback, 1963.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

In 1960, the Region Two Office paid the Conns $500 to survey Jasper Cave with an eye toward 

possible loop tour routes that the NPS could develop there (see Figures 46 and 47).58 The Conns 

noted that, “At the back of the entrance room a twisting hole leads down 40' and is equipped with 

three old wooden ladders.” Further in the cave, the Conns found additional evidence of earlier 

cavers, including “several bottles containing water, a few candles,” a tobacco can, and buttons. At a 

“crystal lined passage too tight to squeeze through” with strong air movement (at survey point B11), 

the Conns noted, “there were signs here that previous explorers had attempted to enlarge the 

57 Beatty to Region Two Director, memorandum, June 28, 1960. 

58 Beatty to Region Two Director, memorandum, June 28, 1960; Regional Chief of Interpretation M. E. Beatty to 

Superintendent, Wind Cave National Park, memorandum, July 7, 1960, General Files 1952–1963, Box N-10, Folder 

N3023 Book #1 JECA June 1958–June 1964, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA 

KC; Elms to Wind Cave Superintendent, memorandum, February 4, 1965, 3, File 1661c, Jewel Cave NM MF. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 125

passage with crowbars.”59 Herb reported that, despite the strong winds emanating from Jasper Cave, 

accessible passages were minimal:

In addition to our own visits to Jasper Cave, groups of rangers have been in several times during the 

past summer on their days off, hunting for further leads. While it is never possible to say that an 

important lead might not have been missed, we feel reasonably certain that practically all of the 

accessible portion of the cave has been found and is shown on the map.60

Regional Director Baker concluded that Jasper Cave “was proven to be of such limited extent and 

so devoid of significant features as to eliminate it from future consideration in planning.”61

Figure 47. Herb Conn surveying Jewel Cave, pictured here in a photo by the South Dakota Highway Department, ca. 

1963.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

59 Herb Conn, “Jasper Cave Exploration, Jewel Cave National Monument, Special Use Permit JECA-1-60,” 

October 26, 1960, 1–3, Cabinet 3, Drawer 2, Folder N3023 Jasper Cave, Jewel Cave NM CF.

60 H. Conn, “Jasper Cave Exploration, Jewel Cave National Monument, Special Use Permit JECA-1-60,” October 

26, 1960, 3.

61 Regional Director to Director, memorandum, no date, 1.
126 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

With Jasper Cave off the table, 

the Conns continued to explore the 

many leads they found in Jewel Cave. 

The NPS issued the Conns an annual 

permit for surveying and mapping for 

the purpose of identifying a new tour 

route. The Region Two Office 

funded the Conns’ surveying with 

lump sum payments and occasionally 

made additional research dollars 

available for the purpose of analyzing 

potential tour routes (about $500 a 

year for the first few years of the 

1960s).62 As a requirement of their 

annual permits, Herb and Jan 

prepared a narrative report, survey 

data, and maps, in order to explain 

the three-dimensional aspects of the 

cave and to enable later cavers to 

follow their routes.63 During 40 trips in 1960, they mapped 3.5 miles, much of the time working with 

Miller, Schnute, and other cavers and friends (see Figure 48).

64 All of the new cave they found was 

beyond Milk River, extending east and northeast.65

In February 1961, Region Two Director Baker concluded that the Conns’ findings for potential 

new tour routes were insufficient to warrant further exploration. Baker wrote to Lombard,

. . . nothing has been found thus far in the way of cave formations and decorations to warrant 

additional development. It also appears there are no natural passages connecting the two presently 

developed routes which would have permitted a circle trip and an increase in the number of people 

who could be taken through the cave at one time.

Although we share your hope that additional exploration work can be financed next year, it would be 

unrealistic for us to anticipate any further continuation of this work from National Park Service funds. 

We hope you will convey to the Conns our sincere appreciation of the careful work performed under 

what must have been very difficult conditions. We greatly appreciate their cooperation and feel that 

62 Jewel Cave NM Management Assistant Wallace B. Elms to Wind Cave Superintendent, memorandum, February 

4, 1965, 3, File 1661c, Jewel Cave NM MF; 1961 Ranger-in-Charge’s Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument, 

4; Beatty to Superintendent, Wind Cave National Park, memorandum, July 7, 1960; and Wind Cave Superintendent Jess 

H. Lombard to Region Two Director, November 6, 1961, both in General Files 1952–1963, Box N-10, Folder N3023 

Book #1 JECA June 1958–June 1964, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

63 Herb and Jan Conn, Jewel Cave Exploration, Special Use Permit JECA-1-60, Descriptive Report, 1, File 3449zj, 

Jewel Cave NM MF.

64 Herb and Jan Conn, Jewel Cave Exploration, Special Use Permit JECA-1-60, Cave Trip Log, 16–22, File 3449zj, 

Jewel Cave NM MF; Herb and Jan Conn, Jewel Cave Exploration Cave Trip Log, Special Use Permit JECA-1-60, April 

1, 1960 to June 30, 1960, File 3449zm, Jewel Cave NM MF.

65 H. and J. Conn, Jewel Cave Exploration, Special Use Permit JECA-1-60, Descriptive Report, 2.

Figure 48. Jan Conn with Myrna Sheie, Karen Dilts, and Lynn Svatos, 

photo by Larry Dilts, ca. 1975.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 127

their contribution to the project was very superior to the amount of money we were able to make 

available.66

Despite Baker’s opposition, Lombard issued the Conns a permit for August to December 1961.67

During these several months, the Conns found 2.5 more miles of cave, including what they called 

the “Frosty Grotto,” which they described as “possibly the most scenic discovery in the cave.” It 

was a passage 40 feet high and five feet wide, with walls “coated with white aragonite coral 

formation and some frostwork” and a floor “piled deep with crystalline fragments or ‘snow.’” This 

discovery, as well as a breakthrough to a “bewildering maze of passageways” that included “Eerie 

Boulevard,” made a round-trip tour a legitimate possibility.68 In the wake of the Conns’ discoveries, 

Lombard convinced Region Two officials to provide $500 from the region’s Natural History 

Research budget for their exploration work.69

After these finds, Miller emphasized the need for continued exploration of the cave: 

The more times I enter the new sections of Jewel Cave, the greater becomes my appreciation of what 

the cave has to offer. It is difficult to visualize the actual beauty, since it is not apparent in the sections 

through which we now take cave tours. . . . Eventually it will be necessary to open other portions of 

the cave to the public. Not solely because of the pressure of a heavy park visitation, but also to show 

off some of the beauty of Jewel Cave.

I feel that the survey and mapping of Jewel Cave should continue. Primarily because the more we 

know the easier will be the administrative decisions concerning it. Secondly, there is a possibility that 

another entrance may be found. Third, again for administrative reasons, we should know how far out 

of the Monument it runs and what protection is needed. Fourth, it is just good common sense to want 

to know just where and how far the cave runs. . . . 

I have felt somewhat like an uncle to a questionable Park Service stepchild, whose being has 

sometimes caused concern, but who in my mind deserves the status given to a child who has proven 

he is a legitimate offspring of Park Service criteria.

70

Region Two officials had begun to consider constructing a second entrance to the cave by tunnel, 

but Miller did not think this was a good idea. Rather, Miller argued, “the present tour routes can 

handle the present visitation,” and he echoed the regional office’s perspective from before the 

Conn’s 1961 discoveries that the tours offered visitors a “primitive cave” experience while still 

showcasing the cave’s eponymous crystals.71

66 Regional Director Howard W. Baker to Wind Cave Superintendent, memorandum, February 6, 1961, General 

Files 1952–1963, Box N-10, Folder N3023 Book #1 JECA June 1958–June 1964, Records of the National Park Service 

Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

67 NPS, Special Use Permit JECA 1-61, expires December 31, 1961, General Files 1952–1963, Box N-10, Folder 

N3023 Book #1 JECA June 1958–June 1964, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA 

KC.

68 Herb and Jan Conn, General Report, Special Use Permit JECA-1-61, File 3449zi, Jewel Cave NM MF.

69 Lombard to Region Two Director, November 6, 1961.

70 Keith E. Miller to Wind Cave National Park Superintendent, January 26, 1962, Cabinet 3, Drawer 3, Folder D18 

JECA Master Plan, Jewel Cave NM CF.

71 Miller to Wind Cave National Park Superintendent, January 26, 1962.
128 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

In spite of Miller’s opposition to development, Lombard asked the Conns as part of their 1962 

explorations to investigate potential locations for a tunnel into the cave. They identified two possible 

locations: either a 150-foot tunnel connecting to the Haunted Loft or a 200-foot tunnel connecting 

to the Cracker Barrel area. In either case, the entrance would be in Hell Canyon, “on the south 

facing slope below the existing campground.” Echoing earlier NPS preferences for drip formations 

over calcite crystals, Lombard noted that a tunnel “would open up sections of the cave where the 

display of mineral decoration far exceeds those presently seen on the developed tours now used,” 

and he added that further exploration might reveal even better locations for a tunnel.72

Assistant Region Two Director George E. Baggley, however, opposed the construction of a 

tunnel into Jewel Cave. He wrote, 

We see no reason, however, for giving immediate attention to new tunnels or addition to existing cave 

tours since the existing tours appear adequate for several years into the future.

If additional explorations suggest that a loop trip can be developed with exit through another tunnel, 

our enthusiasm for additional entrances would be much higher. Perhaps this objective can be included 

in any additional cave exploration work which the Conns—or your own staff—may pursue.73

As of 1962, the NPS had no plans to create new entrances to Jewel Cave because of the opposition

of the Region Two Office. 

1962 Formation Discoveries

While the NPS debated what to do about Jewel Cave, the Conns continued to find new rooms 

and formations inside the cave (see Figures 49 and 50). In June 1962, Lombard argued that recently 

discovered geological features, such as the frosted grotto, indicated that “there is [a] significant 

difference in geological features of this portion of Jewel Cave compared to the previously surveyed 

portions.”

74 That same day, Beatty, now the Region Two chief of natural history, acknowledged for 

the first time that the Conns’ recent discoveries might merit development: 

An extremely large room, believed to be only 40 feet from the surface, could easily be reached by a 

small vertical drill hole, which would permit the Conns to close their traverse and accurately locate the 

new find in relation to the existing dirt road down Lithograph Canyon. This find is under land 

controlled by the U.S. Forest Service which has been withdrawn from mineral exploration and 

development. Mr. Lombard believes that it would be possible to effect an exchange of lands with the 

Forest Service as some of our land has exceptionally good timber stands.75

72 Wind Cave Acting Superintendent Robert J. Murphy to Region Two Director, memorandum, April 25, 1962, 

General Files 1952–1963, File 3449zg, Jewel Cave NM MF.

73 Region Two Assistant Director George E. Baggley to Wind Cave Superintendent, memorandum, May 17, 1962, 

General Files 1952–1963, Box N-10, Folder N3023 Book #1 JECA June 1958–June 1964, Records of the National Park 

Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

74 Jess H. Lombard to Region Two Director, memorandum, June 20, 1962, General Files 1952–1963, Box N-10, 

Folder N3023 Book #1 JECA June 1958–June 1964, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), 

NARA KC.

75 Regional Chief, Division of Natural History, M. E. Beatty, to Assistant Region Two Director, memorandum, June 

20, 1962, General Files 1952–1963, Box N-10, Folder N3023 Book #1 JECA June 1958–June 1964, Records of the 

National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 129

This was the first time anyone in the NPS suggested drilling a vertical hole into a passage. The 

proposed land exchange with the Forest Service was not a new idea, however; Semingsen had first 

proposed such a swap in 1959.

Figure 49. The Conns and other cavers discovered new formations in Jewel Cave. Here, Jan Conn is holding frostwork. 

Photo by Dave Schnute, 1962.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

Figure 50. Herb Conn examines 

cave “bacon,” in photo by South 

Dakota Highway Department, ca. 

1963.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.
130 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

In 1962, the Conns—and other cavers who were friends of theirs—went on over 50 trips and 

surveyed over three miles of passageways, bringing the total mileage of known cave passageways to 

10.76 Members of the NSS, who were in Custer for the second-ever NSS convention, joined the 

Conns for some recreational expeditions in Jewel and Wind Cave.77

Among the discoveries in 1962 were wet rooms near Lithograph Canyon that included stalactites 

and flowstone, something that the NPS and Forest Service had previously assumed the cave lacked. 

Through the “Long-Winded Passage,” the Conns found many new passageways to the southeast and 

wind indicating many more passageways beyond. They also encountered formations they thought 

were unique to Jewel Cave. Herb Conn explained, 

One, named “scintillites” by Dwight Deal and Will White, consists of red helictites of silica covered 

with a sparkling layer of tiny quartz crystals. The other forms in silvery balloons or bubbles of a 

magnesium mineral, hydromagnesite.78

Deal believed that the newly discovered formations proved Jewel Cave’s value and merited 

development: 

I now think, for the first time, that there is defin[i]tely something worth developing for the public in 

the new sections of Jewel. The dripstone formations are as extensive and at least as scenic as any 

observed in any developed cave in the Black Hills. I feel that the displays in Jewel Cave are actually 

much more scenic than those in the other caves of the region. . . . The calcite crystals, however, are 

the final touch that make these rooms such exceptional sights. The combination of fairly sizeable cave 

passages, the coating of large calcite crystals, and the delicate dripstone formations result in both the 

scenic and scientifically most interesting cave passages in the United States. The caves in the Black 

Hills are already the most geologic[al]ly complex caves known in the country, and poss[i]bly in the 

world. Combine this with a scenic group of cave passages and the result is a cave which would be 

most ideally suited for the interpretive program of the National Park Service. I therefore encourage 

those considering the development of these new sections of Jewel Cave.79

Other experts lauded Jewel Cave’s unique geology, including John A. Stellmack and Alan D. 

Howard, a ranger-naturalist at Wind Cave who had bachelor’s degree in geology from Yale and 

master’s in geology from Harvard.80 Stellmack argued that the deposits of “stalactites, stalagmites, 

columns, flowstone, draperies and . . . many unusual helictites” on top of the dogtooth spar made it 

unique among Black Hills caves.81 In an August 1962 report, Howard highlighted the unique 

formations in Jewel Cave, including dripstone, “large passageways and immense rooms [that] exceed 

76 Herb and Jan Conn, Jewel Cave Exploration Trip Log, Special Use Permit JECA-1-62, Jan. 1, 1962 to Sept. 15, 

1962, 3–9, File 3449zd, Jewel Cave NM MF; No author, “Jewel Cave Surveys,” undated [ca. 1962], Cabinet 3, Drawer 3, 

Folder D18 JECA Master Plan, Jewel Cave NM CF.

77 Dwight Deal, “Jewel Cave Exploration late 1800s through 1962,” talk, Jewel Cave 200-mile Reunion, Custer, SD, 

June 29, 2019.

78 Herb and Jan Conn, Jewel Cave Exploration Summary Report, Special Use Permit JECA-1-62, Jan. 1, 1962 to 

Sept. 15, 1962, 1, File 3449zd, Jewel Cave NM MF. 

79 Dwight E. Deal to Jess H. Lombard, June 27, 1962, Files 1786c–1786d, Jewel Cave NM MF.

80 Acting Superintendent Robert J. Murphy to Midwest Region Director, memorandum, September 20, 1962, 1, 

General Files 1952–1963, Box N-10, Folder N3023 Book #1 JECA June 1958–June 1964, Records of the National Park 

Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

81 John A. Stellmack, Editor, NSS News, to Jess Lombard, September 10, 1962, File 1786j, Jewel Cave NM MF. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 131

in size most of those in Wind Cave,” pools, calcite coating, flowstone, “sandstone intrusions,” 

manganese deposits, popcorn, “balloonites,” “scintillites” (chert dissolved to form thin stringers like 

“a bowlful of spaghetti which has a red color and a drusy quartz coating which gives a dazzling 

sparkle to the formation”), stream gravels, and old water levels with corresponding horizontal bands 

of colors.82 Howard continued, 

I believe that development of the cave should follow a rather complete exploration of the cave in the 

area under consideration for development. Only then can the best routing for proposed trails be 

determined. . . . As an example of what happens when inadequate exploration and mapping precede 

trail development, I point to the almost complete absence of flowstone along the trails in Wind Cave, 

although there are many areas near the entrance and Garden of Eden which contain flowstone 

deposits. . . . The selection of route should be considered in conjunction with the selection of an 

entrance site. The best cave routes have little or no retracing of steps on the tour. People expect to be 

immediately hit with the best that the cave has to offer, so a route that begins in an area of flowstone, 

and similarly ends with a flowstone display would be the ideal.83

Howard recommended still making the cave trails “as primitive as possible,” with minimal grading, 

minimal electric lighting, and stairways of wood and iron rather than concrete.84 “Another 

possibility,” Howard offered, “is to make the first area opened a primitive or ‘rough’ development, 

and then if demand and load are sufficient, later add a separate loop which would be more highly 

developed, giving the visitor the choice of a hard or easy tour.”85

Figure 51. Discoveries made by the 

Conns and their caving partners 

included massive rooms, such as 

“King Kong’s Cage,” pictured here 

with Jan Conn in the foreground 

and two other cavers in the 

background (their headlamps are 

visible as white dots to the right of 

Jan’s knee). Photo by Dave 

Schnute, 1962. 

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

82 Alan D. Howard, “Personal Observations and Opinions Regarding the Proposed Commercial Development of 

New Parts of Jewel Cave,” August 5, 1962, 1–2, Cabinet 3, Drawer 3, Folder D18 JECA Master Plan, Jewel Cave NM 

CF.

83 Howard, “Personal Observations and Opinions Regarding the Proposed Commercial Development of New Parts 

of Jewel Cave,” August 5, 1962, 3. 

84 Howard, “Personal Observations and Opinions Regarding the Proposed Commercial Development of New Parts 

of Jewel Cave,” August 5, 1962, 3–4.

85 Howard, “Personal Observations and Opinions Regarding the Proposed Commercial Development of New Parts 

of Jewel Cave,” August 5, 1962, 4.
132 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Howard and two other rangers prepared colored slides of 

these new discoveries, showcasing images of “the new south 

‘wet’ section of Jewel Cave,” scintillites, and hydromagnesite 

bubbles, as well as more common geologic formations 

including manganese deposits, flowstones, cave pearls, chert 

layers, polished peppers, red cave earth, soda straws, 

boxwork, aragonite, water pools, rimstone, and geodes (see 

Figures 51 and 52).86

Around the time that Howard was preparing these slides

in 1962, the NPS changed the names of its regional offices. 

The Region Two Office in Omaha became the Midwest 

Regional Office. It continued to supervise South Dakota’s 

parks, including Jewel Cave.87 Once the slides were ready,

Lombard submitted them, along with maps, photographs, 

and mineral samples, to the Midwest Regional Office to make 

the case for opening newly discovered portions of the cave to 

the public.88

New Development Plans 

After seeing slides of the newly discovered formations, the Midwest Regional Office determined 

that the NPS should develop the section of Jewel Cave near Lithograph Canyon. Midwest Regional

Director Howard Baker concluded, “In view of the extent and variety of the discoveries noted in the 

above, there seems to be no doubt as to the national significance of the caverns connecting with 

Jewel Cave.”

89 Access to the new sections of the cave, he suggested, “could be developed through 

either a 110 foot sloping tunnel from Lithograph Canyon or a 200 foot vertical elevator shaft north 

of the Canyon.”90 The regional office proposed constructing an elevator building, a utility area, a 

new parking lot, new utilities, staff housing, and a day use picnic area on the surface, but no 

camping.91 After construction was completed, regional officials planned to “obliterate and restore 

[the] existing headquarters site.”92

86 Murphy to Midwest Region Director, memorandum, September 20, 1962, 2–3.

87 Ron Cockrell, Amidst Ancient Monument: The Administrative History of Mound City Group National Monument/Hopewell 

Culture National Historical Park Ohio (Omaha: Division of Cultural Resources, Midwest Support Office, NPS, DOI, 1999),

343; Howard Baker, “The Early Days,” Courier 34, no. 3 (March 1989): 20.

88 Murphy to Midwest Region Director, memorandum, September 20, 1962, 2–3.

89 Regional Director to Director, memorandum, undated [ca. 1962], 2.

90 Regional Director to Director, memorandum, undated [ca. 1962], 2.

91 Regional Director to Director, memorandum, undated [ca. 1962].

92 No author, “Jewel Cave Development,” undated, Cabinet 3, Drawer 3, Folder D18 JECA Master Plan, Jewel 

Cave NM CF.

Figure 52. Soda straws in Jewel Cave, ca. 

1963.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 133

The area recommended for development was within the Black Hills National Forest, which 

meant no progress could be made until the NPS came to an agreement with the Forest Service. 

Baker explained his proposal: 

A boundary revision shall be obtained which will exclude roughly seven-eighths of the present 

Monument area, while adding an approximately equal acreage to the east and south. A land exchange 

with the Black Hills National Forest is inherent to this proposal.93

Lombard drew a proposed boundary and a development scheme for the new visitor center. The new 

boundary would return lands to the west of the known cave, where no cave passageways had ever 

been found, to the Forest Service; exclude Highway 16 but allow for easy location of an access road 

from the highway to the proposed visitor center; include the historic entrance; and provide room for 

the visitor center, parking, housing, elevator, and utilities. The new boundary would also exclude the 

Jasper Cave entrance from Jewel Cave National Monument.94

NPS Assistant Director A. Clark Stratton approved Lombard’s proposed boundary in 1963 and 

approved “in principle . . . relocation of Monument headquarters, and opening to the public of 

newly explored sections of the cave.”95 Stratton suggested that an executive order might be the best 

way to accomplish the boundary revision, although he thought that permission to drill test holes for 

an elevator shaft could be achieved through a memorandum of understanding with the Forest 

Service.96

While the NPS discussed development, the Conns continued exploration under their special use 

permit.97 They reported to Lombard that they had discovered yet another unique formation, which 

they called “logomites” (see Figure 53). The Conns wrote,

The most fascinating discovery is that of the large hollow stalagmites which are described in the 

mimeographed pages attached. Not only are they hollow, a feature defying explanation, but they are 

composed of a coarse calcite “popcorn” unlike the compact banded material of normal stalagmites. 

“Popcorn” is generally a secondary deposit growing on the wall, and in this case—to all 

appearances—it has been deposited upon a vertical tube of empty air! . . . Information on the hollow 

stalagmites has been presented to a number of geologists and authorities on cave formations, but no 

one has yet produced a reasonable explanation of these unusual towers. We believe they are another 

formation unique in Jewel Cave. Not only are they spectacular and intriguing to contemplate, but they 

may lead to new concepts of the cave’s history and of cave processes in general.98 

93 Regional Director to Director, memorandum, undated [ca. 1962].

94 Jess H. Lombard, Superintendent, Wind Cave, to Midwest Regional Director, June 25, 1963, Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, 

Folder L1417 Boundary Adjustments, Jewel Cave NM CF.

95 A. Clark Stratton, Director, NPS, to Midwest Regional Director, November 6, 1963, Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, Folder 

L1417 Boundary Adjustments, Jewel Cave NM CF; Wallace B. Elms, Annual Report of Information and Interpretive 

Services—NPS (CN)-1, 1963, 1, Cabinet 1, Drawer 2, Folder 6.A.1 Annual Interpretive Reports 1960–1979, Jewel Cave 

NM CF. 

96 Stratton to Midwest Regional Director, November 6, 1963.

97 Elms, Annual Report of Information and Interpretive Services—NPS (CN)-1, 1963, 3; NPS, Special Use Permit 

JECA-1-63, expires December 31, 1963, General Files 1952–1963, Box N-10, Folder N3023 Book #1 JECA June 1958–

June 1964, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

98 Herb and Jan Conn, Jewel Cave Exploration Summary Report, Special Use Permits JECA-1-62, JECA-1-63, Sept. 

16, 1962 to March 31, 1963, 1–2, File 3449zb, Jewel Cave NM MF.
134 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Figure 53. Herb and Jan Conn discovered hollow stalagmites in the cave, which they called “logomites.” At left is a

photograph of one, ca. 1963, and on the right is Herb Conn’s drawing of them.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

Despite these additional discoveries, midway through 1963, Lombard and the Midwest Regional 

Office closed all access to remote areas of the cave, citing safety concerns. The only exception was 

permission for the Conns to continue surveying already-known areas. Lombard explained that safety

was more of a concern due to the extent of new discoveries: unexplored cave passageways were now 

so far from the cave entrance that it would be difficult to rescue injured cavers.99 For the rest of 

1963 and all of 1964 and 1965, the NPS did not permit further exploration in Jewel Cave. The only 

sanctioned trips into the cave during were “for the purpose of marking the principal cave routes 

with flagging tape, for photographing, and for other specifically authorized purposes.”100

99 Lombard, 1964 Superintendent’s Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument, 8; Regional Director to 

Director, memorandum, no date, 3; Elms to Wind Cave Superintendent, memorandum, February 4, 1965, 4, File 1661d, 

Jewel Cave NM MF. 

100 Herb and Jan Conn, Jewel Cave Exploration Summary Report, Special Use Permits JECA-1-63, JECA-1-65, 

April 1, 1963 to Dec. 31, 1963, 1, File 3449g, Jewel Cave NM MF.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 135

Figure 54. A cave tour in 1964. This image ran in Don Hipschman’s article on Jewel Cave and the Conns in South 

Dakota Highway Magazine in March 1964.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

In January 1964, the Conns used their limited access of the cave to take some photographs for 

Don Hipschman, director of the Division of Publicity of the South Dakota Department of 

Highways (see Figure 54).101 The Conns noted, “[Hipschman] wanted some shots of our activities—

the surveying, the nailing up of the marking tape, etc.—to go with the article he has written.”102

Hipschman’s article ran in South Dakota Highway Magazine in March 1964. Edwin Alberts, chief of 

the Midwest Division of Natural History, reviewed the article before Hipschman published it and 

recommended that “[t]he size of Jewel Cave should be played down” so that readers did not assume 

that the cave had large chambers like Carlsbad Caverns.103 However, Hipschman still discussed the 

extent of the cave, and the Conns’ recent discoveries: 

The Conns’ explorations, which began in 1959, have found four formations which are unique in the 

United States, and which may be unique in the world. In addition they have mapped 131⁄2 miles of 

new passages and have uncovered leads to others that will total hundreds of miles underground and 

may well be the largest cave on earth.104

101 US Travel Service, “Second Semi-Annual Report of the Secretary of Commerce on the United States Travel 

Service,” April 1962–September 1962, 32. 

102 Herb and Jan Conn to Wally Elms, January 23, 1964, File 1775f, Jewel Cave NM MF. 

103 Edwin C. Alberts to Assistant to the Regional Director, memorandum, December 11, 1963, 1, General Files 

1952–1963, Box N-10, Folder N3023 Book #1 JECA June 1958–June 1964, Records of the National Park Service 

Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

104 Don Hipschman, “South Dakota Couple Discovers . . . A New World Underground,” South Dakota Highway 

Magazine, March 22, 1964, clipping, General Files 1952–1963, Box N-10, Folder N3023 Book #1 JECA June 1958–June 

1964, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.
136 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Hipschman’s article included a photo of the hollow stalagmite the Conns had discovered, and he

mentioned the NPS decision to halt exploration of the cave.

105

Hipschman’s article brought national publicity to Jewel Cave, which resulted in increased 

visitation and greater interest from the South Dakota congressional delegation.106 Lombard 

expressed frustration to Acting Midwest Regional Director George Baggley that the Conns had 

talked to the press without going through him, especially because Hipschman had cast the NPS as 

an obstacle to the Conns’ continued exploration: 

The Conns have demonstrated a complete disregard for provisions of the Special Use Permit 

JECA_1-63, Condition No. 24, concerning publicity. We never have been given prior opportunity to 

edit the publicity they “leaked” to various sources. Herb and Jan Conn have indicated a strong 

possessiveness about Jewel Cave and a tendency to exclude the National Park Service. We believe they 

should be gradually phased out or else brought into line to do useful, specific, cave-survey jobs with 

adequate compensation. We do not believe that even with the new access tunnel that they should be 

allowed to explore, without limitation, all passages regardless of where they lead. We could have 

problems with the U.S. Forest Service, for one thing, if their explorations penetrated deep under the 

Forest lands and they got stuck or injured.

The Conns resist strongly and resent all efforts at control, but control of the cave exploration is what 

we must have. We note some of the Conn’s publicity invites other spelunkers to share the exploration 

of Jewel Cave. We are going to point out to them that they have absolutely no authority to issue any 

such invitations or to make any statement about policies at Jewel Cave.107

Unlike Lombard, Baggley recognized that the publicity the Conns generated through the article had 

triggered a surge of national support for Jewel Cave, which he surmised could be useful to the 

NPS.108 Baggley encouraged Lombard to work with the Conns and the press as important allies in 

the development of Jewel Cave: 

We can understand the interest the Conns have in the cave. The recent publicity which they have 

received tends to increase this interest. They have really made genuine contributions to our program. 

Under the circumstances, the “possessiveness” which you mention with respect to cave exploration is 

quite understandable. To a limited degree at least, it is an asset to our program. They are the prime 

authorities on the subject at the moment and it is our obligation to use their energy and “know how”

to advance our own program. Unless their attitude should become one of complete intransigence, we 

should not suggest that we do not consider them wholeheartedly as members of our team. . . . 

We have no doubt that much of our “image” in South Dakota will depend on how successfully we 

handle this sudden burgeoning of interest in Jewel Cave after so many years of almost complete 

neglect of its potential.109

105 Hipschman, “South Dakota Couple Discovers . . . A New World Underground.”

106 Lombard, 1964 Superintendent’s Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument, 1.

107 Superintendent Jess H. Lombard to Midwest Regional Director, memorandum, April 7, 1964, 1–2, General Files 

1952–1963, Box N-10, Folder N3023 Book #1 JECA June 1958–June 1964, Records of the National Park Service 

Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC. 

108 Lombard, 1964 Superintendent’s Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument, 7.

109 Acting Regional Director George F. Baggley to Wind Cave Superintendent, memorandum, June 10, 1964, 1–2, 

File 3449p, Jewel Cave NM MF.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 137

After hearing of the Jewel Cave discoveries, US Senators George McGovern (D-SD) and Karl E. 

Mundt (R-SD) began corresponding directly with the NPS officials in the Midwest Regional Office

and the Conns as they considered introducing legislation for a land exchange between the NPS and 

the Forest Service.110 McGovern advocated strongly and vocally for Jewel Cave, calling South 

Dakota’s cave systems “the world’s largest and most awe-inspiring caverns.” He drew attention to 

the size of Jewel Cave’s unique speleogical formations to justify protecting the cave and authorizing

funds for development.111 Mundt requested specimens of the recently discovered formations from 

Jewel Cave for his office, so that he could show colleagues and visitors why Jewel Cave was so 

unique.112 To fulfill Mundt’s request, Lombard sent to NPS Director George Hartzog “ten 

specimens from the proposed tour route”: hollow stalagmite, scintillites, calcite crystals, dripstone, 

flowstone rings, bacon rind, “chiclet” (or “cave pearl”), and popcorn. Lombard assured Hartzog that 

“[a]ll specimens removed from the cave were found lying loose upon the floor. NONE were broken 

from walls or ceiling.”113

McGovern introduced a bill on April 17, 1964, to effect a land exchange between the Forest 

Service and the NPS.114 McGovern’s bill provided for the NPS to reclassify Jewel Cave as a national 

park, but NPS leadership opposed a redesignation.115 The NPS assistant director explained why: 

Generally, national parks are spacious land areas essentially of primitive or wilderness character which 

contain scenery and natural wonders outstanding in quality, whereas national monuments are 

significant landmarks, structures, objects or areas of scientific or prehistoric interest. Accordingly, the 

designation of this area—comprising about 1,280 acres—would be most appropriate as a national 

monument to denote the types of values known to be represented here. Due to its remoteness and the 

difficult access to the newly discovered portion of the cave, we are unable to fully appraise the values 

associated with this section until an entrance tunnel is developed. We therefore, recommend the

enactment of the enclosed substitute bill which would retain National Monument designation for 

Jewel Cave.

The assistant director agreed with the land exchange provision in McGovern’s bill.116

110 George F. Baggley, notes from long distance telephone call with Assistant Director Baker, April 21, 1964, Box 

N-10, Folder N3023 Book #1 JECA June 1958–June 1964, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest 

Region), NARA KC.

111 110 Cong. Rec. 5076 (March 12, 1964). 

112 Robert H. Rose, Research Geologist, Natural History Studies, to Wind Cave Superintendent, memorandum, 

February 24, 1964, General Files 1952–1963, Box N-10, Folder N3023 Book #1 JECA June 1958–June 1964, Records 

of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

113 Superintendent Jess H. Lombard to NPS Director, March 4, 1964, Files 1784g–1784i, Jewel Cave NM MF. 

114 110 Cong. Rec. 8236 (April 17, 1964).

115 Max N. Edwards, Assistant to the Secretary of the Interior and Legislative Counsel, to Hon. Kermit Gordon, 

Director, Bureau of the Budget, April 13, 1964, Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, Folder L1417 Boundary Adjustments, Jewel Cave 

NM CF; 26 Fed. Reg. 4074 (May 11, 1961).

116 Assistant Director, NPS, to Legislative Counsel, Office of the Solicitor, undated [April 1964?], Cabinet 3, Drawer 

4, Folder L1417 Boundary Adjustments, Jewel Cave NM CF. 
138 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Determining the Cave’s Surface Footprint 

Engineers and designers could not make plans for new visitor facilities until they knew exactly 

where the newly discovered underground rooms were located in relation to the surface.117 Lombard 

had asked many experts for assistance, including the USGS Branch of Crustal Studies, but no one 

knew exactly how to correlate underground and aboveground surveys.118 Herb Conn reached out to 

James C. Maxwell of the University of Missouri School of Mines about electromagnetic cave 

surveying equipment, and Maxwell suggested using radiolocation.119 Maxwell did not own such 

equipment himself, so he referred the NPS to Earl C. Biffle of Fenton, Missouri, who had 

developed equipment with Father Paul Wightman of St. Henry’s Seminary in Belleville, Illinois.120

Elms invited Father Wightman and Biffle to Jewel Cave to operate the radiolocation equipment 

that they had used at other caves. Herb Conn drew a diagram of where they should radiolocate 

based on the estimated location of the large underground passage that they called the “Target 

Room” (see Figure 55).121 On March 31, 1964, Wightman and Biffle started the radiolocating 

process, with Biffle, the Conns, and Park Ranger J. F. Devenport underground, and Wightman, 

Elms, Lombard, and Midwest Regional Electrical Engineer John Eubank aboveground (see Figure 

56). Elms described how the process worked: 

A two-kilocycle transmitter feeding a 19-inch loop—laid exactly horizontal—was placed in the caves 

at the desired locations; and a receiver operated with a loop on the surface picked up the signal and 

determined the location by rotating the loop through a null position (position of no reception). A 

depth triangulation was made by the same method.122

Within four hours, they located the spot to drill a test hole and marked it aboveground for the 

driller. The NPS paid Wightman and Biffle for their travel and fees associated with the survey.

Lombard, Elms, and Eubank were pleased with the survey results and recommended proceeding 

with drilling the test hole into the Target Room.123 The WODC recommended a magnetic 

117 Regional Director to Director, memorandum, no date, 4.

118 Luther T. Peterson Jr., Acting Regional Chief of Operations and Maintenance, to Acting Regional Engineer, 

Topographic Division, Geological Survey, Denver, Colorado, memorandum, March 9, 1964; Acting Regional Engineer 

Thomas V. Cummins to Luther T. Peterson Jr., NPS, Omaha, memorandum, March 5, 1964; and L. C. Pakiser, Chief, 

Branch of Crustal Studies, to Superintendent Jess H. Lombard, March 31, 1964, all in General Files 1952–1963, Box N10, Folder N3023 Book #1 JECA June 1958–June 1964, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest 

Region), NARA KC.

119 H. and J. Conn to Elms, January 23, 1964, File 1775f, Jewel Cave NM MF; James C. Maxwell to Wallace B. 

Elms, March 4, 1964, File 3449x, Jewel Cave NM MF; James C. Maxwell to Jess Lombard, March 5, 1964, File 3449w, 

Jewel Cave NM MF.

120 Jess H. Lombard to Chief, WODC, March 12, 1964, memorandum, File 1785k, Jewel Cave NM MF; James C. 

Maxwell to Jess Lombard, March 5, 1964, File 3449w, Jewel Cave NM MF.

121 Paul Wightman, interview by Jackie Gonzales, June 30, 2019, Custer, SD; Management Assistant Wallace B. 

Elms to Wind Cave Superintendent, memorandum, April 6, 1964, 1–2, Files 1785o–1785p, Jewel Cave NM MF; Herb 

Conn, Drawing of Target Room and Drill Point, March 13, 1964, File 1659, Jewel Cave NM MF.

122 Elms to Wind Cave Superintendent, memorandum, April 6, 1964, 1–2, Files 1785o–1785p, Jewel Cave NM MF.

123 Elms to Wind Cave Superintendent, memorandum, April 6, 1964, 2, File 1785p, Jewel Cave NM MF; Jess H. 

Lombard to Midwest Regional Director, memorandum, April 3, 1964; and Superintendent Jess H. Lombard to Herb and 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 139

directional survey to calculate depth, which Schlumberger Well Surveying Corporation of Newcastle 

completed after the radiolocation survey.124

Figure 55. Herb 

Conn’s drawing of 

where to drill a hole to 

hit the Target Room, 

1964.

Source: NPS, Jewel 

Cave NM.

Figure 56. Radiolocating the underground cave from the aboveground surface. Father Paul Wightman uses the 

equipment aboveground, while others wait belowground, 1964.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

Jan Conn, April 7, 1964, both in General Files 1952–1963, Box N-10, Folder N3023 Book #1 JECA June 1958–June 

1964, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

124 Jewel Cave NM Management Assistant Wallace B. Elms to Superintendent, Wind Cave and Jewel Cave, 

memorandum, June 29, 1964, File 3449n, Jewel Cave NM MF.
140 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Herb Conn proposed to do barometric studies before a test hole was drilled into the Target 

Room, in case the hole changed the cave’s “breathing.” Based on his observations and Stan Arlton’s 

earlier research, Conn believed it would be possible to calculate the volume of the cave by measuring 

the barometric pressure and the velocity, duration, and direction of the air flow within the cave. To 

complete this, he secured permission from Senator McGovern to borrow a barograph from the 

Forest Service in Washington.

125 They went to McGovern because Lombard had hesitated to offer 

assistance: he agreed that air flow studies were important but thought that NPS employees, not the 

Conns, should perform the work.

126 Lombard was particularly concerned of the intent behind the

measurement efforts: 

While we agree with the Conns on the desirability of gathering this information when there is only the 

one known opening into Jewel Cave, we do not believe they should be allowed to “interpret” the 

results just to substantiate exaggerated claims concerning the size of Jewel Cave.127

Dr. Wilfred D. Logan, Midwest Regional Chief of Archeological Research (and later the first chief of 

the Midwest Archeological Center [MWAC] in Lincoln, Nebraska) told Acting Midwest Regional 

Director Baggley that he did not think calculating the cubic feet volume of the cave would be very 

useful, since it would not necessarily help with interpretation (he called it “obscure knowledge”). But 

Logan acknowledged, 

On the other hand—Senator McGovern has introduced a $133,000 clause into the Interior 

Department’s appropriation bill for F.Y. 1965 providing for Visitor Center and related development 

at Jewel Cave connected with the discovery of the new sections of the Cave. Jess [Lombard] can

hardly lock the Cave up and keep the Conns out in view of their connection with Senator 

McGovern.128

Baggley agreed that the barometric wind study was “of minimal importance” and not “worthy of 

Service funding.”

129 In spite of Baggley and Lombard’s resistance—and likely as a result of the 

Conns’ connection with Senator McGovern—Herb Conn completed his proposed preliminary study 

of Jewel Cave airflow and air pressure before the test hole was drilled.130 NPS Acting Resource 

Studies Advisor Merrill J. Mattes was pleased with Herb’s study and considered his findings valuable 

contributions to the NPS as it developed management policies for the cave.131

125 H. and J. Conn to Elms, January 23, 1964, File 1775f, Jewel Cave NM MF; Herb Conn to Jess H. Lombard, 

April 2, 1964, General Files 1952–1963, Box N-10, Folder N3023 Book #1 JECA June 1958–June 1964, Records of the 

National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

126 Lombard to H. and J. Conn, April 7, 1964. 

127 Lombard to Midwest Regional Director, memorandum, April 7, 1964, 1–2. 

128 Wil Logan to Merrill J. Mattes, May 22, 1964, Box N-10, File N3023 Book #1 JECA June 1958–June 1964, 

Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

129 Acting Regional Director George F. Baggley to Wind Cave Superintendent, memorandum, June 10, 1964, 1, File

3449p, Jewel Cave NM MF.

130 Herb Conn, “Preliminary Report: Wind and Air Measurements, Entrance to Jewel Cave,” June 24, 1964, File 

1668, Jewel Cave NM MF. 

131 Acting Resource Studies Advisor Merrill J. Mattes to Wind Cave Superintendent, memorandum, December 3, 

1965, File 3449i, Jewel Cave NM MF.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 141

Next, the WODC prepared specifications for a contractor to drill a 200-foot, three-inchdiameter hole into the Target Room. The contract was open-ended so the contractor could drill 

additional holes if the first did not work.132 The NPS contracted with Clark Drilling Company of 

Custer to do the work.133 Herb and Jan Conn went into the cave after the hole was drilled in June 

1964, and Elms lowered a light into it to confirm that the survey hole had indeed penetrated the 

Target Room.134 The test hole survey was only seven feet and six inches off from the point 

radiolocated by Wightman and Biffle (see Figure 57).135

Figure 57. The test hole into the Target Room, 1964.

Source; NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

132 Jess H. Lombard to Chief, WODC, memorandum, February 7, 1964, General Files 1952–1963, Box N-10, 

Folder N3023 Book #1 JECA June 1958–June 1964, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), 

NARA KC; Jess H. Lombard to Chief, WODC, March 24, 1964, memorandum, File 1785n, Jewel Cave NM MF.

133 Jewel Cave NM Management Assistant Wallace B. Elms to Superintendent, Wind Cave and Jewel Cave, 

memorandum, June 29, 1964, File 3449n, Jewel Cave NM MF. 

134 “Electronic Survey of Jewel Cave Successful,” press release, June 17, 1964, 2, General Files 1952–1963, Box N10, Folder N3023 Book #1 JECA June 1958–June 1964, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest 

Region), NARA KC.

135 Jewel Cave NM Management Assistant Wallace B. Elms to Rev. Paul Wightman, July 1, 1965, File 3449k, Jewel 

Cave NM MF; G. F. B. to Mr. Baggley, memorandum of long-distance telephone call, June 17, 1964, General Files 

1952–1963, Box N-10, Folder N3023 Book #1 JECA June 1958–June 1964, Records of the National Park Service 

Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.
142 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Land Exchange with the Forest Service 

To proceed with development above the Target Room, which was under Forest Service land, the 

Midwest Regional Office cooperated with the Forest Service “for joint on-the-ground study of the 

Jewel Cave area with the objective of recommending boundary changes necessary to provide 

adequate service areas for Jewel Cave.” The NPS also worked with the Forest Service to protect 

underground natural resources outside of the monument boundary.

136 Forest Service and NPS 

officials met in Custer in June 1964 to discuss the possible land exchange and the legislation 

McGovern had introduced earlier that spring to change the boundary.137 They agreed that the best 

outcome would be to shift the boundaries of Jewel Cave east and south, while retaining 

approximately the same total acreage (around 1,280 acres). Part of the new western boundary would 

be the centerline of Highway 16, where it squiggled from north to south.

138

Officials from both agencies agreed that it would be helpful to include a provision—either in the 

legislation or in a cooperative agreement—that extended NPS jurisdiction to any naturally 

connecting underground portions of Jewel Cave that lay under Forest Service land.

139 NPS Director 

George B. Hartzog Jr. agreed that this arrangement would be useful and confirmed that McGovern’s 

bill would allow for the NPS to be given administrative jurisdiction over the subsurface features 

through agreements between the Forest Service and the NPS, if published in the Federal Register.

140

To justify the boundary exchange, the NPS prepared preliminary plans for the development that 

would occur on the surface above the Target Room. In September 1964, John A. Ronscavage of the 

WODC completed a General Development Narrative to guide development at the area of the park 

above the Target Room.141 Ronscavage explained, 

The portion of the existing Monument encompassing present Headquarters and the existing entrance 

to the cave will be retained as a control and access point to the new underground system, but will not 

be used by the visitor once the new entrance and facilities are developed. It may prove useful as an 

emergency exit in the new scheme.142

136 Baggley, notes from long distance telephone call with Baker, April 21, 1964.

137 Lombard, 1964 Superintendent’s Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument, 7.

138 Park Planner David L. Hieb to Regional Director, NPS, June 3, 1964, 1–3, Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, Folder L1417 

Boundary Adjustments, Jewel Cave NM CF; David L. Hieb, Acting Regional Chief, National Park System Studies, NPS, 

to Ted Schlapfer, Supervisor, Black Hills National Forest, June 9, 1964, Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, Folder L1417 Boundary 

Adjustments, Jewel Cave NM CF.

139 Hieb to Regional Director, NPS, June 3, 1964, 3. 

140 Jackson E. Price, Director, NPS, to Midwest Regional Director, July 6, 1964, Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, Folder L1417 

Boundary Adjustments, Jewel Cave NM CF. The language in McGovern’s draft was not included in the final bill. 

141 John A. Ronscavage, WODC, Jewel Cave National Monument General Development Plan, drawing, September 

1964, File 1735, Jewel Cave NM MF. Mike Wiles later noted, “This would not even remotely be feasible, which shows 

they did not understand the realities of the situation.” Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

142 NPS, John A. Ronscavage, Master Plan: Jewel Cave National Monument, General Development Narrative To 

Accompany Drawing No. Nm-JC-3113-H General Development, February 1964, revised October 1964, 2, Cabinet 3, 

Drawer 3, Folder D18 JECA Master Plan, Jewel Cave NM CF.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 143

The General Development Narrative called for completing the land exchange with the Forest 

Service to acquire the land above the Target Room, building a visitor center above the room, 

excavating an elevator shaft into the Target Room, developing a tour in the cave from the elevator, 

installing electric lights on the new tour, and retaining the old ranger cabin at the cave entrance.143

The following year, Ronscavage prepared a master plan for Jewel Cave development, which the NPS 

director and the Midwest regional director approved in 1965 (see Figure 58).144

Figure 58. John A. Ronscavage of the NPS Western Office of Design and Construction completed 

this color conceptual drawing, the first to show a proposed visitor center above the Target Room, 

in September 1964.

Source: NPS.

NPS officials were eager to break ground on the Jewel Cave visitor center. They signed a 

memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the Forest Service to move forward while Congress 

worked on legislation formalizing the exchange. The MOU stipulated that the NPS could withdraw 

lands around Jewel Cave National Monument from mineral entry. Within the proposed boundaries, 

the MOU allowed the NPS to close and rehabilitate the Hell Canyon road, assume fire protection 

responsibilities, and survey and mark the new boundary lines. The Forest Service would be allowed 

to develop Prairie Dog and Chokecherry Springs to provide water for livestock on ranches within 

143 Ronscavage, Master Plan: Jewel Cave National Monument, General Development Narrative To Accompany 

Drawing No. Nm-JC-3113-H General Development, February 1964, revised October 1964, 2–4.

144 Wallace B. Elms, Annual Report of Information and Interpretive Services—NPS (CN)-1, 1964, 2, Cabinet 1, 

Drawer 2, Folder 6.A.1 Annual Interpretive Reports 1960–1979, Jewel Cave NM CF; Lombard and Thompson, 1965 

Superintendent’s Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument, 7. 
144 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

the previous monument boundaries.145 The MOU was designed to be temporary and would 

terminate when Congress authorized the boundary changes. The agencies agreed to cooperate to 

secure passage of the legislation.146

South Dakota’s congressional delegation remained interested in Jewel Cave. In November 1964, 

assistants to Senator Mundt and US Representative Ellis Y. Berry (R-SD2) visited Jewel Cave.147

Early in 1965, McGovern introduced an updated bill in the Senate to change the Jewel Cave 

National Monument boundaries (S. 2812), and Representative Berry introduced a companion bill in 

the House of Representatives (H. R. 9417).148 The bills passed out of committee in September 

1965—McGovern’s chairmanship of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs facilitated quick 

action on the Senate side.149 The Senate committee’s report explained that the boundary exchange 

would allow the NPS

to permit the new area [at Jewel Cave] to be opened up and made accessible to visitors as a part of the 

national monument. At the same time, the relinquishment to Forest Service control of approximately 

the same acreage now within the national monument will relieve the National Park Service of 

responsibility for administering land which is of no great importance for its purposes. 

The long-range development plans of the National Park Service for the revised Jewel Cave National 

Monument include providing a 3⁄4-mile access road and parking area, elevators, an emergency exit 

tunnel, underground lighting, a visitors’ center, employees quarters, and related facilities. The total 

cost of these installations is estimated at about $1,646,000.

150

The committee speculated, based on NPS planning reports, that a new visitor center and related 

facilities would boost visitation from 55,000 to 220,000 annually. In a speech on the Senate floor, 

McGovern referenced Herb and Jan Conn’s contributions. He remarked, “I am convinced, Mr. 

President, that Jewel Cave is one day going to be one of the great national park units—an 

underground wonderland rivaling Yellowstone and the new Canyonlands National Park in Utah.”151

President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the act to revise the boundary of Jewel Cave National 

Monument on October 9, 1965 (see Appendix A). The final legislation cited the need to protect 

“significant caverns and other geological features beneath lands within the Black Hills National 

Forest adjacent to the national monument” and returned to the Black Hills National Forest equal 

acreage from the previous boundaries of the national monument.152 The new boundaries 

145 W. L. Lloyd, Forester, memorandum, March 18, 1965; and Memorandum of Understanding Between the United 

States Forest Department of Agriculture and the National Park Service Department of Interior, February 9, 1965, 1–4, 

both in Historical Documents of Jewel Cave National Monument binder, File Duplicates, Jewel Cave NM CF.

146 Memorandum of Understanding Between the United States Forest Department of Agriculture and the National 

Park Service Department of Interior, February 9, 1965, 5.

147 Lombard and Thompson, 1965 Superintendent’s Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument, 1.

148 111 Cong. Rec. 24885–24886 (September 23, 1965); 110 Cong. Rec. 5076 (March 12, 1964); H. Rept. 981, 89th

Cong, 1st Sess., September 13, 1965. 

149 111 Cong. Rec. 24723 (September 22, 1965); Select Legislative Summary for Jewel Cave National Monument, 

Undated [ca. 1990?], 2, Jewel Cave NM CF. 

150 111 Cong. Rec. 24886 (September 23, 1965).

151 111 Cong. Rec. 24886 (September 23, 1965).

152 Act of October 9, 1965, 79 Stat. 971 (P.L. 89-250). 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 145

corresponded with what was then the known area of Jewel Cave and excluded Jasper Cave. Since 

there had never been any real programming at Jasper Cave, NPS staff did not change park 

operations beyond removing the sign at the entrance referring to both Jewel Cave and Jasper 

Cave.

153 The MOU between the Forest Service and the NPS terminated in spring 1966, since it was 

superfluous after Congress enacted the boundary change.

154

Monument Operations 

Research 

Outside of surveying and 

exploring, research at Jewel Cave in 

the late 1950s centered on the cave’s 

bat populations.155 James Stokes of 

Wind Cave wrote “Behavior and 

Habits of Bats as observed in Jewel 

Cave National Monument” in 1959, 

based on his observations from that 

summer. Stokes found that some bats 

had a parasitic winged insect 

infestation and recommended further 

study on the matter.156 Stokes began a 

bat banding program later that year, 

which he continued into 1961, with 

bands and data cards provided by the 

US Fish and Wildlife Service.

157 Stokes 

estimated populations during the 

153 James B. Thompson, Annual Report of Information and Interpretive Services—NPS(CN)-1, Jewel Cave, 1965, 

1, Cabinet 1, Drawer 2, Folder 6.A.1 Annual Interpretive Reports 1960–1979, Jewel Cave NM CF.

154 Warren D. Hotchkiss, Superintendent, Wind Cave National Park, to Midwest Regional Director, April 19, 1966, 

Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, Folder L1417 Boundary Adjustments, Jewel Cave NM CF.

155 NPS, “Priority List—Research Program,” January 1, 1958, and NPS, “Priority List—Research Program,” January 

1, 1959, both in Records of Wind Cave National Park General File, Box 5, Folder N2621 Annual Research Reports, 

Records of the NPS Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

156 Stokes’ brief report is available in Jewel Cave Central Files. James T. Stokes, “Behavior and Habits of Bats as 

observed in Jewel Cave National Monument,” undated [Sept. 1959?], Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, Folder N1427 Bats Jewel 

Cave Pre-1980, Jewel Cave NM CF.

157 Reports on the number of bats banded by Stokes are available in annual ranger-in-charge reports from 1960 and 

1961. Miller, 1960 Ranger-in-Charge’s Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument, 4; Lombard, 1962 

Superintendent’s Annual Report, 10A8 for Jewel Cave National Monument, 3.

Acting Director of Bird and Mammal Laboratories, USFWS Branch of Wildlife Research Richard H. Manville to 

Acting Superintendent of Wind Cave and Jewel Cave J. Wesley Warner, December 9, 1959, Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, Folder 

N1427 Bats Jewel Cave Pre-1980, Jewel Cave NM CF.

Figure 59. Banding bats at Jewel Cave, 1962.

Source: Jewel Cave NM
146 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

winter hibernation at 3,500 to 4,000 bats (see Figure 59).158 Lombard discontinued the bat banding 

program in 1962, “since a survey disclosed over 65% of the banded individuals suffered from flesh 

damage due to the use of an improper sized band supplied by the Fish and Wildlife Service.”159

Lombard asked for larger bands to address the problem.160

In 1965, at the request of Wind Cave Park Naturalist John Tyers, assistant professor of Zoology 

at the University of Kansas, Knox Jones, brought students to Jewel Cave to band bats and to study 

swarming patterns (see Figures 60 and 61).161 Larry Brown and Jerry Kocer, researchers from the 

University of Wyoming, classified the bats in 1965 after Thompson sent them specimens.162 There 

was a brief hiatus in bat research until 1970, when Robert Martin of the South Dakota School of 

Mines Department of Biology assisted Jewel Cave in bat studies and banding.

163

Figure 60. Bats at Jewel Cave. Photo by Richard Hart, 

1958.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

Figure 61. A bat in Jewel Cave, with a hand for scale. Photo 

by Richard Hart, 1959.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

158 Acting Superintendent of Wind Cave and Jewel Cave J. Wesley Warner to John Aldrick, US Bureau of Sport 

Fisheries Department of Bird & Mammals Distribution, December 2, 1959, Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, Folder N1427 Bats 

Jewel Cave Pre-1980, Jewel Cave NM CF.

159 Lombard, 1963 Superintendent’s Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument, 6.

160 Superintendent Jess H. Lombard to Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife Department of Birds and Mammals 

Distribution, memorandum, September 17, 1963, Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, Folder N1427 Bats Jewel Cave Pre-1980, Jewel 

Cave NM CF.

161 John A. Tyers, Chief Park Naturalist, Wind Cave, to J. Knox Jones Jr., Assistant Professor, Zoology, University 

of Kansas, May 28, 1965, Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, Folder N1427 Bats Jewel Cave Pre-1980, Jewel Cave NM CF; 

Thompson, interview. 

162 Larry N. Brown, Assistant Professor and Curator of Mammals, to Jim Thompson, Management Assistant, Jewel 

Cave NM, November 19, 1965, Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, Folder N1427 Bats Jewel Cave Pre-1980, Jewel Cave NM CF.

163 Robert A. Martin to David Todd, Manager, Jewel Cave NM, July 20, 1970, Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, Folder N1427 

Bats Jewel Cave Pre-1980, Jewel Cave NM CF.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 147

Brochure

The NPS revised the Jewel Cave brochure in 1966 to reflect the larger size of the known cave, 

newly discovered features, and the 1965 boundary change.164 Over the next few years, only minor 

changes were made to the brochure, with the idea that it would be thoroughly revamped when the 

new visitor center opened.165 When the visitor center opened in summer 1972, the overhauled 

brochure included a new map and significant textual revisions.166 Unlike previous brochures, it did 

not call Jewel Cave “small.” Instead, large text read, “In the lovely hill country of western South 

Dakota, in a fragrant green setting of ponderosa pine, is a glittering underground world—Jewel 

Cave.” The brochure provided the information about the history of the park, climate, terrain, flora, 

fauna, cave genesis, cave formations (boxwork, globulites, frostwork, helictites, gypsum flowers, 

hydromagnesite bubbles), and the breathing of the cave.

167

Natural History Association

The Black Hills Natural History Association (BHNHA) continued to sell books and other 

merchandise at Jewel Cave, Wind Cave, Mount Rushmore, Badlands, and Devils Tower. As of 1958, 

Wind Cave Park Naturalist Richard Hart was the executive secretary. Sales at Jewel Cave were low 

due to inadequate display space: just $49.50 in 1959. Devils Tower and Mount Rushmore withdrew 

to form their own associations in 1958, and Badlands followed in 1959, leaving just Jewel Cave and 

Wind Cave in the BHNHA.

168

Regional Chief of Interpretation M. E. Beatty wanted the BHNHA to focus on books: 

Jewel Cave should be given attention as an outlet for pertinent material; most visitors would find their 

stay at this area enriched by availability of interpretive literature. Souvenir sales should not be engaged 

in, but good quality post cards or color slides might be considered. Soft drinks would not be 

164 James B. Thompson, Annual Report of Information and Interpretive Services—NPS(CN)-1, Jewel Cave, 1965, 

1, Cabinet 1, Drawer 2, Folder 6.A.1 Annual Interpretive Reports 1960–1979, Jewel Cave NM CF.

165 Gillespie, Annual Report of Information and Interpretive Services—NPS(OI)-2, Jewel Cave National 

Monument, 1967.

166 Dave Todd, Annual Budget Request, for Informational Printing (Free and Sales), Jewel Cave National 

Monument, February 24, 1971, Cabinet 1, Drawer 2, Folder 6.A.2 Annual Budget Requests Printing 10-81, Jewel Cave 

NM CF; Dave Todd, Annual Budget Request, for Informational Printing (Free and Sales), Jewel Cave National 

Monument, February 17, 1972, Cabinet 1, Drawer 2, Folder 6.A.2 Annual Budget Requests Printing 10-81, Jewel Cave 

NM CF.

167 Jewel Cave National Monument, informational brochure (US GPO, 1972), Files 712a–712e, Jewel Cave NM MF.

168 Richard T. Hart, Black Hills Natural History Association, Annual Report of the Executive Secretary, December 

31, 1958, 1; and Hart, Black Hills Natural History Association, Annual Report of the Executive Secretary, December 31, 

1959, both in General Files 1952–1963, Box A44, Folder A42 Black Hills Natural History Association, Records of the 

National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC; Semingsen and Lienau, 1959 Superintendents Annual 

Report for Jewel Cave National Monument South Dakota, 3; Semingsen to All Employees, Wind Cave National Park, 

Jewel Cave National Monument, memorandum, July 20, 1959, 2.
148 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

objectionable if the vending machine can be kept somewhat inconspicuous. This, of course, is for the 

Superintendent to decide.169

The BHNHA did not expand its book offerings, but it did begin selling soft drinks at Jewel Cave in 

1960, per Beatty’s recommendation. Proceeds from sales went to aid the parks, but Jewel Cave 

received little because of its still minimal sales. Hart recommended electing a non-NPS resident of 

Custer to the BHNHA board to “give Jewel Cave more representation on the Board.”170

In 1962, the organization proposed 

changing its name to the Wind Cave 

Natural History Association.171 The 

change occurred sometime between 

then and 1965. At Jewel Cave, the 

association continued to sell items at 

the ticket booth, which it wanted to 

expand to provide more display 

space.

172 The new content included The 

Geology of Jewel Cave, a booklet written by 

Management Assistant Jim Thompson 

and published by the Wind Cave 

Natural History Association.173 The 

association sold it at the Jewel Cave 

ticket booth starting in 1965 (see Figure 

62). Copies sold well enough that the 

association reprinted it in 1967, with a few revisions to reflect changes in the known extent of the 

cave. 174Thanks largely to the booklet (315 copies sold in 1968 alone), Wind Cave Natural History 

Association annual revenues for Jewel Cave increased, reaching $2,213.20 in 1968.175

169 Regional Office Comments on Annual Report, April 19, 1960, General Files 1952–1963, Box A44, Folder A42 

Black Hills Natural History Association, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

170 Richard T. Hart, Annual narrative report of the Black Hills Natural History Association, December 31, 1960, 1–

2, Box A44, Folder A42 Black Hills Natural History Association, Records of the National Park Service Region II

(Midwest Region), NARA KC.

171 Annual Narrative Report of the Black Hills Natural History Association, Wind Cave National Park, December 3, 

1962, Box A44, Folder A42 Black Hills Natural History Association, Records of the National Park Service Region II

(Midwest Region), NARA KC. 

172 Donald F. Gillespie, Annual Report of Information and Interpretive Services—NPS(CN)-2, Jewel Cave, 1966, 1, 

Cabinet 1, Drawer 2, Folder 6.A.1 Annual Interpretive Reports 1960–1979, Jewel Cave NM CF.

173 James B. Thompson, The Geology of Jewel Cave (Wind Cave Natural History Association, 1965), Files 714a–n, Jewel 

Cave NM MF. 

174 Hotchkiss, Jewel Cave National Monument Annual Narrative Report, 1967, 4; Gillespie, Annual Report of 

Information and Interpretive Services—NPS(OI)-2, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1967, 2.

175 Gillespie, Annual Report of Information and Interpretive Services—NPS(OI)-2, Jewel Cave National 

Monument, 1968, 1.

Figure 62. The ticket booth outside of the ranger station, erected in 

1963, with Wind Cave Natural History Association publications 

displayed for sale on the right-hand side, ca. 1965.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 149

Aboveground Natural Resources 

Jewel Cave staff continued to develop their understanding of the monument’s aboveground 

natural resources, although accomplishments in this area drew less attention than the breakthroughs 

belowground. Research project proposals submitted by NPS staff in 1959 included a study of the 

monument’s surface geological features, a botanical survey, and a survey of the local fauna. The 

proposals suggested partnering with a cooperating school or other federal bureaus for the latter two 

projects. However, all of the aboveground projects ranked below the need to further survey and 

map the cave and to study the cave “breathing” phenomenon.176

Superintendent Warren D. Hotchkiss, responding to a request from the regional director, 

prepared a land inventory for Jewel Cave in 1968. The regional director used the data to support 

funding requests for soil and moisture conservation. Hotchkiss reported that the monument 

contained 1,273.51 acres of land, 575 of which were classified as grazed and 1,110 as cut-over land. 

Soil and moisture conservation work had previously been completed on 7.5 acres, and a project was 

in progress on 3.5 acres of land.177 Other conservation work included adding topsoil to areas around 

the Ranger Station trampled by people visiting the park.178

Due to the small size of the monument and the fact that it was predominately covered in forest, 

livestock grazing was not an important management issue. The annual forestry report for 1963 noted 

that the lack of livestock or a large, stable deer population meant that “no grazing or browsing 

problems occur.”179 However, boundary changes in 1965 incorporated unfenced lands into the 

monument, increasing the likelihood of trespass by cattle grazing on the adjoining Harney National 

Forest. The following year, the acting superintendent reported that “[r]ecent boundary changes have 

permitted cattle unrestricted access to the monument” and “encroachment by cattle took place 

regularly.”180 Two miles of temporary fence built in 1967 kept cattle away from the headquarters 

area. But a proper boundary fencing program was needed.181

Insect pests at Jewel Cave and Wind Cave included the Black Hills pine beetle and the tent 

caterpillar. Acting Regional Chief Ernest Field suggested the use of DDT for control of the tent 

caterpillar, recommending a “25% emulsified concentrate mixed with water at the rate of two quarts 

176 US Department of Interior, National Park Service, “Priority List—Research Program, Jewel Cave National 

Monument,” January 1, 1959, Records of Wind Cave National Park General File, Box 5, Folder N2621 Annual Research 

Reports, Records of the NPS Region II, NARA KC.

177 Warren B. Hotchkiss, Superintendent, Wind Cave, to Regional Director, Midwest Region, “Memorandum: Soil 

and Moisture Conservation Needs Inventory, Jewel Cave,” October 14, 1968, Cabinet 2, Drawer 4, Folder D54, Jewel 

Cave NM CF.

178 Hotchkiss, Wind Cave Annual Narrative Report, 1967, 7.

179 Superintendent, Wind Cave to Midwest Regional Director, “Memorandum: Annual Forestry Report NPS(CR)-1, 

1963, Jewel Cave,” January 21, 1964, Cabinet 2, Drawer 2, Folder Y26 Reports, Jewel Cave NM CF.

180 Acting Wind Cave Superintendent Donald F. Gillespie to Midwest Regional Director, “Memorandum: Annual 

Forestry Report NPS(OR)-1, 1966, Jewel Cave,” February 7, 1967, Cabinet 2, Drawer 2, Folder Y26 Reports, Jewel Cave 

NM CF.

181 Wind Cave Superintendent Warren D. Hotchkiss to Midwest Regional Director, “Memorandum: Annual 

Forestry Report NPS(OR)-1, 1967, Jewel Cave,” February 8, 1968, Cabinet 2, Drawer 2, Folder Y26 Reports, Jewel Cave 

NM CF.
150 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

of concentrate to make 100 gallons of mix.”182 In 1959, $1,000 was allocated to Wind Cave and $150 

to Jewel Cave for insect control, mostly directed at the pine beetle. Field said that he would visit the

monument in the spring to help survey for infested trees.183

After conducting the annual beetle survey in 1958, the regional forester and the supervisory park 

ranger reported that “woodpeckers had eliminated the insect from almost every infested tree thus 

keeping the disease endemic.”184 Again in 1959, control of the beetles was “being accomplished by 

woodpeckers.” The superintendent reported that a “careful survey was made on two different 

occasions this year of the infested trees and all were found to be cleaned up by birds.”185 For the 

next few years, woodpeckers apparently continued to keep the insects in check. Then, in 1963, a 

partial survey by the Forest Service showed “insect infested trees of epidemic proportions.” The 

superintendent planned another survey and a goal of one hundred percent treatment of all infected 

trees. This entailed felling the infected trees and treating them with ethylene dibromide (EDB).186

The 1965 survey “turned up only two new infested trees,” which suggested that beetles had 

returned to an endemic level. However, tent caterpillars damaged vegetation at the monument’s 

headquarters and in the canyons that year. They were controlled by burning the vegetation.187 That 

same year, the superintendent sent out a memo prohibiting the use of DDT at Wind Cave and Jewel 

Cave for spraying tent caterpillars, calling for the disposal of any remaining stocks “just as soon as 

possible.”188

Jewel Cave cooperated with other federal and state agencies to meet its fire management needs. 

As of January 1, 1960, both Wind Cave and Jewel Cave were part of the Black Hills Cooperative Fire 

Control Agreement.189 The agreement established procedures and cost-sharing policies for 

cooperative fire-fighting on lands administered by the South Dakota Department of Game, Fish and 

Parks and several federal agencies (the NPS, Forest Service, and BLM). Initial action in fire 

suppression would be taken by whichever agency’s personnel could first arrive on the scene, 

182 Ernest K. Field to Superintendent, Wind Cave National Park, “Memorandum: Tent Caterpillar Control,” July 28, 

1959, Records of Wind Cave National Park General File, Box 6, Folder Y22 Forest Pests & Control, Records of the 

NPS Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

183 Ernest K. Field to Assistant Regional Director, “Orientation of Incoming Superintendent, Wind Cave,” 

November 23, 1959, General Files 1952–1963, Box A52, Folder A6435 WICA May 1956 to 1961, Records of the 

National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

184 Semingsen and Lienau, 1958 Superintendents Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument South Dakota, 

4.

185 Semingsen and Lienau, 1959 Superintendents Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument South Dakota, 

4; Semingsen and Lienau, 1958 Superintendents Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument South Dakota, 4.

186 Elms to Midwest Regional Director, “Memorandum: Annual Forestry Report, Jewel Cave, NPS(CR)-1, 1963,” 

January 21, 1964, 2.

187 Acting Wind Cave Superintendent John A. Tyers to Midwest Regional Director, “Annual Forestry Report, 

NPS(OR)-1, 1965, Jewel Cave,” February 14, 1966, Cabinet 2, Drawer 2, Folder Y26 Reports, Jewel Cave NM CF.

188 Warren D. Hotchkiss, to Wind Cave personnel and Jewel Cave Management Assistant, “Memorandum: Use of 

DDT Prohibited,” March 25, 1966, 2, Cabinet 2, Drawer 2, Folder Y26 Reports, Jewel Cave NM CF.

189 Howard W. Baker, Regional Director to Jess H. Lombard, December 23, 1959, 5, General Files 1952–1963, Box 

A52, Folder A6435 WICA May 1956 to 1961, Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA 

KC.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 151

“irrespective of administrative boundaries.” However, the agency responsible for the area in 

question should “relieve the cooperating agency as promptly as reasonably possible, including the 

release of manpower and equipment.” The specific “Protection Boundaries” assigned to each agency 

would be agreed upon at an annual fire planning conference and designated on a map as part of the 

agency’s fire plan.190 

Fire protection duties became more formalized at Jewel Cave in 1958 with the creation of a fire 

control aid position (GS-4). This seasonal employee was responsible for “clearing fire trails, 

maintaining a fire weather station and patrolling the area regularly to eliminate man-caused forest 

fire and secure early detection on lightning-caused forest fires.” The fire control aid maintained radio 

contact with Wind Cave and the Forest Service using the Black Hills radio network. In 1958, there 

were no fires on the monument, and in 1959, crews responded to two fires on adjacent lands.191 In 

what must have been a frightful few minutes in 1960, a small fire started near the entrance to Jewel 

Cave when a gas can ignited and rolled down the grassy slope. Luckily, the fire control aid and 

maintenance man were present, and “the fire was controlled in approximately eight minutes.”192

Lightning caused a fire in June 1961, but a Forest Service aircraft spotted it and a ground crew 

extinguished it, containing the fire to a single tree.193

Superintendent Lombard reported that there were insufficient funds in the forestry and fire 

control budget to employ a fire control aid in 1962, despite “many long periods of extremely high 

fire hazard in the vicinity.”194 Annual reports from 1963 to 1966 make no mention of fire control 

activities. In 1967, Management Assistant Donald Gillespie participated in a two-day Forest Service 

fire simulator training program in Hill City, South Dakota. While there were no fires at the 

monument that year, NPS personnel helped suppress some lightning-strike fires on Forest Service 

land, as part of the cooperative agreement with Black Hills National Forest.195 Beyond the 

specialized training available through the Forest Service, monument staff received “back up sessions 

on pumper operation and safe use of hand tools” and familiarized themselves with the fire attack 

plan.196

A 1972 MOU among the Black Hills National Forest, Devils Tower National Monument, 

Mount Rushmore National Memorial, Jewel Cave, and Wind Cave supplemented the earlier 

190 “Cooperative Forest Fire Protection Agreement Between State of South Dakota Department of Game, Fish and 

Parks and National Park Service and United States Forest Service and Department of Interior Bureau of Land 

Management,” 3, 7, Cabinet 2, Drawer 2, Folder Y1417 Wildland Fire Presuppression, Jewel Cave NM CF.

191 Semingsen and Lienau, 1958 Superintendents Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument South Dakota, 

2, 4; Semingsen and Lienau, 1959 Superintendents Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument South Dakota, 4.

192 Miller, 1960 Ranger-in-Charge’s Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument, 2.

193 Jess H. Lombard, “Memorandum: 1961 Supplement to Superintendent’s Annual Report (Period June 1 to June 

30) for Jewel Cave,” July 6, 1961, 4, files provided by Katie Atkins, Folder A2621 Narrative Reports: Annual, 

Superintendent’s Annual 1961, Jewel Cave NM CF.

194 Jess H. Lombard, 1962 Superintendent’s Annual Report, 10A8 for Jewel Cave National Monument, 2, files 

provided by Katie Atkins, Folder A2621 Narrative Reports: Annual, Superintendent’s Annual 1962, Jewel Cave NM CF.

195 Hotchkiss, Wind Cave Annual Narrative Report, 1967, 7.

196 Warren D. Hotchkiss to Regional Director, “Memorandum: Annual Forestry Report—NPS(OR)-1, Jewel Cave,” 

January 30, 1969, Cabinet 2, Drawer 2, Folder Y26 Reports, Jewel Cave NM CF.
152 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

cooperative fire control agreement. The MOU established specific dispatching procedures and areas 

of responsibility for Forest Service fire crews and a contract helicopter, including “all fires within the 

boundaries of Jewel Cave National Monument and Mount Rushmore National Memorial.” 

Meanwhile, Wind Cave and Jewel Cave personnel were required to respond to fires reported on 

national forest land within one mile of their boundaries.197

Law Enforcement and Safety 

Law enforcement issues at the monument were minor, mostly amounting to fence-cutting and 

cattle trespass or small acts of vandalism. Vandalism most often occurred in the winter, when there 

were no staff at the monument.198 In 1960, two steel bars were pulled out of the Jasper Cave gate 

during the winter off-season, and someone cut the boundary fencing open in the autumn. Ranger-inCharge Keith Miller reported that “year around protection will be available with the construction of 

two new residences during fiscal year 1962,” which would “eliminate many of the violations that 

occur.”199 Still, over the next year, the boundary fence was cut in several places, and Jasper Cave was 

broken into again.200 The first successful law enforcement action on the monument occurred in 1965 

when “a Custer, South Dakota resident was fined $25 for cutting and removing wood from the 

monument.”201

Construction of the New Visitor Center and Associated Development

Development plans for the new visitor center and new cave tour were based on the General 

Development Narrative and Master Plan that Ronscavage and the WODC completed in late 1964 

and early 1965 (see Figure 63).202 Wind Cave hosted a pre-construction conference in August 1965, 

to kick off the process. Attendees included Lombard, Wind Cave Administrative Assistant Carl 

Glass, Wind Cave Maintenance Supervisor Harold J. Chittum, Jewel Cave Management Assistant 

Jim Thompson, WODC Project Supervisor Hal Look, WODC Landscape Architect Vernon M. 

Anderson, and representatives from contractors Summit Construction Company and Howe 

Investments and Northwestern Engineering Company (HINEC), both of Rapid City.203

197 “Memorandum of Understanding Between the Black Hills National Forest and Devils Tower National 

Monument, Mount Rushmore National Memorial, Jewel Cave National Monument, and Wind Cave National Park,” 

Cabinet 2, Drawer 2, Folder Y1417 Wildland Fire Presuppression, Jewel Cave NM CF.

198 Semingsen and Lienau, 1959 Superintendents Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument South Dakota, 

5.

199 Miller, 1960 Ranger-in-Charge’s Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument, 5.

200 Lombard, 1962 Superintendent’s Annual Report, 10A8 for Jewel Cave National Monument, 2.

201 Warren D. Hotchkiss, Jewel Cave National Monument Annual Narrative Report, 1966, 3, files provided by Katie 

Atkins, Folder A26, Jewel Cave NM CF.

202 Ronscavage, Master Plan: Jewel Cave National Monument, General Development Narrative To Accompany 

Drawing No. Nm-JC-3113-H General Development, February 1964, revised October 1964, 2.

203 Jean Donnell, Minutes of Pre-Construction Conference, August 5, 1965, 1, Cabinet 2, Drawer 4, Folder D 22 

Contract No. 14-10-0232-1041, Jewel Cave NM CF.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 153

Figure 63. A schematic drawing of Jewel Cave as it would look after development, if one were south of the monument 

and looking north into Hell and Lithograph Canyons. Drawn by James B. Thompson, November 1965.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

Jewel Cave management assistants and Wind Cave superintendents kept local partners informed 

and involved during the construction process. In January 1966, Thompson and Warren D. 

Hotchkiss, the superintendent at Wind Cave who followed Lombard, together with the Forest 

Service and state highway commissioner, held a “round-robin discussion of development plans in 

the Custer area” at the request of the Custer Chamber of Commerce and the Highway 16 

Association.204 The Custer and Newcastle Chambers of Commerce agreed to erect roadside signs 

directing visitors to Jewel Cave.205 Management Assistant Donald Gillespie (who followed 

Thompson) gave talks at the Rapid City Rotary Club, Hot Springs Gem and Mineral Society, the 

Custer Chamber of Commerce, the Custer 4-H clubs, the Custer Sportsmen Association, and other 

local groups to keep them informed of developments going on at Jewel Cave.206 Gillespie also kept 

local landowners apprised of development “in an effort to ward off any misunderstandings 

204 Hotchkiss, Jewel Cave National Monument Annual Narrative Report, 1966, 1.

205 Gillespie, Annual Report of Information and Interpretive Services—NPS(CN)-2, Jewel Cave, 1966, 1.

206 Gillespie, Annual Report of Information and Interpretive Services—NPS(OI)-2, Jewel Cave National 

Monument, 1968, 2; Hotchkiss, Jewel Cave National Monument Annual Narrative Report, 1967, 1.
154 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

concerning cattle grazing and possible trespass.” He noted that the program had been successful and 

“cooperation has been very good.”207

Groundwork: Roads and Utilities 

One of the first changes to the 

new site was laying new roads and 

leveling land (see Figure 64). Brady 

Engineering Company of Spearfish, 

South Dakota, completed a 

topographical survey of the 40-acre 

development area and the planned 

access road from Highway 16, in 

order to ascertain the extent of 

leveling required before 

construction.208 In August 1965, 

Summit Construction Company 

began construction of “roads, 

parking areas, [and] residential and 

utility roads” for the new area.209

The WODC prepared all plans and 

specifications for the projects. 

Roads were constructed with “4" of 

base course and 2" of plant mix 

surfacing” and then sealed, chipped, and curbed with concrete (except for the entrance road and 

shoulders of the utility and residential roads).210 Following construction, the NPS added topsoil to 

and reseeded the disturbed areas.211 A year later, Summit Construction returned and built a retaining 

wall to mitigate slumping “on the newly completed Monument roadway between the office and 

residence area.”

212 The NPS coordinated with the South Dakota Department of Highways to add 

207 Hotchkiss, Jewel Cave National Monument Annual Narrative Report, 1967, 1.

208 Lombard and Thompson, 1965 Superintendent’s Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument, 7; WODC, 

Roads & Parking, Headquarters, Jewel Cave Nat’l Mon., S.D., January 1965, File 1740, Jewel Cave NM MF.

209 Hotchkiss, Jewel Cave National Monument Annual Narrative Report, 1966, 5.

210 Jewel Cave, Completion Report Narrative, Access Road: Headquarters Area, December 1, 1966, 1, 3, Jewel Cave 

NM CF; Jewel Cave, Completion Report Narrative, Residential and Utility Roads: Headquarters Area, December 16, 

1966, 3, Cabinet 2, Drawer 4, Folder D 22 Contract No. 14-10-0232-1043, Jewel Cave NM CF.

211 Harvey B. Reynolds, Assistant to the Regional Director, Development, to Regional Director, memorandum, 

December 8, 1966, 2, General Files 1952–1963, Box D135, Folder Book #10 July 1964–Jan 1967 WICA closed, Records 

of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC. 

212 Donald F. Gillepsie to Owen Emme, July 24, 1967, Cabinet 2, Drawer 4, Folder D 22 Contract No. 14-10-0232-

1043, Jewel Cave NM CF.

Figure 64. Grading for the entrance road to the new development area. 

Photo by John Tyers, 1965.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 155

new entry signs along Highway 16, but the NPS planned to replace signs internal to the monument 

after construction was completed.213

As part of the extension of utilities to the new area, the NPS issued the Black Hills Electric 

Cooperative, Inc., a permit to relocate existing electrical lines

with future underground primary voltage service to a pad-mounted or vault-type transformer for the 

Visitor Center, elevators, cave trails and aerial distribution to the Residential and Maintenance areas. A 

portion of the existing line is proposed to be retained to serve the picnic area comfort station with a 

short section of underground line at the parking area.214

For electrical service to the elevators, the Rural Electrification Administration agreed to provide a 

“three-phase, 7200/12500 volt wye power service... at no cost of extension to the Government.”215

The NPS prepared special use permits for Bison State Telephone Company to realign its line and to 

Northwestern Bell Telephone Company, which had a toll telephone line running through a portion 

of the monument that had previously been Forest Service land (see Figure 65).216 The new permits 

to these companies lasted until the mid- to late 1970s. After their expiration, renewal of these

permits languished for 40 years, although the park still allowed the companies to maintain their 

lines.

217

Figure 65. Power line construction 

near the location of the new visitor 

center, 1967.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

213 Gillespie, Annual Report of Information and Interpretive Services—NPS(CN)-2, Jewel Cave, 1966, 1.

214 NPS, John A. Ronscavage, Master Plan: Jewel Cave National Monument, General Development Narrative To 

Accompany Drawing No. NM-JC-3116 General Utilities, February 1965, 2.

215 Hotchkiss, Jewel Cave National Monument Annual Narrative Report, 1967, 6; Ronscavage, Master Plan: Jewel 

Cave National Monument, General Development Narrative To Accompany Drawing No. NM-JC-3116 General 

Utilities, February 1965, 2.

216 Hotchkiss, Jewel Cave National Monument Annual Narrative Report, 1966, 4.

217 “JECA,” in Management Inspection Data – Jewel Cave National Monument, April 15, 1969, File 1677zzi, Jewel 

Cave NM MF.
156 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

HINEC completed the new water system in 1966. It consisted of a new pump in the existing 

well and another in a pump house to push water to a 100,000-gallon reservoir, from which the water 

flowed by gravity through a distribution system to the new headquarters area (see Figure 66). 

HINEC experienced difficulty with digging trenches and with “cracking of the reservoir roof and 

water penetration of the reservoir walls,” but it was able to repair the roof and walls and complete 

the job.

218

Figure 66. 

Excavation for 

the 100,000-

gallon reservoir 

at Jewel Cave 

National 

Monument, 

1965.

Source: NPS, 

Jewel Cave NM.

Ronscavage planned for primary sewage treatment through the “extended aeration process,” 

secondary treatment by a small sewage lagoon, and then disposal via dry wash. He acknowledged the 

difficulties of sewage treatment in the hilly area: 

The extreme limitations of the site make it impossible to construct sewage lagoons large enough for 

primary treatment. Also it is necessary to prevent untreated wastes from entering the cave system. The 

proposed comfort station will have a septic tank and leach field disposal system.219

Thompson assisted with siting the sewage disposal system and minimizing its effect on the cave 

resource, such as “not putting the septic system on top of the cave” (although this happened 

anyways: passages beneath the sewer lagoons were discovered in 1969).220 In late 1966, HINEC

completed the new sewer system, which consisted of lines (six-inch vitrified clay pipe and six-inch 

cast iron pipe), trenches in which the lines were placed, a sealed lagoon “composed of two cells with 

a total surface area of approximately one acre,” and a four-strand covered wire fence around the 

lagoon. HINEC encountered minor difficulties grading the lagoon and digging trenches in rocky 

areas, but it overcame these problems by drilling and blasting ahead of the backhoe to fracture rocks 

(see Figure 67).221

218 Jewel Cave, Completion Report Narrative, Water System: Headquarters Area, December 23, 1966, 3, Cabinet 2, 

Drawer 4, Folder D 22 Contract No. 14-10-0232-1041, Jewel Cave NM CF.

219 Ronscavage, Master Plan: Jewel Cave National Monument, General Development Narrative To Accompany 

Drawing No. NM-JC-3116 General Utilities, February 1965, 2–3.

220 Thompson, interview; Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

221 Hotchkiss, Jewel Cave National Monument Annual Narrative Report, 1966, 5; Jewel Cave, Completion Report 

Narrative, Sewer System: Headquarters Area, December 27, 1966, 1–3, Cabinet 2, Drawer 4, Folder D 22 Contract No. 

14-10-0232-1041, Jewel Cave NM CF.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 157

Figure 67. The 

graded future site 

of the sewage 

lagoon, 1965.

Source: NPS, Jewel 

Cave NM.

Cave Tour and Elevator Shaft

Herb and Jan Conn worked on the cave tour route that would lie underneath the new surface 

developments. In February 1965, Thompson, Look, and Herb Conn went into the cave “to study 

the proposed new tour route trail location.” Thompson and Look agreed on the Conns’ proposed 

loop, with two amendments: 

1. The western entrance into the Chinese Torture Chamber [later called simply the “Torture 

Room”] was unsatisfactory due to safety and terrain reasons and an alternative was selected 

which makes entrance into this chamber further to the east.

2. The route from Rum Runners Road to the Formation Room, as mapped by the Conns, was 

found to be less scenic than a higher level route through the Mezzanine. Since two steep 

stairways would be required (one up and one down) however, both routes should be built so 

that a choice may be made on the basis of the makeup for the tour group. Mr. Look will at 

least survey the two possibilities. 

No satisfactory alternative to the route north of Spooky Hollow was found. This will require enlarging 

the passage for about 15 linear feet.222

Thompson noted that the tour route included many impressive formations, but it lacked examples 

of scintillites and logomites (the hollow stalagmites Hipschman had written about). Thompson 

recommended that the NPS display these features to the public in the future, while being especially 

careful about exposing fragile hydromagnesite bubbles to the public. Thompson asked designers and 

surveyors to keep in mind “the tour management trap that can result from a single loop tour,” in 

case they could think of a way to create additional interconnections.223 

222 Management Assistant James B. Thompson to Acting Superintendent, Wind Cave, memorandum, February 6, 

1965, 1, Cabinet 2, Drawer 4, Folder D52 Contracts, Jewel Cave NM CF. The Chinese Torture Chamber later became 

the “Torture Room,” and Rum Runners Road became “Rum Runner’s Lane” (a reference to Prohibition, because it 

connected a wet area of the cave with a dry one). The passage to be enlarged was the “low spot” of the route and was 

one of only two places excavated during construction. Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

223 Thompson to Acting Superintendent, Wind Cave, memorandum, February 6, 1965, 1–2.
158 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

With these suggestions, the Conns and Thompson ironed out the details of the route, and the

Conns finished marking it with plastic surveyor tape by the end of 1965 (see Figure 68).224 Gillespie 

worked with interpreters to determine what information guides should provide on a cave tour. 

Chuck McCurdy (likely a seasonal ranger at Jewel Cave) suggested that the new tour carry over many 

of the topics covered in the old tour: origins of the cave, cave cycles, speleothems, the cave 

environment, history of Jewel Cave exploration, and an introduction to limestone, cave hydrology, 

and cave breathing.225 As for tour group size, Gillespie noted, “It is difficult to say what the 

maximum size of tours will be. We would hope to contain them to 100 or fewer but during peak use 

it may well go over that figure.”226

With the route of the cave 

tour settled, the next step was 

to dig the elevator shaft, 

around which the visitor 

center would be built. The 

WODC hired Edward H. 

Oshier, a mining engineer at 

the South Dakota School of 

Mines, to complete a geology 

study that would determine 

where to locate the elevator 

shaft. Thompson, who had a 

degree in geology, helped 

Oshier with survey work.227

Rock data from the test hole 

drilling log informed Oshier’s 

study.228

In February 1965, Thompson called siting the elevator and access tunnel an “important problem 

which is holding up development.” Oshier had originally proposed driving an eight-by-ten-foot 

tunnel from Lithograph Canyon to a point south of the Target Room, to allow vehicle access to the 

cave and to intersect with the elevator shaft. Other proposals were to either use the same elevator 

shaft site and build a four-by-eight-foot walk-in tunnel from Lithograph Canyon (with no vehicular 

access), which would require steps, or to build an elevator shaft north of the Target Room that did 

224 Lombard and Thompson, 1965 Superintendent’s Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument, 8; 

Hotchkiss, Jewel Cave National Monument Annual Narrative Report, 1966, 8.

225 Charles H. McCurdy to George Robinson and Don Gillespie, memorandum, August 4, 1967, 1–2, Cabinet 2, 

Drawer 4, Folder 1965–81 SEND TO NARA 2011, Jewel Cave NM CF.

226 Management Assistant Donald F. Gillespie to Wind Cave Superintendent, memorandum, April 2, 1968, 1, 

Cabinet 2, Drawer 3, Folder D22 Construction, Jewel Cave NM CF.

227 Lombard and Thompson, 1965 Superintendent’s Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument, 7; 

Thompson, interview.

228 Driller’s Log of Well, April 24, 1964, Cabinet 2, Drawer 4, Folder D 22 Contract No. 14-10-7:971-3, Jewel Cave 

NM CF.

Figure 68. Cavers in the Formation Room, which Herb and Jan Conn included 

in their proposed tour route. Photo by Alan Howard, September 1962.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 159

not intersect with the tunnel, allowing for either type of tunnel since it would be structurally 

independent of the shaft.229 All proposals provided for elevator landings at two levels. Thompson 

explained his thinking: 

The more northerly elevator provides a slightly more desirable tour circulation pattern and better 

position for future tour expansion. On the surface it would be closer to the parking lot. The southern 

location could be connected directly with the access tunnel and might present some less risk to 

damaging the cave. On the surface it has a more esthetically pleasing location.

The larger longer tunnel would be more expensive but might decrease maintenance and construction 

costs because of vehicle access. The smaller tunnel would be much cheaper and would not risk 

changing air circulation patterns. . . . The importance of reaching a decision in this matter cannot be 

overemphasized. No further development can be undertaken until this problem is resolved. . . . The 

shaft must be excavated before the building is constructed. These development items are coming up 

in the 67 F.Y. program. Funding for the shaft and tunnel are available from F.Y. 65 and 66.230

Thompson supported a shaft north of the Target Room, because he thought drilling too close to or 

directly into the large room would cause structural problems.231

Oshier raised concerns about the accuracy of the existing surveys. He recommended, before 

proceeding with any drilling or underground development, that the Conns conduct additional 

Brunton surveys to check the accuracy of their previous surveys, and that they place permanent 

survey stations in the cave.232 Oshier then recommended

sinking a small 5’x8’ vertical shaft from the surface of Lithograph Canyon to connect with the cave 

opening at approximately Station ST-12. . . . The sole purpose of this shaft is to provide an entrance 

to the cave in the area of the development so that additional transit and level surveys may be made 

and that additional much needed exploration of the cave in the area to be developed can be 

performed expeditiously. Without these additional underground surveys and careful examination of 

vital areas of the Cave the driving of the adit and the elevator shaft work cannot be performed 

without undue risk involving critical areas of the Cave which should be preserved in their natural 

state.233

Oshier suggested contracting with local miners to drill the small shaft and then placing a ladder in it 

and a small shack above it. Only after this small shaft and further surveys had been completed, 

Oshier advised, should the adit and elevator shaft be constructed.234 He included specifications for 

the adit in his report and echoed Thompson’s concerns about the stability of the Target Room: 

It is my considered opinion that the placing of this shaft and adit in any area in close proximity to the 

Target Room could lead to disastrous consequences. It is my opinion that the Target Room is the 

result of the collapse of the limestone beds in an area criss-crossed by joints and possibly a major 

229 James B. Thompson to Wind Cave Acting Superintendent, February 5, 1965, 2, Cabinet 2, Drawer 4, Folder D52 

Contracts, Jewel Cave NM CF.

230 Thompson to Wind Cave Acting Superintendent, February 5, 1965, 3.

231 Thompson, interview. 

232 Edwin H. Oshier, “Report on Proposed Underground Development of Jewel Cave National Monument,” June 

17, 1965, 3, Cabinet 2, Drawer 4, Folder D52 Contracts, Jewel Cave NM CF. 

233 Oshier, “Report on Proposed Underground Development of Jewel Cave National Monument,” June 17, 1965, 2. 

234 The “adit” was the horizontal access tunnel—“adit” is a mining term meaning a horizontal passage through rock. 

Oshier, “Report on Proposed Underground Development of Jewel Cave National Monument,” June 17, 1965, 2–6. 
160 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

fault. Any attempt to work through this area either in raising or sinking the shaft or in driving the 

service adit could lead to grave difficulties and without doubt would materially increase the cost of the 

work. . . . [I]f we keep the proposed adit and shaft work a reasonable distance from all known 

passageways of the Cave we will have no difficulties. We must, however, have the needed survey 

information before we can make our final plans.235

Oshier recommended that “only experienced mining companies be requested to bid on this project.” 

The WODC drew up the specifications for drilling the test hole(s), access tunnel, and elevator 

shaft.236 In December 1965, the NPS approved the final drawing for the elevator shaft, which would 

include space for two elevators.237

Frontier Constructors, Inc., won the 

contract to drill an elevator shaft wide 

enough for two elevators (see Figures 69, 

70, 71, and 72).238 After drilling the first test 

core, Frontier consulted with Oshier, and 

the NPS determined the shaft hole should 

be moved 20 to 25 feet to the east. The 

change necessitated a longer shaft, because 

the relocated point was uphill from the 

original. It also required redesigning the 

visitor use tunnels belowground. In October 

1966, Frontier proceeded with excavation of 

the shaft until drillers hit fractured rock: 

they had expected to hit only solid 

limestone and then mount the elevator rails 

directly in the limestone walls, but they 

encountered hardly any solid limestone.239

After hitting the fractured rock, Frontier stopped excavation and explained, “it was unsafe to 

proceed with the work until the concrete lining could be installed to hold the rock in place. The 

material is badly fractured and is bedded at about 45°.”240

235 Oshier, “Report on Proposed Underground Development of Jewel Cave National Monument,” June 17, 1965, 7.

236 Oshier, “Report on Proposed Underground Development of Jewel Cave National Monument,” June 17, 1965, 7; 

WODC, NPS, Specifications for Construction of Shaft, Tunnels, and Subsurface Exploration, Jewel Cave National 

Monument, South Dakota, Project No. JC-S49, May 25, 1966, Cabinet 2, Drawer 4, Folder D 22 Contract No. 14-10-

7:971-3, Jewel Cave NM CF.

237 Hotchkiss, Jewel Cave National Monument Annual Narrative Report, 1966, 6; Ronscavage, Master Plan: Jewel 

Cave National Monument, General Development Narrative To Accompany Drawing No. NM-JC-3116 General 

Utilities, February 1965, 2.

238 Allen D. Huber, Acting Chief of Contract Administration and Construction, to Frontier Constructors, Inc., 

September 28, 1966, Cabinet 2, Drawer 3, Folder Elevator Shaft-JECA Frontier Constructors, Jewel Cave NM CF.

239 Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

240 P. E. Smith, Chief of Contract Administration and Construction, DCSSC, to Assistant Director, Design and 

Construction, memorandum, November 3, 1966, 2–3, Cabinet 2, Drawer 3, Folder Elevator Shaft-JECA Frontier 

Constructors, Jewel Cave NM CF. 

Figure 69. Earth-moving in preparation for construction of the 

elevator shaft, 1966.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 161

Oshier reexamined the cores to figure 

out how much lining would be needed and 

determined there was a “possibility of 

structural collapse of a fault located to the 

north of the proposed shaft. Therefore, it is 

not considered practical to move the shaft 

location to the north.” However, the NPS 

did not want to move the shaft south 

because visitors would have to walk farther 

from the already-completed parking area. 

Because so much work had already been 

done at the present location, the NPS 

decided to keep the shaft there, despite 

additional costs that might result from the 

fractured rock.241

Figure 71. Excavation of the elevator shaft. 

Photo by Don Gillespie, 1966.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

Figure 72. Inside the elevator shaft during construction, 

1967.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

241 Smith to Assistant Director, Design and Construction, memorandum, November 3, 1966, 2–3.

Figure 70. Elevator shaft excavation and the partially graded 

visitor center site, July 18, 1967.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.
162 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Because of the added costs, the 

NPS asked Congress for an additional 

$300,000 in March 1967 to complete 

the shaft and elevator. The “badly 

fractured rock,” Assistant Secretary of 

the Interior Stanley A. Cair explained, 

“will require complete concrete lining 

for the entire length of the [310-foot] 

shaft” (see Figure 73). Because this 

would delay construction, the NPS 

reprogrammed money designated for 

housing at Jewel Cave to the elevator 

shaft, as no new housing would be 

needed until the visitor center was 

completed.242 In May, the additional 

funding came through.

The final shaft was lined entirely

with concrete. Crews excavated a little 

at a time, stopped at regular intervals to 

install rebar and a temporary inner 

lining for each newly excavated section 

of shaft. They poured concrete and 

then removed the inner lining after the 

concrete had set. After finishing this 

process for one section of shaft, crews 

then excavated below the poured 

concrete and repeated the process, 

which meant the newest concrete 

butted up against the base of the 

previously poured concrete. This was 

difficult to do, and often left gaps 

through which water could leak. In 

places where crews hit cave passages 

before the Target Room, they built an 

outer wall with heavy timbers to 

contain the poured concrete.243

242 Stanley A. Cair to Rep. Julia B. Hansen Chair, Subcommittee on Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations, 

March 16, 1967, Cabinet 2, Drawer 3, Folder Elevator Shaft-JECA Frontier Constructors, Jewel Cave NM CF. 

243 These wooden timbers were never removed and have deteriorated in subsequent years. Wiles, comments on 

draft, April 7, 2020; Acting Chief of Contract Administration and Construction, and Contracting Officer, Walter Lord to 

Frontier Constructors, Inc., May 11, 1967, Cabinet 2, Drawer 3, Folder Elevator Shaft-JECA Frontier Constructors, 

Jewel Cave NM CF. 

Figure 73. When excavating the elevator shaft, Frontier hit fractured 

rock that required lining of the shaft in those zones, 1966.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 163

Geological issues continued to plague Frontier. In September 1967, drillers ran into a cavity “just 

below the level of the upper landing and Target Room connection. It leads down at a 45 degree 

angle northeast past the north wall of the shaft, where it looks down into deep fissures on both 

north and east sides.” It turned out that these were known cave passages, surveyed by Centennial 

Development Co. in September 1966 as part of the additional surveys Oshier had recommended, 

but Frontier had not realized where they were located in relation to the shaft. Frontier noted, “A 

large quantity of rock from the shaft has fallen through the new hole and has completed blocked the 

cave passage for 20 feet” between two Centennial stations, and it would require cleanup (see Figure 

74).

244

Figure 74. When drilling the elevator shaft, rock and muck fell into the cave and 

blocked a passageway. Drawn here by Herb Conn, August 31, 1967.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM. 

244 Herb Conn, “Report of Investigation of Elevator Shaft Area in Jewel Cave Sept. 1, 1967,” September 2, 1967, 

Cabinet 2, Drawer 3, Folder Elevator Shaft-JECA Frontier Constructors, Jewel Cave NM CF.
164 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

By July 1968, Frontier had completed the 389-linear-foot access tunnel (coated in gunite), one 

concrete portal, 480 square feet of approach road, and 96 square feet of storage area.245 Spoil from 

the shaft was used as fill for the parking at the proposed picnic area.246 In July 1969, Frontier 

completed the concrete-lined elevator shaft and emergency exit. Its contract did not include the 

addition of elevator machinery (see Figure 75).247

Figure 75. Construction of the access tunnel, pictured here at its entrance in Lithograph Canyon, ca. 1967.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

While drillers excavated the elevator shaft from above, the NPS began trail construction inside 

the cave. Minor construction and cave lighting planning began in 1966 but then stalled due to 

funding shortages caused by the elevator shaft drilling issues.248 Herb Conn, a trained electrical 

engineer, advised Gillespie on the lighting system (see Figure 76). The NPS completed drawings in 

February 1967, revised them, and ordered 2,000 feet of cable to wire the cave with electricity.249

245 Completion Narrative Report, Work Order No. 146-225107, Construct Access Tunnel, Headquarters Area, 9, 26, 

Cabinet 2, Drawer 3, Folder Shaft, Tunnels, & Subsurface Exploration, Jewel Cave NM CF; Hotchkiss, Jewel Cave 

National Monument Annual Narrative Report, 1967, 9.

246 Carl W. Alleman to Midwest Regional Director, memorandum, March 13, 1967, Cabinet 2, Drawer 3, Folder 

D3215 Campgrounds, Picnic Areas, Jewel Cave NM CF.

247 Mining Engineer George R. Kyler to Western District Manager, memorandum, July 24, 1969, Cabinet 2, Drawer 

3, Folder D22 Construction, Jewel Cave NM CF.

248 Completion Report Narrative, Day Labor Project, Work Order No. 146-211705, PCP-U-14, Construct Cave 

Lighting System for Jewel Cave, Headquarters Area, January 7, 1975, 1, Cabinet 2, Drawer 3, Folder Construct Cave 

Lighting System-JECA, Jewel Cave NM CF.

249 Management Assistant Donald F. Gillespie to Wind Cave Superintendent, memorandum, January 13, 1967, 

Cabinet 2, Drawer 3, Folder D22 Construction, Jewel Cave NM CF; Completion Report Narrative, Day Labor Project, 

Work Order No. 146-211705, PCP-U-14, Construct Cave Lighting System for Jewel Cave, Headquarters Area, January 7, 

1975, 1–2.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 165

Figure 76. Installing wiring along the new cave tour route.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

The NPS hired a crew of six to prepare the cave trail.250 They moved “blocks weighing five tons 

and more . . . to provide a walking surface.” Maintenance crews installed a shop in the access tunnel 

to provide easy access for trail and lighting development. By mid-summer, about two-thirds of the 

trail had been “roughed in” and was ready for a “base coarse application,” and temporary lighting 

was installed on the route.251 Later that summer, the NPS purchased aluminum stair treads and other 

materials needed for the trail, as determined by WODC engineers. Crews graded and leveled the 

tour assembly area in the Target Room, moving “large amounts of breakdown . . . to provide a large 

relatively flat area.” They also constructed a wooden emergency stairway on the back route of the 

Target Room, for maintenance purposes only.

252

250 Todd, Information and Interpretive Services, NPS(I)-2, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1969, 1; “Item 6,” in 

Management Inspection Data – Jewel Cave National Monument, April 15, 1969, File 1677i, Jewel Cave NM MF.

251 Completion Report Narrative, Day Labor Project, Work Order No. 146-211705, PCP-U-14, Construct Cave 

Lighting System for Jewel Cave, Headquarters Area, January 7, 1975, 1; Hotchkiss, Jewel Cave National Monument 

Annual Narrative Report, 1967, 9.

252 Completion Report Narrative, Day Labor Project, Work Order No. 146-211705, PCP-U-14, Construct Cave 

Lighting System for Jewel Cave, Headquarters Area, January 7, 1975, 2–3.
166 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

In early 1968, crews completed the trail 

surface and installed transformers to power the 

lights along the tour route (see Figures 77 and 

78).253 By late 1969, the aluminum stairways and 

the wiring for the cave lighting system were 

almost finished.254 Herb Conn sent 

recommendations for setting up lighting to best 

showcase the cave’s unique features to Keith 

Fellbaum (an engineer at Mount Rushmore who 

had assisted with the cave trail and lighting 

design), along with minor changes needed to 

complete the lighting system.255 In November 

1969, the cave telephone was installed, which

included buried cable and “5 moisture-proof 

telephone boxes.”

256

Maintenance crews noticed some rockfall 

when they paved the trail in summer 1969. It 

may have occurred before then, but rockfall on 

top of rubble was not easy to notice. The 

rockfall slowed after the early summer wet 

season, but it did not stop entirely.257 In July, 

mining engineers from the Bureau of Mines and 

the WODC inspected the cave trail 

developments. They found the stairway and 

lighting systems safe, but they noted that the roof of the Target Room was slacking—hence the 

rockfall—and was not safe for visitors. Mining Engineer George R. Kyler of the Bureau of Mines 

recommended Aero Spray 52 Binder, made by American Cyanamid Company, to seal the rock and 

prevent slacking.258 The US Army Corps of Engineers suggested using shotcrete instead of Aero 

Spray 52, because Aero Spray 52 “has no structural strength and probably would not work on a 

ceiling application.”259

253 Completion Report Narrative, Day Labor Project, Work Order No. 146-211705, PCP-U-14, Construct Cave 

Lighting System for Jewel Cave, Headquarters Area, January 7, 1975, 3.

254 Todd, Information and Interpretive Services, NPS(I)-2, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1969, 1.

255 Herb Conn to Keith Fellbaum, February 21, 1970, File 6347a, Jewel Cave NM MF. 

256 Jewel Cave NM, Work Order No. 146-211708, January 7, 1975, Cabinet 2, Drawer 3, Folder Work Order 146-

211708 – Cave Telephone, Jewel Cave NM CF.

257 Mount Rushmore NM Engineer Keith Fellbaum to Jim Dunning, Midwest Region, memorandum, December 31, 

1969, Cabinet 2, Drawer 3, Folder D22 Construction, Jewel Cave NM CF.

258 Mining Engineer George R. Kyler to Western District Manager, memorandum, July 24, 1969, Cabinet 2, Drawer 

3, Folder D22 Construction, Jewel Cave NM CF.

259 Midwest Region Civil Engineer George F. Lucko to Mount Rushmore NM Engineer Keith Fellbaum, 

memorandum, October 3, 1969, Cabinet 2, Drawer 3, Folder D22 Construction, Jewel Cave NM CF.

Figure 77. Laying asphalt for the new cave tour trail, ca. 

1968.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 167

The NPS asked Oshier to examine the 

rockfall and suggest another possible solution. 

Oshier thought that the rockfall might be “the 

result of humidity changes in the room and the 

scaling of a rather talcy area of the ceiling which 

exists immediately above the assembly area.”

The humidity changes had occurred as a result

of air entering the cave from the elevator shaft, 

which introduced a freeze/thaw cycle to this 

part of the cave for the first time, thus 

destabilizing the ceiling of the Target Room. 

Oshier recommended barring down (scaling) 

the talcy area and several large chunks near 

elevator shaft entrance, which was common 

practice in mines. After the scaling, he said, the 

NPS should monitor humidity and temperature, 

and if the rockfall continued, then the NPS 

could install bolted-down cyclone wire 

fencing.260

Jewel Cave and Wind Cave managers 

considered, in lieu of the expensive task of 

stabilizing the ceiling, rerouting the existing trail 

and possibly eliminating the Target Room 

entirely from the tour route.261 Fellbaum asked 

Fred Kaas to study alternative tour routes.262

Kaas advised that, even if the rockfall continued indefinitely, the tour route could remain the same 

with a few changes: 

The original concept of interpretation may be retained by the installation of a new platform, stair and 

short trail connection, all outside the hazardous area, but still utilizing the existing shaft and entrance 

to the Target Room.

Kaas thought that the platform provided a valuable congregating area and “increases the initial visual 

impact as well as offering a wider field of view.”263

In 1970, the rockfall continued, so the WODC decided to reroute the cave trail slightly to avoid 

hazardous areas and to construct a “shelter for the upper elevator lobby portal,” which the WODC 

260 Consulting Engineer Edwin H. Oshier to Keith Fellbaum, December 22, 1969, Cabinet 2, Drawer 3, Folder D22 

Construction, Jewel Cave NM CF; Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

261 Todd, Information and Interpretive Services, NPS(I)-2, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1969, 1.

262 Mount Rushmore NM Engineer Keith Fellbaum to Jim Dunning, Midwest Region, memorandum, December 31, 

1969, Cabinet 2, Drawer 3, Folder D22 Construction, Jewel Cave NM CF.

263 Fred Kaas, Wind Cave, to Jim Dunning, Chief Park Support, January 7, 1970, Cabinet 2, Drawer 3, Folder D22 

Construction, Jewel Cave NM CF.

Figure 78. Herb Conn and maintenance workers installing 

aluminum stair treads along the new cave tour route. 

Photo by Don Gillespie, 1968.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.
168 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

designed. Instead of using a recently leveled area as a gathering spot, planners determined that a 

platform in the Target Room would be a safer location (see Figure 79). Planners also ordered the 

construction of a wooden roof structure in the Target Room, at the point of entry from the elevator 

lobby, to deflect any ongoing rockfall. The WODC deemed these measures to be sufficient to make 

the Target Room safe for tour groups, even if occasional rockfall continued.264

Figure 79. A 1968 photo of the Target Room, 

with caption on back reading: “View of Target 

Rm. showing first 3 stairs locations - prior to 

construction of 2 & 3.” The upper landing in the 

photo is still used to access the elevator portal, 

but no stairs were ever built between the upper 

and lower landing. Instead, after issues with 

rockfall from the Target Room ceiling, the lower 

landing was camouflaged with large rock and 

abandoned. If the photo were taken in 2020, the

Target Room platform would fill the lower third 

of the image.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

Interpretation During Development

Visitation increased as news of Jewel Cave’s size spread. By April 1969, Jewel Cave ranked as the 

third-largest cave in the country, with 30 miles of mapped passages.265 In 1968, 35,049 people went 

on guided cave tours, nearly tripling the 1960 count of 11,262. The NPS anticipated an additional 

increase when the new visitor center opened.266 As in previous years, managers complained that they 

could not accommodate everyone who wanted to go on a cave tour, due to limited space in the cave 

and insufficient staffing.267 In 1964, Thompson noted, 

264 Dave Todd, Information and Interpretive Services, NPS(I)-2, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1970, 1, Cabinet 

1, Drawer 2, Folder 6.A.1 Annual Interpretive Reports 1960–1979, Jewel Cave NM CF.

265 Management Inspection Data – Jewel Cave National Monument, April 15, 1969, 1, File 1677b, Jewel Cave NM 

MF.

266 1961 Ranger-in-Charge’s Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument, 4; “Item 8,” in Management 

Inspection Data – Jewel Cave National Monument, April 15, 1969, File 1677zzg, Jewel Cave NM MF.

267 Lombard, 1964 Superintendent’s Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument, 3.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 169

In the past three years the visitor cave tour use has approximately doubled. Due to the confined 

nature of the developed portion of Jewel Cave, the tour situation has become extremely difficult from 

the standpoint of accommodation of the visitors, interpretation of the cave features, and safety.268

Thompson observed that the increase “has pushed 

Jewel Cave very close to the saturation point, due to 

the small capacity of the developed portion of the 

cave. Splitting of tours has provided some relief on 

the very large groups, but sufficient personnel are 

not available for consistently doing this.”269 The 

new tour route was badly needed. 

In 1966, with visitation increasing, the NPS 

awarded the A. C. Nelson Company a contract for 

construction of four mobile buildings: a temporary 

office and public contact station, a comfort station 

(toilets) trailer, and two mobile quarters for use 

during construction.270 The trailers were initially 

supposed to be at the west end of the new parking 

area, but due to complications with installing water 

and sewer lines, the contractors moved them “to 

the proposed maintenance area” on the eastern side 

of the new parking area.271

Jewel Cave staff continued to offer cave tours 

through what managers began to call “the historic 

portion of the cave” (see Figure 80) during 

construction of the new headquarters.272 They 

installed botanical signs for the cave entrance trail 

and gave tours to growing numbers of cave visitors. 

The remodeled ticket booth, first erected in 1963, 

had been expanded by 1969 into a “small structure 

that houses a combination ticket booth, 

information counter, concession stand, ranger station, etc., etc. . . . on the eastern rim of Hell 

Canyon.”

273 In addition to selling tickets, rangers displayed and sold Wind Cave Natural History 

268 Lombard and Thompson, 1965 Superintendent’s Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument, 5.

269 Jess H. Lombard and James B. Thompson, Supplement to the 1965 Annual Report for Jewel Cave National 

Monument, 1, files provided by Katie Atkins, Folder A26, Jewel Cave NM CF.

270 Hotchkiss, Jewel Cave National Monument Annual Narrative Report, 1966, 5, 8; Hotchkiss, Jewel Cave National 

Monument Annual Narrative Report, 1967, 8; DOI, NPS, Fact Sheet for Completion report: Jewel Cave National 

Monument, Offices Public Contact Station, and Two Mobile Quarters, November 10, 1966, Jewel Cave NM CF.

271 Lombard and Thompson, Supplement to the 1965 Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument, 2.

272 Gillespie, Annual Report of Information and Interpretive Services—NPS(CN)-2, Jewel Cave, 1966, 2.

273 Lombard, 1964 Superintendent’s Annual Report for Jewel Cave National Monument, 6; Todd, Information and 

Interpretive Services, NPS(I)-2, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1969, 3; Elms, Annual Report of Information and 

Figure 80. Tours continued from the Hell Canyon 

entrance to the cave during development of the new 

area. Pictured here, staircases on the old tour route, 

1963.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.
170 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Association publications at the booth (see Figure 81).

274 Some rangers roved in the parking area, a 

practice Gillespie called “very fruitful,” because it gave visitors “the opportunity for some individual 

attention in addition to helpful advice concerning clothing, pets, cameras, etc.”275 A loudspeaker, 

microphone, amplifier, and taped message announcing the tour were the only audiovisual materials 

at the site.276

Interpretive staff assessed existing 

signage around the monument. New 

signs would be installed at the new 

visitor center, but the NPS also 

removed “two signs that read 

‘Collection of Rock and Plant 

Specimens Prohibited’” to comply 

with Director Hartzog’s wishes to 

remove the word “prohibited” from 

NPS signage.277 Staff assessed 

potential sites for a surface foot trail 

to connect the historic area in Hell 

Canyon with the new visitor center.278

As of 1970, the trail had not yet been 

completed.279 Other interpretive 

planning remained on hold while 

monument staff waited for the 

Washington Office, Harpers Ferry 

Center (HFC), and regional staff to 

finish plans for the visitor center.280

In 1969, the NPS contemplated keeping the historic area closed for the summer season, due to 

budget and construction issues, but “last minute budgetary adjustments” allowed it to open.281 It 

Interpretive Services—NPS(CN)-1, 1963, 1; Gillespie, Annual Report of Information and Interpretive Services—

NPS(OI)-2, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1967; Gillespie, Annual Report of Information and Interpretive Services—

NPS(OI)-2, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1968, 2.

274 Gillespie, Annual Report of Information and Interpretive Services—NPS(OI)-2, Jewel Cave National 

Monument, 1967, 1, 3.

275 Gillespie, Annual Report of Information and Interpretive Services—NPS(OI)-2, Jewel Cave National 

Monument, 1967, 3.

276 Todd, Information and Interpretive Services, NPS(I)-2, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1970, 5.

277 Todd, Information and Interpretive Services, NPS(I)-2, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1970, 2.

278 Todd, Information and Interpretive Services, NPS(I)-2, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1969, 2.

279 Todd, Information and Interpretive Services, NPS(I)-2, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1970, 3.

280 Gillespie, Annual Report of Information and Interpretive Services—NPS(OI)-2, Jewel Cave National 

Monument, 1968, 1.

281 Todd, Information and Interpretive Services, NPS(I)-2, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1969, 1.

Figure 81. This ticket booth by the CCC ranger cabin was installed in 

1963. The soda machine and the water fountain in the foreground, in 

front of the cabin, were also installed in the 1960s.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 171

opened again for three months in 1970, and interpreters tried to tie in “environmental awareness 

and education” to existing cave tours. That summer, Management Assistant Dave Todd instituted a 

35-person maximum on cave tours. He found that smaller groups provided 

better protection of both visitors and resources, an environmentally oriented interpretive “story,” and 

a more leisurely, enjoyable tour for everyone. There were virtually no complaints from visitors in 

regard to the imposed limit on cave tours. On the contrary, we received many compliments for the 

unhurried, personalized park experience people enjoyed at Jewel Cave.282

In addition to the size limit, the NPS increased the tour fee from 50 cents to $1 per person—a 

change long recommended by Wind Cave superintendents. By and large, visitors did not complain 

about the fee increase.283 Todd considered offering “environmentally oriented ‘cave crawls’ for 

spelunkers” in both the old and new sections of the developed cave. Todd initially planned the cave 

crawls for groups of about 12 with 2 ranger guides.284

Museum Exhibits and the New Visitor Center 

As of 1960, the monument had two interpretive exhibits: one of cave formation specimens and 

another of fresh-cut wildflowers, insects, butterflies, and moths.285 A lack of administrative space 

resulted in the removal of the cave formation specimens to Wind Cave, where they were stored until 

the new visitor center was built.286 In July 1966, Jewel Cave, Wind Cave, and Midwest Regional 

Office staff drafted an updated interpretive prospectus to reflect the new development.287 Changes 

included adding bats to the museum exhibit, adding examples of delicate speleogical formations to 

the mineral exhibit, and developing a third exhibit to “deal with the cave exploration story, telling of 

the equipment, lighting, etc., with consideration given to utilizing the actual lighting equipment to 

softly illuminate the exhibit room.” They proposed activities for people waiting for tours, including a 

film, wayside exhibits, a patio at the visitor center, and some sort of food service.288 The Midwest

regional director approved the amended interpretive prospectus later in 1966, having stricken a 

suggestion from Thompson to blast a small hole along the nature trail as a demonstration of cave 

“breathing.” Hotchkiss opposed the idea, saying that it “smacks somewhat of gimmickery.”289

282 Todd, Information and Interpretive Services, NPS(I)-2, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1970, 4.

283 Todd, Information and Interpretive Services, NPS(I)-2, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1970, 1, 4.

284 Todd, Information and Interpretive Services, NPS(I)-2, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1970, 6.

285 Richard T. Hart, Annual Report of Information and Interpretive Services—10A2, 1, 1960, Cabinet 1, Drawer 2, 

Folder 6.A.1 Annual Interpretive Reports 1960–1979, Jewel Cave NM CF.

286 Elms, Annual Report of Information and Interpretive Services—NPS (CN)-1, 1963, 1. 

287 Acting Regional Director George Baggley to Wind Cave Superintendent, memorandum, March 22, 1966, Cabinet 

1, Drawer 3, Folder K1817 Interp Prospectus, Jewel Cave NM CF.

288 David D. Thompson Jr., MWR Chief of Interpretation and Visitor Services, to Associate Regional Director, 

memorandum, July 13, 1966, 1–2, Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, K1817 Interp Prospectus, Jewel Cave NM CF. 

289 Management Assistant James B. Thompson to Wind Cave Superintendent, August 4, 1966; Wind Cave 

Superintendent Warren Hotchkiss to Midwest Regional Director, memorandum, August 9, 1966; Acting Regional 

Director George E. Baggley to Wind Cave Superintendent, memorandum, August 19, 1966, all in Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, 

K1817 Interp Prospectus, Jewel Cave NM CF.
172 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Museum planning had been delayed for several years during the drawn-out elevator shaft digging 

process. In 1967, the NPS museum planning team picked up the exhibit planning process.290

Monument staff collected material for the future museum. The collection already included mineral 

specimens and bats, and staff now added caving equipment from Jan and Herb Conn that included 

patched pants, a leather seat guard, hard hats, a carbide lamp, a compass, Herb’s device to measure 

cave wind and barometric pressure changes, a caving notebook, worn shoes, and more, for an 

exhibit on exploration. The Conns’ pieces were significant because they were “the actual items used 

in exploring the cave.”291 In June 1970, Todd loaded “all but the most fragile and delicate of Jewel 

cave’s museum specimens” into a van at Wind Cave, where they had been stored, and sent them all 

to the HFC in West Virginia for the exhibit planners to use.292

The NPS held a meeting to review the Jewel Cave exhibit plans with regional interpretive staff, 

HFC staff, and Keith Trexler and Dave McLean of the Washington Office’s Division of Museums. 

They determined the exhibits would be installed in lobby area, since the size of the visitor center had 

been reduced due to cost considerations and “the Exhibit Room originally included in the plan has 

now been eliminated.” They acknowledged that having ticket sales and exhibits in the same room 

and could cause congestion issues. To remedy this, the exhibit planning team suggested moving 

ticket sales from the lobby to “a structure adjacent to the visitor center building, for use during peak 

periods of visitation.” All present agreed the ticket booth should be “a permanent facility included as 

an integral part of the building design.”

293

Housing and Maintenance Buildings 

Jewel Cave had a longstanding problem of inadequate staff housing. In 1961, Wind Cave 

Superintendent Lombard noted an “acute and urgent need” for two more housing trailers at Jewel 

Cave.294 Staff lived in temporary housing built in the 1940s, in the Transa-Hut erected in the 1950s, 

and in the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC)-built ranger cabin (see Figures 82 and 83).295 The NPS 

added three trailers at Jewel Cave in 1964, after which the management assistant and maintenance 

person lived at Jewel Cave year-round, but housing remained inadequate, especially for those with 

290 Gillespie, Annual Report of Information and Interpretive Services—NPS(OI)-2, Jewel Cave National 

Monument, 1967, 2.

291 Lester F. McClanahan to Superintendent, Wind Cave, December 11, 1969; and “Jewel Cave Exhibits,” both in 

Cabinet 2, Drawer 4, Folder D62 Museum and Exhibits, Jewel Cave NM CF.

292 Todd, Information and Interpretive Services, NPS(I)-2, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1970, 3.

293 Acting Midwest Regional Director to Chief, Design and Construction, SSC, memorandum, undated [Sept. 1967? 

68?], 1, Cabinet 2, Drawer 3, Folder D22 Construction, Jewel Cave NM CF; Gillespie, Annual Report of Information 

and Interpretive Services—NPS(OI)-2, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1968, 1; “Item 6,” in Management Inspection 

Data – Jewel Cave National Monument, April 15, 1969, File 1677i, Jewel Cave NM MF. 

294 Superintendent Jess E. Lombard to Region Two Director, memorandum, September 5, 1961, General Files 

1952–1963, Box F-7, Folder F7423 Book #1. Sept 1952–Jan 1962. WICA., Records of the National Park Service Region 

II (Midwest Region), NARA KC.

295 Thompson, interview. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 173

families.296 NPS management inspections in 1969 noted that the lack of permanent and seasonal 

housing at Jewel Cave “will result in serious recruitment and area protection problems especially 

when visitor services are expanded” when the visitor center opened.297 New housing was not 

included in the visitor center development because of budget cuts, despite the NPS calling it “an 

important part of the management scheme” at Jewel Cave.298

Figure 82. Housing at 

Jewel Cave near the 

Hell Canyon entrance, 

1967.

Source: NPS, Jewel 

Cave NM.

Figure 83. TransaHut at Jewel Cave, 

1963.

Source: NPS, Jewel 

Cave NM.

296 Statement for Management, Jewel Cave National Monument, March 1987, 17, Cabinet 1, Drawer 2, Folder D18 

Statements for Management, Jewel Cave NM CF; Hotchkiss, Jewel Cave National Monument Annual Narrative Report, 

1967, 2; Thompson, interview. 

297 “Item 4,” in Management Inspection Data – Jewel Cave National Monument, April 15, 1969, File 1677g, Jewel 

Cave NM MF.

298 “Item 6,” in Management Inspection Data – Jewel Cave National Monument, April 15, 1969, File 1677i, Jewel 

Cave NM MF.
174 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

New maintenance buildings went up conjunction with the visitor center development. In 1965, a 

metal wash house and a metal storage building were constructed (see Figure 84).299 The maintenance 

shop and storage area became “badly overcrowded” with the maintenance needs from the new 

development.300 In 1969, Strahan Construction Company built a new Shop and Utility building, 

which a Hot Springs contractor finished in 1971.301

Figure 84. Maintenance 

shed in Lithograph 

Canyon, ca. 1966.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave 

NM.

Visitor Center Construction and Opening

In October 1970, the NPS awarded the contract for the construction of the “long awaited new 

visitor center” to the Corner Construction Company of Rapid City. The contract for $553,480 

included building a visitor center with piers, completion of one elevator, site work, and installing 

underground power to the building.302 Corner Construction began work in November 1970 and 

completed the bulk of construction on the visitor center building during 1971 (see Figures 84, 85, 

and 86).303 The new building was designed in the Mission 66/Parkscape Development style that the 

299 Statement for Management, Jewel Cave National Monument, March 1987, 17.

300 Hotchkiss, Jewel Cave National Monument Annual Narrative Report, 1967, 6.

301 This building was the maintenance building as of 2020. Todd, Information and Interpretive Services, NPS(I)-2, 

Jewel Cave National Monument, 1969, 1; Todd, Information and Interpretive Services, NPS(I)-2, Jewel Cave National 

Monument, 1970, 1; Statement for Management, Jewel Cave National Monument, March 1987, 17.

302 Midwest Staff Meeting Minutes, October 20, 1970, Cabinet 2, Drawer 3, Folder D22 Construction, Jewel Cave 

NM CF.

303 Todd, Information and Interpretive Services, NPS(I)-2, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1970, 1.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 175

NPS used across the country during the 1960s and 1970s.304 The main entry door was directly ahead 

when approached from the parking lot stairway, and there was no dedicated space for the bookstore, 

although there were some display shelves to the right of the entryway.305 A delay occurred in 1971, 

when a cement truck driver backed into the restroom area, and the contractor had to complete 

necessary repairs (see Figure 87). Despite this setback, by the end of the 1971, the bulk of the main 

visitor center building had been erected.306

Figure 85. Drawings for the Jewel Cave Visitor Center, 1969.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

304 Sarah Allaback, Mission 66 Visitor Centers: The History of a Building Type (Washington, DC: Government Printing 

Office, 2000), https://www.nps.gov/parkhistory/online_books/allaback/vciii.htm. 

305 Al Hendricks, interview with Emily Greenwald, May 16, 2019, Ennis, MT; Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 

2020. 

306 Gail Evans-Hatch and Michael Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages: Jewel Cave National Monument Historic Resource Study

(Omaha: NPS Midwest Regional Office, 2006), 225.
176 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Figure 86. As shown here, the elevator was built first and then the visitor center was built around it, ca. 1970–1971.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM. 

Figure 87. Visitor center construction 

was delayed briefly when a cement 

truck backed into the restroom 

building in 1971.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

Although contractors had dug a shaft large enough for two elevators, only one elevator was 

installed due to funding constraints. Todd explained that the single elevator might limit visitation to 

the cave: 

Since installation of only one of two elevators has been authorized, visitor services may have to be 

curtailed during periods of heavy travel. The interpretive potential of the cave will be realized only 

with the addition of the second elevator. 307

307 Todd, Information and Interpretive Services, NPS(I)-2, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1970, 2.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 177

Nevertheless, the NPS deemed one elevator sufficient for the time being. Contractors spent the first 

several months of 1972 installing windows, doors, and utilities, and completing the walkways and 

benches around the visitor center.308

Figure 88. The Jewel Cave visitor center, built in the Mission 66/Parkscape style, opened to the public in 1972.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

The new Jewel Cave visitor center was officially dedicated on May 28, 1972 (see Figure 88). The 

NPS held a special event and ribbon-cutting to celebrate the opening of the new center. Dignitaries 

attended and spoke at the events, including US Representative James Abourezk (D-SD) and former 

US Representative Ellis Y. Berry (R-SD) (see Figure 89). NPS regional and national officials 

attended, as did Herb and Jan Conn. Tours began after the official opening, and the contractor 

continued to complete minor repairs and alterations into 1973.309

Figure 89. US 

Representative James 

Abourezk (D-SD) 

(center, with hands on 

scissors) and former US

Representative Ellis Y. 

Berry (R-SD) (left, with 

hand on scissors) 

cutting the ribbon to 

open the Jewel Cave 

visitor center, 1972.

Source: NPS, Jewel 

Cave NM.

308 Evans-Hatch and Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages, 226.

309 Evans-Hatch and Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages, 226; Lorraine Collings, “The Conns of Jewel Cave,” Empire 

Magazine (March 18, 1973): 26, in Conn File Interpretation Division Binder, Jewel Cave NM Visitor Center; Hendricks, 

interview.
178 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Conclusion 

Jewel Cave—both the cave and the NPS monument dedicated to protecting it—underwent a 

complete transformation between 1959 and 1972. In 1959, the NPS considered Jewel Cave a “small 

cave,” as the sign out front proclaimed. A representative crystal cave of the Black Hills, yes, but 

perhaps not a cave of such great extent or such unique features to meet the high standards required 

for inclusion in the National Park System. Herb and Jan Conn started exploring the cave in 

September 1959 (see Figure 90). Within six years, their exploration proved the cave was at least 10 

miles long, and Herb’s barometric wind study suggested that it extended much farther The Conns’ 

discoveries upended NPS plans for Jewel Cave, shifting them from offering “primitive,” Tom 

Sawyer-esque cave tours to building a full Mission 66 visitor center and elevator and tunnel access 

into the cave. The opening of the visitor center in 1972 ushered in a new era for Jewel Cave 

National Monument, during which the NPS agreed on the cave’s important value to the nation and 

the need to protect and preserve it. 

Figure 90. Herb and Jan Conn, 

pictured here in 1967 just inside the 

cave’s historic entrance in Hell 

Canyon, explored over 10 miles of 

Jewel Cave in the 1960s. Their 

discoveries convinced the NPS to 

develop a new cave entrance and 

visitor center, rather than delist the 

national monument.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 179

Chapter 5: Managing a Larger Cave (1972–

1989) 

After the new visitor center opened in 1972, the monument’s focus shifted from the Michauds’ 

cave entrance—now called the “historic entrance”—to the recently developed area. Staff began 

leading cave tours that began from the elevator, went through the Target Room, and then along the 

tour route that the Conns had laid out. Staff still gave tours at the historic entrance, in order to offer 

the primitive cave experience that the National Park Service (NPS) had seen as central to Jewel 

Cave’s appeal. Over the next two decades, visitation increased, as did the number of interpretive 

staff. Jewel Cave’s lead role changed from management assistant to unit manager, but the position 

remained under the supervision of the Wind Cave superintendent.

The Conns and their caving partners nearly doubled the known extent of the cave, from 41 

surveyed miles in 1972 to 81 in 1989.

1 With greater understanding of the tremendous belowground 

resource, the NPS hired the first dedicated cave specialist for Jewel Cave.

General Administration

Staffing and Budgets 

Jewel Cave had its own line item in the regional budget starting in the 1970s, but Wind Cave 

administrative staff continued to manage Jewel Cave’s budget and finances. The arrangement 

benefited Jewel Cave. If Wind Cave had surplus funds and Jewel Cave had outstanding needs, Wind 

Cave sometimes moved its funds to Jewel Cave projects.2 For instance, when Jewel Cave 

experienced a budget shortfall in 1983, Wind Cave reallocated $20,900 of its own funds to maintain 

minimum operations at Jewel Cave.

3

.

Dave Todd continued to hold the management assistant position in 1972, and he oversaw Jewel 

Cave’s day-to-day operations. Todd reported to Lester McClanahan, superintendent of Wind Cave 

and Jewel Cave, who had final responsibility for management decisions.4 At some point between 

1 Herb and Jan Conn, Jewel Cave Exploration, Special Use Permit 2-146-9, Summary Report, Jan. 1, 1972 to Dec. 

31, 1972, File 3449b, Jewel Cave National Monument Museum Files, Custer, SD (hereafter Jewel Cave NM MF); 

“Extend mapped Jewel Cave caverns past 75 mile mark,” Custer Chronicle, July 14, 1987, Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, K1817 

Interpretive Planning Jewel Cave National Monument Central Files, Custer, SD (hereafter Jewel Cave NM CF); 

Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1989, 6, files provided by Katie Atkins, Folder 1990 

Superintendent’s Report, Jewel Cave NM CF.

2 Dennis Ditmanson, interview by Jackie Gonzales, April 19, 2019, Santa Fe, NM. 

3 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Wind Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument, 1983, 1, files 

provided by Katie Atkins, Folder 1983 Superintendent’s Report, Jewel Cave NM CF.

4 Dave Todd, Annual Budget Request, for Informational Printing (Free and Sales), Jewel Cave National Monument, 

February 17, 1972, Cabinet 1, Drawer 2, Folder 6.A.2 Annual Budget Requests Printing 10-81, Jewel Cave NM CF.
180 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

1972 and 1974, Steve Hurd took over from Todd as management assistant, still under McClanahan 

(see Figure 91).5 A full-time maintenance employee and a GS-7 ranger who led the interpretive, 

resource management, and protection efforts (Larry Dilts) worked alongside Hurd.6

The NPS restructured its regions in 1974 

and established two new regional offices, one 

of which was the Rocky Mountain Regional 

Office in Denver, Colorado. This regional 

alignment lasted for the next 21 years.7 As part 

of the restructuring, the NPS transferred South 

Dakota’s parks from the Midwest Region to 

the Rocky Mountain Region.8 The change in 

oversight affected Jewel Cave primarily in the 

pool of parks it was now competing with: while 

the Midwest Region contained parks mostly of 

similar size and complexity, the Rocky 

Mountain Region managed several large, 

complex parks with high visibility (such as 

Rocky Mountain National Park and 

Yellowstone National Park).9

In 1976, Al Hendricks took over as 

management assistant at Jewel Cave, his first 

management role. Hendricks had the same 

permanent staff as Hurd, as well as a seasonal 

staff of over a dozen interpretive rangers and a 

secretary.10 The seasonal secretary performed 

everyday clerical work, but personnel and 

5 Management Assistant Stephen M. Hurd to Bruce Hopkins, March 11, 1974, Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, Folder K38 

NPS Publications; Jewel Cave NM; Management Assistant Stephen M. Hurd to Wind Cave National Park 

Superintendent, memorandum, October 10, 1975, Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, Folder K187 Interp Prospectus, Jewel Cave NM 

CF.

6 Larry Dilts, interview by Jackie Gonzales, April 17, 2019, Colby, KS. Note to reader: there are no superintendent’s 

annual reports for the 1970s, and we therefore have an incomplete picture of staffing levels during this period. This is

common to all parks for this period: Director George B. Hartzog Jr. (1964–1972), a former superintendent at Jefferson 

National Expansion Memorial (now Gateway Arch National Park) saw the superintendent’s annual report as an onerous 

task, and as director, instead called for briefing papers or summaries. The superintendent’s annual report practice was reinstated following Hartzog’s dismissal by President Nixon.

7 United States, Congress, Senate, Committee on Appropriations, Department of the Interior and Related Agencies 

Appropriations for Fiscal Year 1975, hearings (Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1974), 876. 

8 U.S. Congress, House, Department of the Interior and Related Agencies: Appropriations for 1975, Hearings, 94th

Cong. (Washington, DC: GPO, 1975), 131; James B. Thompson, interview by Jackie Gonzales, April 18, 2019, Estes 

Park, CO. 

9 Ron Cockrell, Midwest Regional Historian, NPS, to Emily Greenwald, April 7, 2020.

10 Al Hendricks, interview by Emily Greenwald, May 16, 2019, Ennis, MT. 

Figure 91. Steve Hurd became management assistant 

around 1973.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 181

budget files were all handled by the Wind Cave administrative officer, and the files resided at Wind 

Cave.11 Staff meetings were held at Wind Cave, and even the Jewel Cave mail arrived at Wind Cave.12

As the manager of a small unit, Hendricks’ duties ran the gamut, especially in the slow winter 

season. An entry in his daily log on February 8, 1979, provides a snapshot of his activities: 

Went to town for mail. Shovelled [sic] V.C. sidewalk. Bob took pictures of V.C. roof paint situation 

and I proposed memo and sent photos to Noby Ikeda at RMRO [Rocky Mountain Regional Office]. 

Received call from Naomi Hunt of the N.P.S. Courier. She requested pictures of Herb and Jan Conn 

to accompany the press release. I found four black & white negatives, prepared a memo and mailed 

them out by certified mail. Answered one info. request.13

Hendricks familiarized himself with maintenance operations with the help of seasonal maintenance 

worker Don Lytle, who had previously worked at Wind Cave and remained at Jewel Cave for many 

years.14 Dilts left in 1977, and Bob Appling replaced him as interpretive and resource management 

lead.15 In 1981, Hendricks left Jewel Cave for Lehman Caves, and Dennis Ditmanson became the 

management assistant (GS-9) (see Figure 92).16

McClanahan closely oversaw the Jewel Cave management assistant. He required the 

management assistant to obtain permission for anything other than routine daily operations, and 

only McClanahan communicated directly with the Rocky Mountain Regional Office. He thus 

continued the practice of centralizing Jewel Cave management at Wind Cave, but he did not visit 

Jewel Cave often.17 McClanahan made it clear that the Jewel Cave management assistant was his 

subordinate. Hendricks recalled how this sometimes caused issues for the management assistant, but 

Ditmanson remembered McClanahan as “uniformly supportive.”18 In 1983, McClanahan and 

Ditmanson partnered to host a Rocky Mountain Regional Superintendent’s Conference in Custer 

and gave the superintendents a tour of Jewel Cave.19

As it had been for Hendricks, Jewel Cave was Ditmanson’s first management role. He recalled 

how the collaborative relationship among Wind Cave, Mount Rushmore National Memorial, and 

Badlands National Monument benefitted Jewel Cave, as well as the other units: 

I think we were able to maybe heighten the perception of the park a little bit. Even though we were—

of that group, of Badlands and Mount Rushmore and Wind Cave and Jewel Cave—we were, by far, 

11 Al Hendricks, daily note log, August 31, 1977, from Hendricks’ personal files; Hendricks, interview. 

12 Al Hendricks, daily note log, February 17, 1979, from Hendricks’ personal files; Al Hendricks, daily note log, 

February 21, 1979, from Hendricks’ personal files.

13 Al Hendricks, daily note log, February 8, 1979, from Hendricks’ personal files.

14 Jewel Cave National Monument Objectives, 1979 FY, 2, Cabinet 3, Drawer 3, Folder A6419 Goals/Objectives 

Long Term Management Plans, Jewel Cave NM CF.

15 Hendricks, interview; Dilts, interview. 

16 Ditmanson, interview; Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1986, 1, files provided 

by Katie Atkins, Folder 1986 Superintendent’s Report, Jewel Cave NM CF.

17 Hendricks, interview. 

18 Ditmanson, interview. 

19 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Wind Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument, 1983, 13.
182 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

the junior partner. But we met regularly, informally, a lot, with the other four parks, we would get 

together for various things. And I think we were able to put Jewel Cave maybe on a little higher level 

as a true partner in that grouping. It taught me the value of cooperation. You know, we didn’t have 

things like a front-end loader, big, heavy equipment at Jewel. But if we needed it, we could get it from 

Wind Cave, primarily. But sometimes even a place like Mount Rushmore would have something that 

we could borrow. We would go to both Wind Cave and Badlands and assist with things like the bison 

roundups, which was a real great experience for me personally and for the staff that was able to do 

that. If there was a project at any of those parks that needed a lot of manpower for a short period of 

time, often maintenance crew, primarily, would go to that area and help. Not for months at a time, 

but for a day or two.20

McClanahan retired in 1983, and Jim Randall 

became superintendent of Wind Cave and Jewel 

Cave.21 Randall held the position until 1985, when 

Ernest Ortega replaced him. The relationship 

between the two units changed when Ortega 

became superintendent. Ortega later recalled that he 

wanted the two units to have a “symbiotic kind of 

relationship, whereas they would not be subservient 

to Wind Cave, but rather . . . Wind Cave staff, 

primarily me, would be available to provide 

assistance and support.”22 Ortega noted that the 

relationship between the two parks was already a 

good one, but he wanted to emphasize Jewel Cave’s 

autonomy. He retitled Ditmanson’s position “unit 

manager,” and he wanted Ditmanson to function as 

a de facto superintendent.23 Ortega’s prior 

experiences influenced his perspectives on the 

relationship between Wind Cave and Jewel Cave. 

Early in his career, he had managed El Morro 

National Monument under the purview of the 

Navajo Lands Group superintendent, and he was 

therefore sensitive to the challenges Jewel Cave 

managers faced in having to report to a different 

unit’s superintendent.24

At one point, Ortega suggested creating a full 

superintendent position for Jewel Cave, but Harold 

Dance in the Rocky Mountain Regional Office 

20 Ditmanson, interview. 

21 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Wind Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument, 1983, 1. 

22 Ernest Ortega, interview by Jackie Gonzales, June 28, 2019, Custer, SD. 

23 Ortega, interview; Ditmanson, interview. 

24 Ortega, interview. 

Figure 92. Dennis Ditmanson in the cave, examining 

a hollow stalagmite. Photo by Art Palmer, ca. 1984.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 183

responded that he would have to lower Ortega’s pay grade to make the change, so it never 

happened. Ortega was, however, able to raise the Jewel Cave unit manager’s pay grade, and by the 

time Ditmanson left in December 1986, he was a GS-11.25 Steve Holder then replaced Ditmanson, 

transferring in from Golden Gate National Recreation Area, where he had been the Marin 

Headlands District Ranger.

26

Staff numbers grew under Ditmanson and 

Holder in the 1980s. In 1983, Jewel Cave had three 

permanent staff: the management assistant

(Ditmanson), maintenance lead (Steve Riley), and 

chief of interpretation, resource management, and 

visitor protection (Herschel Schulz) (see Figure 

93). In addition, it employed twenty seasonal staff 

(sixteen interpretation, one resource management, 

and three maintenance). In July 1983, the Rocky 

Mountain Regional Office conducted a position 

classification review at Wind Cave and Jewel 

Cave.

27 Perhaps as a result of that analysis, Jewel 

and Wind Cave staff developed a position 

description for a clerk-typist position at Jewel 

Cave, which Joanne Bornong filled in 1986 when 

funding came through (there had been a seasonal 

clerk-typist in the 1970s and early 1980s, but this 

was the first permanent clerical position).28

Bornong cooperated with Jean Donnell, the 

administrative officer at Wind Cave, who had been 

at Wind Cave for decades and ran a smooth 

operation.29 In 1988, the clerk-typist position was 

reclassified as park ranger-administration position 

25 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Wind Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument, 1986, 3, files 

provided by Katie Atkins, Folder 1986 Superintendent’s Report, Jewel Cave NM CF; Ditmanson, interview.

26 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1987, 1, files provided by Katie Atkins, Folder 

1987 Superintendent’s Report, Jewel Cave NM CF.

27 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Wind Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument, 1983, 2. 

28 Rocky Mountain Regional Office, Jewel Cave National Monument, Annual Goals for FY1984, 1, Cabinet 3, 

Drawer 3, Folder A6419 Goals/Objectives Long Term Management Plans, Jewel Cave NM CF; Superintendent’s 

Annual Report, Wind Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument, 1986, 3.

29 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Wind Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument, 1989, 14, files 

provided by Katie Atkins, Folder 1990 Superintendent’s Report, Jewel Cave NM CF; Rocky Mountain Regional Office, 

Jewel Cave National Monument, Annual Management Goals for FY1986, 1, Cabinet 3, Drawer 3, Folder A6419 

Goals/Objectives Long Term Management Plans, Jewel Cave NM CF; Marty Ott, interview by Jackie Gonzales, April 

24, 2019, Kanab, UT.

Figure 93. Herschel Schulz was chief ranger of 

interpretation, protection, and visitor protection for 

part of the 1980s.

Source: Jewel Cave NM.
184 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

(GS-4). Later that year, Bornong transferred away, and Margaret Schwartz replaced her.30

In 1986, Wind Cave and Jewel Cave updated all park ranger series position descriptions to reflect 

new, service-wide GS-0025 classification standards.31 This was the beginning of a service-wide effort 

to separate generalist ranger positions into specialized positions (i.e., interpretation, natural resource 

management, or cultural resource management).32 Jewel Cave seasonal staff positions were retitled to 

fit the new categories.33 Other staff changes in the mid-1980s included Larry Dilts returning as chief 

of maintenance (see Figure 94), and, when Chief of Interpretation and Resource Management 

Herschel Schulz left in 1986, Brian Adams replaced him (GS-7/9).

34 Staff changes in 1988 and 1989 

included converting long-time seasonal maintenance employee Don Lytle to a permanent/subjectto-furlough employee, converting a park ranger/administration position (GS-4) to full-time, 

changing a park ranger (resource management) (GS-3) to a forestry technician (GS-4), and creating a 

supervisory park ranger to manage seasonal interpretive employees (GS-6/7).35 

Figure 94. Larry Dilts 

was the chief ranger 

at Jewel Cave, left for 

several years, and 

then returned as 

maintenance lead. 

Pictured here with 

Herb Conn in a state 

of South Dakota 

photograph, 1975.

Source: NPS, Jewel 

Cave NM.

30 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1988, 1, files provided by Katie Atkins, Folder 

1988 Superintendent’s Report, Jewel Cave NM CF.

31 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Wind Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument, 1986, 3.

32 Paul Menard, interview by Jackie Gonzales, April 9, 2019, Sequim, WA. 

33 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1987, 4.

34 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Wind Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument, 1984, 1, files 

provided by Katie Atkins, Folder 1984 Superintendent’s Report, Jewel Cave NM CF; Superintendent’s Annual Report, 

Jewel Cave National Monument, 1984, 2, files provided by Katie Atkins, Folder 1984 Superintendent’s Report, Jewel 

Cave NM CF; Ditmanson, interview; Dilts, interview; Rocky Mountain Regional Office, Jewel Cave National 

Monument, Annual Management Goals for FY1986, 3.

35 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1988, 1; Superintendent’s Annual Report, 

Jewel Cave National Monument, 1989, 1.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 185

By the end of 1989, Jewel Cave had six permanent staff, twenty seasonal or temporary staff, one 

Student Conservation Association (SCA) intern, four other interns, and three regular volunteers.36

That November, Holder transferred to a park in Alaska, and Brian Adams became acting unit 

manager in his place for a brief period.

37 After Holder left, Wind Cave leadership reviewed the 

position “and identified it as a potential trainee position under the GS-0025/301 series 

[miscellaneous administration and program] for recruitment in December,” thus opening the door to 

establishing a separate superintendency for Jewel Cave.38

Volunteers In Parks 

Starting in the late 1970s, Jewel Cave and Wind Cave managers began developing a Volunteers 

In Parks (VIP) program, following 1969 legislation authorizing the secretary of the Interior to 

establish such a program service-wide.39 Hendricks was required to write regular VIP reports, and he 

used funding from new the VIP program for certain expenses related to the Conns’ surveying work

(which was still done under a special use permit), such as carbide for lamps, a replacement compass, 

and tape.40 In the early 1980s, Jewel Cave and Wind Cave managers tracked the monetary equivalent 

of work conducted through the VIP program (estimated in terms of what the work would have cost, 

had it been done by paid staff), counting it as donated income to the parks.

41 In 1984, park managers 

drafted a VIP Operation Plan.42 As a result of efforts to expand the program, VIP hours for Jewel 

Cave reached 2,500 in 1985 and 5,403 in 1986 (the 1986 hours had an estimated value of $40,000).43

Much of this increase came from cave exploration activities that were now counted as VIP hours.44

VIP participation remained high through the end of the decade, with volunteers posting 5,000 hours 

in 1987 and a little over 6,000 hours per year in 1988 and 1989.45

General Management Planning 

Jewel Cave received virtually no funding for parkwide planning in the 1970s. Hendricks, 

Ditmanson, McClanahan, and Ortega repeatedly requested funding for a general management plan 

36 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Wind Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument, 1989, 2.

37 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1989, 1.

38 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Wind Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument, 1989, 3.

39 Act of July 29, 1970, 84 Stat. 472 (P. L. 91-357). 

40 Al Hendricks, daily note log, February 7, 1979, from Hendricks’ personal files; Mike Wiles, comments on draft 

administrative history, April 7, 2020. 

41 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Wind Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument, 1983, 1.

42 Rocky Mountain Regional Office, Jewel Cave National Monument, Annual Goals for FY1984, 1.

43 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1985, 1, files provided by Katie Atkins, Folder 

1984 Superintendent’s Report, Jewel Cave NM CF; Superintendent’s Annual Report, Wind Cave National Park and 

Jewel Cave National Monument, 1986, 4.

44 Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

45 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1987, 1; Superintendent’s Annual Report, 

Jewel Cave National Monument, 1988, 2; Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1989, 2.
186 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

(GMP), since the most recent plan on file was the Master Plan started in 1962, which predated the 

new visitor center.46 A GMP, managers argued, was “needed to reflect development requirements, 

visitor uses, cave and surface resource considerations and external influences.”47 The most recent 

interpretive prospectus was also outdated: it had been written in 1966 and became obsolete after the 

construction of the new visitor center.48

In 1987, Jewel Cave managers wrote a Statement for Management in which they reiterated the 

need for a new GMP and interpretive prospectus: 

The principal issue facing Jewel Cave is the lack of a current General Management Plan and 

Interpretive Prospectus. Since the existing plans are obsolete, they are of no use in directing 

management action, but more importantly, the absence of up-to-date plans virtually assures that no 

development action will occur at this location. A number of projects have been identified via the 10-

238 process, including a second elevator, expansion of the Visitor Center, surface trails, a picnic area 

with comfort station, etc., but none has received a servicewide priority listing. All possible means of 

completing these crucial plans should be investigated.49

In 1988, staff worked on preliminary planning tasks for a GMP and interpretive prospectus, but still 

no funding was forthcoming.50 The next year, however, the Rocky Mountain Regional Office 

provided funds for GMPs and development concept plans for both Wind Cave and Jewel Cave. 

Work began on them in September.51

Cooperating Association 

A Wind Cave naturalist continued to run the Wind Cave Natural History Association (WCNHA) 

in the 1970s and 1980s, as was common in the NPS at the time, and the Wind Cave superintendent 

retained a seat on the board.52 Jane Farrell served as president of the board for much of the 1980s.53

The association operated the bookstore at the new Jewel Cave visitor center.

54 Jewel Cave managers 

46 Rocky Mountain Regional Office, Jewel Cave National Monument, Annual Goals for FY1985, 1, Cabinet 3, 

Drawer 3, Folder A6419 Goals/Objectives Long Term Management Plans, Jewel Cave NM CF; Outline of Planning 

Requirements, Jewel Cave National Monument, June 2, 1989, 1–2, Cabinet 1, Drawer 2, Folder D18 Outline for 

Planning Requirements, Jewel Cave NM CF; Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1989, 9.

47 Outline of Planning Requirements, Jewel Cave National Monument, May 15, 1986, 1, Cabinet 1, Drawer 2, Folder 

D18 Outline for Planning Requirements, Jewel Cave NM CF.

48 Statement for Management, Jewel Cave National Monument, March 1987, 21, Cabinet 1, Drawer 2, Folder D18 

Statements for Management, Jewel Cave NM CF.

49 Statement for Management, Jewel Cave National Monument, March 1987, 21.

50 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1988, 8, files provided by Katie Atkins, Folder 

1988 Superintendent’s Report, Jewel Cave NM CF.

51 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Wind Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument, 1989, 14.

52 NPS, Statement for Management, Wind Cave National Park, amended June 1980, SFM-6, Cabinet 1, Drawer 2, 

Folder D18 Statements for Management, Jewel Cave NM CF; Hendricks, interview; Ortega, interview.

53 Ernest W. Ortega to Jane Farrell, President, Board of Directors, Wind Cave/Jewel Cave Natural History 

Association, February 23, 1987, Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, Folder N1427 Bats (Mora), Jewel Cave NM CF. 

54 Steve Hurd, Statement for Management, Jewel Cave National Monument, December 3, 1975, SFM-4, Cabinet 1, 

Drawer 2, Folder D18 Statements for Management, Jewel Cave NM CF.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 187

participated in hiring sales clerks for the bookstore, who were generally on duty every day the visitor 

center was open to the public.55

Proceeds from the bookstores helped to fund interpretation at the two parks. In 1983, WCNHA 

sales amounted to $24,000, of which Jewel Cave received $800 for interpretive programming and 

$1,500 for cave-related research. In 1984, of $45,616 in gross sales, net sales amounted to $3,727, of 

which $2,132 went to Jewel Cave for interpretation.56 Starting in 1985, sales supported two SCA 

positions at Jewel Cave.57 People could become members of the WCNHA at rates of $1 per year or 

$3 for a lifetime.58

The WCNHA published books on Jewel and Wind Caves to sell in their bookstores. In 1977,

the WCNHA republished Jim Thompson’s booklet, The Geology of Jewel Cave, after Jewel Cave staff 

updated and partially rewrote the text to reflect recent discoveries of cave passages.59 In the early 

1980s, geologists Art and Peg Palmer received financial support from the association to write a new 

booklet on the geology of Jewel Cave (they had recently completed one on the geology of Wind 

Cave).60 The Palmers partnered with Jay Arnold, editor of the NSS News, to complete Jewel Cave: A 

Gift from the Past in 1984.

61 Ditmanson commented that the Palmers’ booklet “will serve as our prime 

informational piece dealing with the cave resource and it provides a perfect complement to Herb 

and Jan Conn’s earlier work on the exploration effort.”62 It was one of the bookstore’s top-selling 

items in 1984, along with Jewel Cave postcards and the Jewel Cave map.63

The WCNHA became the Wind Cave/Jewel Cave Natural History Association in 1984, a name 

change that Hendricks had requested several years prior because the association operated at both 

parks.64 In 1987, Ortega believed the association had gone too far in its own direction was not 

necessarily providing the best possible financial support for the parks, and so he dissolved it. In its 

place, Ortega established the Black Hills Parks and Forests Association (BHPFA), led by Wind Cave 

55 Al Hendricks, daily note log, May 26, 1979, from Hendricks’ personal files; Superintendent’s Annual Report, 

Wind Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument, 1983, 15.

56 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Wind Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument, 1983, 5, 14; 

Superintendent’s Annual Report, Wind Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument, 1984, 5.

57 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1985, 4.

58 Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

59 Status Report on Goals – 7/1/76–9/30/77, Jewel Cave National Monument, October 1, 1977, 1, Cabinet 3, 

Drawer 3, Folder A6419 Goals/Objectives Long Term Management Plans, Jewel Cave NM CF.

60 Art Palmer to Norm Salisbury, October 28, 1981, and Art Palmer to Dennis Ditmanson, December 14, 1981, 

Cabinet 3, Drawer 2, Folder N3023 Palmer, Art & Peg, Jewel Cave NM CF.

61 Jay Arnold to Art Palmer, August 3, 1982, Cabinet 3, Drawer 2, Folder N3023 Palmer, Art & Peg, Jewel Cave 

NM CF; Arthur N. Palmer, Jewel Cave: A Gift from the Past (Hot Springs, SD: Wind Cave/Jewel Cave Natural History 

Association, 1984); Art Palmer to Christina, Dennis, and Georgene, January 7, 1984, and Art & Peg Palmer to Dennis, 

Herschel, and families, January 15, 1983, Cabinet 3, Drawer 2, Folder N3023 Palmer, Art & Peg, Jewel Cave NM CF.

62 Dennis L. Ditmanson to [unnamed], May 24, 1984, Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, Folder K42 Publications/Other, Jewel 

Cave NM CF.

63 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Wind Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument, 1984, 6.

64 Hendricks, interview. 
188 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Naturalist Bill Swift.65 The new association opened sales outlets at non-NPS sites in the area, 

including Bear Butte State Park, Custer State Park, and Nebraska National Forests and Grasslands.

In 1989, the BHPFA returned a total of $12,073 to Wind Cave and Jewel Cave.66

Community Partnerships 

The Jewel Cave management assistant/unit manager and the Wind Cave superintendent were 

active in community organizations near the caves. As in the early days of the monument, civic 

groups in Custer, South Dakota, and Newcastle, Wyoming, promoted Jewel Cave. Both Custer and 

Newcastle, Ditmanson wrote, were “supportive of the monument and several Custer businesses 

have provided financial support for various special projects.”67 Jewel Cave managers were active in 

both the Custer and Newcastle Chambers of Commerce (membership paid for by the cooperating 

association), the Custer Rotary Club, and the Custer Community Hospital.68 Schulz was on the 

board of the Environmental Education Association of South Dakota, and both Schulz and 

Ditmanson participated in the Black Hills Sport and Travel show and the Black Hills, Badlands, and 

Lakes Association Information Exchange.69

Private and other governmental organizations in neighboring communities donated money to

Jewel Cave, such as Custer Bank (which paid for membership in Black Hills, Badlands and Lakes 

Association), Westworld Hospital Management, Custer Community Hospital ($2,000 for the park 

internship program), Black Hills National Forest, and Jewel Cave Employee’s Recreation 

Association. In 1986, the Lutheran Brotherhood donated plumbing fixtures and furniture for the 

park’s new pole barn.70

In 1983, Jewel Cave celebrated its 75th anniversary in cooperation with community organizations. 

The NPS invited local media to participate. The Rapid City Journal did a full-page article on the 

historic tour, and the WCNHA published a historic newspaper to mark the occasion. On August 24 

and 25, the monument hosted a birthday party and other celebrations, attended by 200 people.71

Organizations that had played a role in the monument’s history, such as the Custer Chamber of 

Commerce and the Newcastle Lions Club, were invited to attend, speak, and provide recollections.72

65 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Wind Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument, 1989, 5.

66 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Wind Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument, 1989, 7.

67 Statement for Management, Jewel Cave National Monument, March 1987, 11.

68 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Wind Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument, 1986, 16.

69 In addition to the BHPFA, there was a separate organization called the Black Hills, Badlands and Lakes 

Association that served as an umbrella tourism promotion organization for the area. Superintendent’s Annual Report, 

Jewel Cave National Monument, 1984, 8; Superintendent’s Annual Report, Wind Cave National Park and Jewel Cave 

National Monument, 1989, 15; Hendricks, interview; Ditmanson, interview; Superintendent’s Annual Report, Wind Cave 

National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument, 1983, 19.

70 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1986, 2.

71 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Wind Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument, 1983, 19.

72 James A. Randall, Rocky Mountain Regional Director, to Wind Cave-Jewel Cave Superintendent, memorandum, 

July 8, 1983, Cabinet 3, Drawer 3, Folder A8215 Special Events, Dedications, etc., Jewel Cave NM CF; NPS, 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 189

NPS managers, at Jewel Cave, Wind Cave, and the Rocky Mountain Regional Office, maintained 

close communication with the media, elected officials, and the local tourism industry to increase 

partnerships and visitation.73 In 1984, local news network KEVN produced a short program on the 

Spelunking Tour, which was widely seen in the area.74 The NPS regularly sent out press releases 

regarding tours, staffing, special programming, improvements to cave trails and facilities, and 

visitation numbers.75 The Rapid City Journal and the Custer Chronicle were especially supportive and 

frequently ran stories about Jewel Cave.76

Jewel Cave staff collaborated with managers of other caves and with the National Speleological 

Society (NSS) to share strategies for protecting and exploring caves. The Paha Sapa Grotto, the local 

NSS chapter that had been founded by South Dakota School of Mines and Technology students in 

1966, was a particularly active partner at Jewel Cave.77 Employees from other NPS cave parks 

interacted with Jewel Cave staff, such as when Oregon Caves employees Tom Aley and Dick Fay 

visited Jewel Cave “to gather information and ideas in preparation for a major revision of the 

lighting system at Oregon Caves.”78 Jewel Cave staff later visited Oregon Caves to assist them with 

development of a cave inventory system.79 Jewel Cave employees attempted to partner with privately 

managed caves in the Black Hills, but with mixed results. Two private cave operators had their staff 

participate in Jewel Cave’s seasonal orientation program in 1987, and another based its seasonal 

orientation packet on Jewel Cave’s.80

“Anniversary Publication Underway for Jewel Cave National Monument,” press release, April 15, 1983, Cabinet 1, 

Drawer 3, Folder K1817 Interpretive Planning, Jewel Cave NM CF.

73 Al Hendricks, daily note log, April 6, 1979, from Hendricks’ personal files; Dennis L. Ditmanson to Eileen Daily, 

Tour Development Coordinator, South Dakota Tourism, September 4, 1985, Cabinet 1, Drawer 2, Folder 6.A.1 

Correspondence, Jewel Cave NM CF; Ortega, interview; Superintendent’s Annual Report, Wind Cave National Park and 

Jewel Cave National Monument, 1989, 17.

74 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1984, 2, 8.

75 NPS, “Anniversary Publication Underway for Jewel Cave National Monument,” press release, April 15, 1983; 

NPS, “Visitation up at Jewel Cave National Monument,” press release, January 4, 1985; NPS, “Trail Rehabilitation 

Underway at Jewel Cave National Monument,” press release, March 8, 1985; NPS, press release, May 25, 1987, 2, all in 

Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, Folder K1817 Interpretive Planning Jewel Cave NM CF. 

76 Mike Wiles, interview by Jackie Gonzales, June 26 and 27, 2019, Custer, SD; Randall to Wind Cave-Jewel Cave 

Superintendent, memorandum, July 8, 1983; Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1985, 9; 

“Extend mapped Jewel Cave caverns past 75 mile mark,” Custer Chronicle, July 14, 1987, Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, Folder 

K1817 Interpretive Planning, Jewel Cave NM CF.

77 Paha Sapa Grotto, “About Us,” accessed December 13, 2019, https://www.pahasapagrotto.org/about-us.html. 

78 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1985, 9.

79 Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

80 Statement for Management, Jewel Cave National Monument, March 1987, 23.
190 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Natural Resources 

Ortega and other park managers stressed that developing knowledge of the cave through 

exploration was a key part of managing cave resources appropriately.81 As the known resource grew, 

management grew in turn. For the first time, the NPS looked beyond studying only what was 

needed for interpretation of Jewel Cave. It funded and partnered to fund studies of the cave’s 

geology, biology, and more. At the same time, the NPS faced the challenge of protecting fragile cave 

resources that were affected by heavy visitation.

Cave Exploration and Mapping 

In the 1970s, Herb and Jan Conn discovered roughly 30 miles of new passageways in Jewel Cave 

while surveying under special use permits, renewed annually.82 They often brought along friends and 

other cavers, who were covered under the Conns’ permit as long as the Conns accompanied them 

and there were no more than eight people.83 Most cavers they brought belonged to the Paha Sapa 

Grotto, the local chapter of the NSS. The Conns marked selected cave routes with surveyors’ 

flagging tape, purchased by the NPS, and wrote route descriptions so that Jewel Cave staff or other 

cavers could follow their routes.

84

In 1977, the Conns hit a point west of Hell Canyon where they believed additional cave lay 

beyond, based on strong airflow. They were fairly certain they had found the far side of a connecting 

passage that was too small for people, but based on their survey data, they were unable to determine 

how long the non-connection was. They hoped that, if it was a direct and not-too-distant 

connection, they could widen the narrow passage with dynamite, removing just a few inches from 

each side. They contacted Father Paul Wightman, the Catholic priest who had assisted with 

radiolocation of the Target Room back in 1964, and wrote, “[we] might just take you up on your 

offer to help with some radio location work.” They explained to Father Wightman, 

. . . we think that there’s a good chance of finding much more cave. There are many breezy leads 

heading into the hill to the west [of Hell Canyon], which could be as permeated with cave as the hill 

on the east side of the canyon. 

The National Park Service holds out some hope that they will give us permission to blast, if we can 

make a good case for the closeness of the connection and the feasibility of opening it. We have a 

caver friend in Custer who is in the business of excavating and using explosives, and he has 

volunteered his services.85

81 Ortega, interview. 

82 Herb and Jan Conn, Jewel Cave Exploration, Special Use Permit 2-146-9, Summary Report, Jan. 1, 1972 to Dec. 

31, 1972, File 3449b, Jewel Cave NM MF; Hurd, Statement for Management, Jewel Cave National Monument, 

December 3, 1975; Jewel Cave Exploration, Special Use Permit SP 1569-0-0022, Summary Report, Dec. 1, 1980 to Nov. 

30, 1981, File 3447, Jewel Cave NM MF; Ditmanson, interview; Ortega, interview.

83 Hendricks, interview; DOI, NPS, Jewel Cave NM, Special Use Permit 1569-17, January 1, 1977, Cabinet 3, 

Drawer 4, Folder L3012 (special use permits) Exploration Survey & mapping, Jewel Cave NM CF. 

84 Hendricks, interview. 

85 Herb and Jan Conn to Father Paul Wightman, July 29, 1977, 1, File 1657a, Jewel Cave NM MF. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 191

Wightman arrived at Jewel Cave later that year and conducted the radiolocation work.86

The Conns called the potential new connection the “Very Important Shortcut,” or VISC (see 

Figure 95). The NPS did not uniformly support the VISC: McClanahan questioned the wisdom of 

blasting rock within the cave for the purposes of exploration. The Conns received approval for it 

directly from the Rocky Mountain Regional Office.87 The Conns raised funds to create the VISC 

from private donors, most of whom were part of the local caving community and park staff.88

Drilling began on August 27, 1979, with the Conns supervising inside the cave while Hendricks 

oversaw operations aboveground.89 The first driller did not get the direction quite right, but a second 

remedied the initial mistake and completed the VISC in early 1980.90 The VISC opened the door to

many new discoveries west of Hell Canyon.91

Figure 95. Herb Conn drew and explained the “Very Important Shortcut” (VISC) in a letter to 

Father Paul Wightman, 1977.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

86 Al Hendricks, daily note log, September 27, 1977, from Hendricks’ personal files.

87 Wiles, interview. 

88 Jan Conn, “Informal Panel Session,” talk, Jewel Cave 200-mile Reunion, June 30, 2019, Custer, SD.

89 Al Hendricks, daily note log, September 3, 1979, from Hendricks’ personal files; Al Hendricks, daily note log, 

September 10, 1979, from Hendricks’ personal files.

90 Al Hendricks, daily note log, December 16, 1979, from Hendricks’ personal files; Al Hendricks, daily note log, 

January 10, 1980, from Hendricks’ personal files; Mike Wiles, “Jewel Cave Exploration from 1979 to 2005,” talk, Jewel 

Cave 200-mile Reunion, June 29, 2019, Custer, SD; J. Conn, “Informal Panel Session.” 

91 Mike Wiles, Ken Allgier, and Steve Baldwin, Jewel Cave Exploration, Summary Report, Jan. 1 to Dec. 31, 1988, 

Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, Folder L3012 (special use permits) Exploration Survey & mapping, Jewel Cave NM CF. 
192 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

The Conns cultivated Ken Allgier and Mike Wiles as protégés who could take over when Herb 

and Jan were no longer able to cave.92 In 1983, Schulz and Ditmanson modified the Conns’ special 

use permit to identify “specifically designated trainees (Paul Wieland and Mike Wiles) who will be 

under direction of permittees.” Wieland and Wiles were required to follow the same regulations 

regarding surveying, mapping, safety, reporting, and publicity as the Conns.93 After the permit was 

issued, the Conns wrote to McClanahan, 

We’ve suggested to Herschel (and he agreed to discuss it by phone with Dennis) that Ken Allgier 

should be included as a trainee on the Permit, either instead of or in addition to Paul Wieland, Ken 

now has almost as much experience as Mike Wiles in Jewel Cave (61 trips in the last three years, 

compared to Mike’s 77 and Paul’s 29). He is the regular compass reader for the mapping crew, and he 

is competent, dedicated, and devoted to conservation and safety. At this point he is more familiar with 

the new areas of the cave than we are, or anyone but Mike.

Ken expects to remain in the Black Hills for the foreseeable future. On the other hand, Mike is now 

working in Pierre with limited opportunities of weekend trips to the Hills, and future jobs may take 

him farther away. Paul is in Brookings, still much interested in the cave but unable to get here often.

His future plans may or may not bring him back to the area. 

We feel it is important to the continuity of the cave work for Ken to become a recognized trainee.

We’re hopeful that you and Dennis will agree, so that this change can become effective for the current 

year.

94

After receiving this letter, McClanahan and Ditmanson added Allgier to the permit. The following 

year, McClanahan completed the transfer from the Conns to the next generation of cavers when he 

issued Wiles and Allgier a two-year special use permit for “exploration, orientation, survey, and 

mapping of Jewel Cave.”95 Jan Conn later explained how they picked Wiles: “We found Mike Wiles, 

we figured, this guy’s is as nutty as we are! He’ll keep it going.”96

In conjunction with the handover, Wiles revamped the trip report template “to clarify issues that 

had been annoyances in the past.”

97 Schulz approved the new format, which included the date and 

time of entry and exit, changes since the last trip, date of last time the cavers were in the area, and 

number of cavers in the group. To standardize cavers’ descriptions, Wiles wrote a glossary of 

speleothems, skills, hazards, types of rock, and levels of the cave.

98

92 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Wind Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument, 1983, 16.

93 DOI, NPS, Jewel Cave NM, Special Use Permit SP1569-3-0001, January 1, 1983, Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, Folder 

L3012 (special use permits) Exploration Survey & mapping, Jewel Cave NM CF.

94 Herb and Jan Conn to Lester F. McClanahan, February 22, 1983, Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, Folder L3012 (special use 

permits) Exploration Survey & mapping, Jewel Cave NM CF.

95 Lester F. McClanahan to Herb and Jan Conn, February 28, 1983, and DOI, NPS, Jewel Cave NM, Special Use 

Permit SP1569-4-0001, November 10, 1984, both in Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, Folder L3012 (special use permits) 

Exploration Survey & mapping, Jewel Cave NM CF.

96 Jan Conn, “Jewel Cave Exploration from 1959–1979,” talk, Jewel Cave 200-mile Reunion, June 29, 2019, Custer, 

SD.

97 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1984, 4.

98 Jewel Cave NM, Cave Trip Report, undated [c.1984], and Jewel Cave NM, Cave Inventory Guidelines [c.1984], 

Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, Folder L3012 (special use permits) Exploration Survey & mapping, Jewel Cave NM CF. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 193

Safety protocols increased in the 1980s. For the first time, the NPS placed first aid kits within 

the cave, since most exploration at that point took cavers so far in that they faced several hours of 

difficult caving to reach an exit.

99 Wiles attended a National Cave Rescue Commission seminar at 

Wind Cave in 1984, the same year that seasonal Ranger Dan Snyder drafted (but did not finalize) a 

Cave Rescue and Emergency Operations Plan.100 In October 1985, Wiles and Allgier oriented 

members of the Pennington County Search and Rescue Team to Jewel Cave, and they conducted a 

mock rescue in December.101

Jewel Cave managers treated caving as a volunteer activity, even if those doing the caving were 

NPS employees. Wiles was a seasonal employee, as were other cavers, but they were required to do 

their exploratory caving outside of work hours. These volunteers—the Conns and then Wiles—

essentially became the NPS-approved custodians of the deep cave. All exploration went through 

them, and the integrity of the exploration program at the cave depended on their actions. At Wind 

Cave, by contrast, there were no NPS-designated primary explorers. Because of that, Wind Cave had 

some issues with rogue cavers who entered without permission. This did not happen at Jewel Cave, 

where the Conns and then Wiles acted as gatekeepers of the cave.102

When Wiles and Allgier took over the permit, they sought advice and counsel from the Conns, 

which provided continuity in exploration efforts.103 As had been the case for the Conns, the permit 

required Wiles or Allgier to be present on any cave trip, and they were responsible for ensuring the 

safety of other cavers and keeping cave resources safe. Ditmanson later remarked, 

[Mike Wiles is] the key. If Herb and Jan were the instigators of the real cave work at Jewel Cave, Mike 

is the logical successor to that. He’s carrying on that tradition and ought to be recognized for that. . . . 

Managers come and go. I mean, we’re there for a while and we kind of blow through and do whatever 

we do and then we go away. And people like Mike are the real heroes of the Park Service.104

In 1987, Wiles, Art and Peg Palmer, and Steve Baldwin surveyed the 75th mile of Jewel Cave. To 

congratulate the explorers on the achievement, Herb and Jan Conn entered the cave while Wiles, the 

Palmers and Baldwin were still inside and left congratulatory cards, cans of soda, a bag of M&Ms, 

and a tin full of fresh grapes. Wiles later recounted, “We discovered these while leaving the cave and 

were thrilled by these thoughtful and unexpected surprises.”105 There were no other external 

celebrations, but the Custer Chronicle reported on the achievement.106 Since the new sections of the 

cave were increasingly far from access points (even with the help of the VISC), Wiles, Allgier, and 

99 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1984, 5.

100 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1984, 5; Research Projects at Jewel Cave 

National Monument by Seasonal Staff, Status Report, 1984, Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, Folder N2219 Research Proposals & 

Projects; Rocky Mountain Regional Office, Jewel Cave National Monument, Annual Goals for FY1984, 1.

101 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1985, 7.

102 Ortega, interview; Ditmanson, interview.

103 Statement for Management, Jewel Cave National Monument, March 1987, 7.

104 Ditmanson, interview. 

105 Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

106 “Extend mapped Jewel Cave caverns past 75 mile mark,” Custer Chronicle, July 14, 1987, Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, 

Folder K1817 Interpretive Planning Jewel Cave NM CF; Wiles, “Jewel Cave Exploration from 1979 to 2005.”
194 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Baldwin regularly embarked on 12- to 17-hour exploration trips in the cave.107 These long trips led to 

another major breakthrough in 1989, beyond what they called the “Victory After Continuous 

Contortions” (VACC), which pointed to huge passageways to the west.

108

Mapping changed dramatically in the late 1980s as a result of computer technology. A caver at 

Wind Cave, Jim Nepstad, pioneered computer mapping on his own time using a program called 

SMAPS, which showed cavers at both caves the possibilities computer mapping might hold. 

Meanwhile, AutoDesk, Inc., of Sausalito, California, donated an AutoCAD computer program to 

Jewel Cave for resource management projects. Jewel Cave eventually followed Wind Cave’s lead and 

used SMAPS instead of AutoCAD. Ortega saw the benefit of digital mapping systems used by 

Nepstad and others and fought for better computer systems at both parks in order to improve 

mapping capabilities.109

At the request of Wiles, Herb Conn painstakingly entered all of the survey data he and Jan had 

collected since 1959 into the new SMAPS system. The Conns’ handwritten notes and maps proved 

to be remarkably accurate: Wiles later noted that in the years since Herb entered this data, resource 

management staff have only found two minor errors in his work.

110 The new mapping system 

prompted some changes in trip reporting, as Wiles, Allgier, and Baldwin noted, 

The computer allows a single data correction to cause the coordinates of each successive station to be 

adjusted. Because this would quickly make earlier data listings obsolete, survey data and coordinate 

listings will no longer be included in the annual report. The data entered on the Sperry computer at 

Jewel Cave National Monument is the most complete, and should be considered the final authority.111

Cave mapping had begun the long road toward going digital. 

Cave Resource Management 

The NPS conducted a broad study of cave radiation and safety procedures in 1974, after 

research at Carlsbad Caverns indicated that radiation levels might be unsafe for employees who 

worked in caves long-term. The study encompassed Carlsbad Caverns, Mammoth Caves, 

Cumberland Gap Caves, Lehman Caves, Oregon Caves, Round Spring Cave in Ozark National 

Scenic Riverways, Crystal Cave in Sequoia National Park, Timpanogos Cave, Jewel Cave, and Wind 

Cave. For the study, the NPS collaborated with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the 

Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) within the Department of Labor, the National 

Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), and the Occupational Safety and Health 

Administration (OSHA). In 1980, the NPS completed a Cave Radiation Safety and Occupational 

107 Wiles, Allgier, and Baldwin, Jewel Cave Exploration, Summary Report, Jan. 1 to Dec. 31, 1988. 

108 Wiles, “Jewel Cave Exploration from 1979 to 2005.”

109 Ortega, interview; Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

110 Wiles, interview; Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020; Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National 

Monument, 1987, 2.

111 Mike Wiles, Ken Allgier, and Steve Baldwin, Jewel Cave Exploration, Summary Report, Jan. 1 to Dec. 31, 1989, 

Cabinet 3, Drawer 2, File N3023 Speleology, Jewel Cave NM CF. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 195

Health Guideline, the first NPS-wide document addressing cave safety.

112 Protocols in the new guide 

included: 

- Prohibition of smoking underground. 

- Regular Kusnetz method tests to measure alpha radiation.

- Regular sampling requirements. 

- Prohibition of ventilating buildings with cave air.

- Prohibition on using alpha radiation in cavers to justify cave closures.

- Mandate for “positive management actions” to reduce human exposure to alpha radiation.

- Mandate for environmental monitoring of newly opened areas of cave to the public, or 

changes in processes that could affect radiation exposure of staff or the public.

- Requirement to explain danger to employees.

- Provision of medical surveillance to employees with high radiation levels.

- Limitation of 700 hours of underground work per year for employees at caves where 

“radiation measurements suggest a potential radiation health hazard.”113

The guide set healthy radiation levels for employees and mandated that the NPS make available 

medical surveillance if any employee’s alpha radiation levels went above a certain level.114

At Jewel Cave, NPS staff completed a Natural and Cultural Resource Management Plan (RMP) 

in 1983.115 It set the following priorities: 

1. Conserve flora, fauna, and ecological processes.

2. Identify and preserve cultural resources. 

3. Maintain the majority of the cave undeveloped and for research and exploration. 

4. Minimize human impacts on cave resources. 

5. Interpret cave features in the developed sections of the cave. 

6. Coordinate with other agencies, especially the Forest Service and local government.116

The plan stressed that “the cave remains the focus of attention at the Monument” and that the NPS 

should prioritize projects relating to the cave resource over other resource management initiatives.117

112 NPS, Cave Radiation Safety and Occupational Health Management Guideline, May 19, 1980, 11, Cabinet 3, 

Drawer 1, File 1980 Cave Safety, Jewel Cave NM CF. 

113 NPS, Cave Radiation Safety and Occupational Health Management Guideline, May 19, 1980, Chapters 2–3. 

114 NPS, Cave Radiation Safety and Occupational Health Management Guideline, May 19, 1980, Chapter 4, 1.

115 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Wind Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument, 1983, 16.

116 Finding of No Significant Impact for Proposed Actions Concerning Natural and Cultural Resources 

Management at Jewel Cave National Monument, August 26, 1983, 2, Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, Folder N16 Management of 

Natural Resources and Area, Jewel Cave NM CF. 

117 Finding of No Significant Impact for Proposed Actions Concerning Natural and Cultural Resources 

Management at Jewel Cave National Monument, August 26, 1983, 4.
196 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

It recommended further studies on hydrology, visitor impact on cave resources, flora, and fauna—

especially bats—to update prior research.118

The 1983 RMP triggered efforts to collect baseline scientific data both above- and 

belowground.

119 A later report said that the most “salient point” to emerge from the RMP was that 

Jewel Cave had “an almost universal lack of baseline information upon which to make management 

or planning decisions.”120 In 1984, the research biologist at Wind Cave set up monitoring systems 

inside and outside the cave. The following year, Ronald Kirbo, the cave management specialist at 

Carlsbad Caverns National Park—the first in the nation hired in that series—visited Wind Cave and 

Jewel Cave to assist with inventorying existing cave resources.121

In 1985, Ditmanson hired Mike Wiles and Jim Basinger into a shared cave management position: 

each was dedicated half-time to cave management and half-time to interpretation (see Figure 96). 

This was the first time any staff positions at Jewel Cave specialized in management of cave 

resources.122 Also in 1985, Jim Nepstad (previously of Mammoth Cave National Park) became the 

first cave specialist at Wind Cave. In 1989, Wind Cave secured funding to promote him to a fulltime cave specialist, the first full-time cave management position at either Wind Cave or Jewel Cave. 

Nepstad’s full-time position was modeled after a similar position at Carlsbad Caverns National 

Park.123

Figure 96. Mike Wiles, the first staff person 

whose position was dedicated to managing 

cave resources, paints an updated cave map to 

replace an old one (on the wall behind him). 

Wiles completed the work on his own time, 

with $1,000 of support from the NHA. It took 

234 hours to complete. ca. 1984.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

118 Finding of No Significant Impact for Proposed Actions Concerning Natural and Cultural Resources 

Management at Jewel Cave National Monument, August 26, 1983, 5–6.

119 Finding of No Significant Impact for Proposed Actions Concerning Natural and Cultural Resources 

Management at Jewel Cave National Monument, August 26, 1983, 5–6.

120 Statement for Management, Jewel Cave National Monument, March 1987, 9.

121 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1984, 5; Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 

2020. 

122 Wiles, interview; Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1985, 6–7; Wiles, comments 

on draft, April 7, 2020. 

123 Wiles, interview; Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1985, 6–7; Wiles, comments 

on draft, April 7, 2020; NPS, “Cave and Karst Resources Management Plan, Wind Cave National Park,” 2007, 74–75; 

Superintendent’s Annual Report, Wind Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument, 1989, 3, 6. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 197

Wiles and Basinger performed resource management tasks like addressing problems caused by 

visitor traffic. They set up equipment along the Scenic Tour route to collect baseline microclimate 

data, reexamined earlier algae eradication techniques, prepared a plan to update the cave lighting 

system to address algae problems, correlated cave survey data, and tracked down past studies of the 

cave.124 They also investigated ways to remove lint from the cave, which had built up over the years 

from visitors’ clothing. At first, they used a dry, 1.5-inch nylon paint brush to remove the lint, then 

wetted down the surfaces of the walls and ceiling of the Formation Room with water, creating a 

runoff to rinse the remaining lint. They recommended regularly spraying formations along the scenic 

tour, using a vacuum for lint on rough surfaces, and carefully dusting lint off delicate speleothems 

only every 20 years to avoid damage to cave resources. The rest of the cave, they determined, should 

be cleaned at a rate of about 20 percent annually, equivalent to a complete cleaning every five years.

To cut down on future lint accumulation, they recommended installing collection tarps under all 

platforms and stairways.125

In 1986, Ditmanson and Ortega requested funding for a cave management plan.126 Wind Cave 

staff had begun assisting Jewel Cave with a preliminary plan, but the monument needed a full plan in 

order to “identify and direct future research needs.”

127 In 1987, the Rocky Mountain regional chief 

scientist called cave management “our primary resource management need” at Jewel Cave and 

identified $150,000 in “unmet funding need” in this area.128 A 1988 Natural Resource Program 

Review for Jewel Cave pointed again to baseline data as one of the most crucial cave resources 

management needs. It added that the lack of baseline data could lead to the “loss of fragile and 

irreplaceable cave resources” and could have harmful consequences for the cave’s bat population.129

The NPS partnered with outside organizations to manage cave resources, like the NSS and the 

Northwest Cave Research Institute (NCRI). Wiles had heard of NCRI and began coordinating with 

the institute after attending one of its field camps at Bighorn Cave in Wyoming,

130 In 1988, Jewel 

Cave partnered with NCRI to “organize a volunteer field conservation camp for Jewel Cave.”131 The 

agreement between Jewel Cave and NCRI provided for four years of cooperation. In July 1988, 

124 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1985, 6–7; Summary of Research Activities, 

Jewel Cave National Monument, 1987, Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, Folder N2219 Research Proposals & Projects, Jewel Cave 

NM CF; Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1986, 4; Superintendent’s Annual Report, 

Jewel Cave National Monument, 1987, 4; Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

125 “Removing Lint from Speleothems,” undated, 2, Cabinet 3, Drawer 2, Folder N3023 LINT, Jewel Cave NM CF; 

Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020; Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1985, 4, 6; 

Mike Wiles, “Microclimate Monitoring of the Scenic Tour Area at Jewel Cave,” undated [1987?], Cabinet 3, Drawer 2, 

Folder N3023 Microclimate Study of Jewel Cave (Wiles), Jewel Cave NM CF; Ditmanson, interview; Wiles, interview.

126 Outline of Planning Requirements, Jewel Cave National Monument, May 15, 1986, 1.

127 Statement for Management, Jewel Cave National Monument, March 1987, 23.

128 Jewel Cave NM Unit Manager to Regional Chief Scientist, December 18, 1987, Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, Folder 

NN2215 Area Research Plans, Jewel Cave NM CF.

129 Natural Resources Program Review, Jewel Cave NM, 1988, Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, Folder NN2215 Area Research 

Plans, Jewel Cave NM CF. 

130 Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

131 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1987, 5.
198 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

NCRI brought a group of 40 volunteer cavers to Jewel Cave for a week-long conservation work 

camp, during which participants reflagged five miles of cave trails, radiolocated 10 locations in the 

cave, and installed photopoints for a cave resources photo-monitoring program along the Scenic 

Tour route.

132 NCRI produced a report from this work titled “Cave Resources Inventorying and 

Radio Location Survey.”133 The following year, NCRI sponsored 35 volunteers who provided 1,400 

hours of service. Similar to the previous year’s crew, they conducted a cave inventory along eight

miles of cave trails, reflagged some of the travel routes, radiolocated 14 locations in the cave, and

continued the resource photo-monitoring program along the Scenic Tour route.

134

Outside Studies of Jewel Cave 

Research at Jewel Cave expanded in the 1970s. In 1975, Management Assistant Steve Hurd 

commented, “Use of subterranean resources as a laboratory for scientific and educational purposes” 

was becoming increasingly popular as a result of the new visitor center development. Hurd and later 

managers partnered with academics and outside institutions to issue special permits for research 

within the cave.135

Some of the research focused on bats. In 1972, Martin and Hawks (first names not available) 

studied bat hibernation in Jewel Cave and other caves in the area. They found that Jewel Cave was 

the only one of over 100 caves in the Black Hills with relatively large numbers of five chiropteran 

species.136 Ken McCarty conducted research on Jewel Cave’s bats in the late 1970s.137 Dave Mora, a 

former seasonal interpretive ranger, wrote the next major bat study in 1987, titled, “Hibernating Bat 

Population Census.” Mora’s study received funding from Bowling Green University and the Wind 

Cave/Jewel Cave Natural History Association.138 Two years later, John Anderson, a graduate student 

at Fort Hays State University under Dr. Jerry Choate, began a multiyear study of Jewel Cave bats, 

funded in part by the BHPFA and Fort Hays State University.139

During the 1980s, several outside researchers conducted geological studies. In 1983, Derek Ford 

of McMaster University partnered with Art and Peg Palmer to write a “Preliminary Report Upon 

McMaster University Geochemical and Isotopic Studies in Wind and Jewel Cave.”

140 The Palmers 

132 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1988, 2, 6.

133 Summary of Research Activities, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1988, Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, Folder N2219 

Research Proposals & Projects.

134 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1989, 2, 6.

135 Hurd, Statement for Management, Jewel Cave National Monument, December 3, 1975.

136 Dave Mora, “Bats of Jewel Cave,” 2, Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, Folder N1427 Bats (Mora), Jewel Cave NM CF.

137 Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

138 Summary of Research Activities, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1987; Research Project Description, “The Bats 

of Jewel Cave,” February 1987, and Ernest W. Ortega to Jane Farrell, February 23, 1987, both in Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, 

Folder N1427 Bats (Mora), Jewel Cave NM CF.

139 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1989, 7.

140 Derek C. Ford to Dennis Ditmanson, May 24, 1983, Cabinet 3, Drawer 2, Folder N3023 Thermal Genesis of 

Black Hills Caves (Ford), Jewel Cave NM CF; Art & Peg Palmer to Jewel Cave staff, June 10, 1988; and Arthur N. and 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 199

continued their geological research after completing Jewel Cave: A Gift from the Past. In the late 1980s, 

they conducted research to “clarify the stratigraphy (sequence of rock layers) in the upper levels of 

the cave.”141 They communicated regularly with Jewel Cave staff and helped to organize trips to 

Jewel Cave for the 1988 NSS convention in Custer.142 Around the same time, Rick Olson, a former 

seasonal interpreter at Jewel Cave, started a separate study titled “Microscopic Analysis of 

Hydromagnesite Balloons” (see Figure 97).143

Figure 97. A 

photograph of 

hydromagnesite 

balloons by Art 

Palmer, ca. 1984.

Source: NPS, Jewel 

Cave NM.

Margaret V. Palmer to Dennis Ditmanson, January 7, 1985, both in Cabinet 3, Drawer 2, Folder N3023 Palmer, Art & 

Peg, Jewel Cave NM CF; Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1984, 4.

141 Art & Peg Palmer to Steve Holder, Brian Adams, August 10, 1989, Cabinet 3, Drawer 2, Folder N3023 Palmer, 

Art & Peg, Jewel Cave NM CF.

142 A. & P. Palmer to Jewel Cave staff, June 10, 1988.

143 Summary of Research Activities, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1988.
200 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Starting in 1984, Jewel Cave managers applied to the NPS Research Center at the University of 

Wyoming to fund studies at Jewel Cave.144 Wind Cave or Jewel Cave staff attended research center 

meetings to keep the center apprised of ongoing research and to discuss new funding needs, such as 

a vegetation survey in 1985.145 The center funded a study to identify “man-caused introductions of 

water and pollutants into both Wind Cave and Jewel Cave,” which was completed by Dr. Calvin 

Alexander, Marsha Davis (a graduate student and a seasonal employee at Jewel Cave), and Scott 

Alexander (no relation to Calvin).146 The study’s goals were 

1) to evaluate the water distribution within these two park areas; 

2) to determine the effects of human impact upon the natural hydrologic system; 

3) to document any detrimental effects to the water quality; 

4) to document any instances in which the cave environment is adversely affected by the quality or 

quantity of the water present; and 

5) to provide options to present water use practices, if necessary.147

Their study dispelled the long-held notion that an area known as the New Wet Room was receiving 

water from the parking lot. Davis, Alexander, and Alexander instead proved that the parking lot

drainages directed water in a different direction, with some entering the cave at locations on and 

near the Spelunking Tour route. They concluded that the monument’s sewer system, parking lots, 

and fuel storage tanks, as well as Highway 16, were all “potential sources of contamination to the 

Cave.” The sewage lagoon was already contaminating the cave and was in danger of contaminating 

the monument’s water supply wells.148 The hydrology study strongly influenced cave resource 

management in the 1980s and for decades to come. (See the Maintenance section below for cave 

managers’ responses to these findings.) 

Interagency Cave Resource Protection 

NPS managers at Jewel Cave and Wind Cave coordinated with the Forest Service, the Bureau of 

Land Management (BLM), and other federal agencies for effective cave resource management. In 

1987, the NPS signed a service-wide memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the BLM for 

144 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1984, 4.

145 Steve Holder to Ken Diem, August 25, 1988, Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, Folder N2219 Research Proposals & Projects, 

Jewel Cave NM CF; Summary of U.W.-N.P.S. Research Center 1985 Research Projects, 1985, Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, 

Folder N2219 Research Proposals & Projects, Jewel Cave NM CF.

146 E. Calvin Alexander and Marsha Davis, “Hydrogeologic Study of Jewel Cave/Wind Cave: Final Report – Year 

2,” August 1987, Cabinet 3, Drawer 2, Folder N3023 Hydrology Study 2nd Year Final Report, Jewel Cave NM CF; 

Superintendent’s Annual Report, Wind Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument, 1986, 13; 

Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1988, 6; Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave 

National Monument, 1989, 6.

147 Alexander and Davis, “Hydrogeologic Study of Jewel Cave/Wind Cave: Final Report – Year 2,” August 1987, 1. 

148 E. Calvin Alexander and Marsha Davis, “Hydrogeologic Study of Jewel Cave/Wind Cave: Final Report – Year 

2,” August 1987, 13, National Park Service Electronic Technical Center (hereafter eTIC); Alexander and Davis, 

“Hydrogeologic Study of Jewel Cave/Wind Cave: Final Report – Year 2,” August 1987, 4–5; Wiles, comments on draft, 

April 7, 2020. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 201

planning and program coordination. The MOU was not specific to caves, but it laid the groundwork 

for cooperative management of mineral and other underground resources.149

In 1985, US Senator Bill Bradley (D-NJ) introduced a bill (S. 1453) that would establish a Sioux 

National Park in the Black Hills. The new park would be administered by the Sioux Nation, which 

the legislation defined as “Lakota, Dakota, and Nakota bands who were members of the alliance 

referred to as the Seven Council Fires.” That definition encompassed eight federally recognized 

tribes: the Cheyenne River Sioux, Crow Creek Sioux, Lower Brule Sioux, Oglala Sioux, Rosebud 

Sioux, Standing Rock Sioux, Santee Sioux of Nebraska, and the Sioux Tribe of the Fort Peck 

Reservation. The legislation required the federal government to convey to the “Sioux Nation” all 

federal lands within the Great Sioux Reservation, as defined by the treaty of April 29, 1868. The land 

area included Jewel Cave National Monument.150 Jewel Cave managers had no comment on the 

proposal as of March 1987. Congress did not pass the bill to establish the park.

151

In 1988, US Representative Rick Boucher (D-VA) and Senator Tom Daschle (D-SD) introduced 

bills for a Federal Cave Resource Protection Act. Boucher’s bill was cosponsored by 29 other 

members of the House, and Daschle’s bill was cosponsored by 7 other Senators. The impetus for

the legislation was a Congressional Research Service (CRS) report that had found that “existing land 

management laws are broad enough to permit management of cave resources, but they do not 

expressly address that goal or compel that result.”

152 US Representative Bruce Vento (D-MN), a 

cosponsor, explained the need for this legislation on the floor of the House: 

there are approximately 40,000 known caves in the United States. A significant number of these caves 

are located on Federal lands, including over 4,200 caves on BLM and Forest Service lands alone. . . . 

Existing general land management laws provide little consideration to Federal cave resources 

specifically. As such, many caves, while still in relative obscurity, are open to indiscriminate use that 

has raised concerns with those interested in the scientific, educational, and recreational resources that 

caves have to offer. 

Vento noted that the bill would require federal agencies to consider caves during environmental 

review and other land management processes. Other legislators emphasized that it would not add 

costs for agencies, since it would simply require federal agencies to take caves into consideration 

during already-occurring planning processes. Vento clarified that the bill was “by no means intended 

to stifle use of caves but its purpose is rather to prevent indiscriminate use of caves that could inflict 

permanent damage on the natural resources contained within.”153

US Representative Manuel Lujan Jr. (R-NM), another cosponsor, highlighted the archeological 

importance of caves, since many caves in New Mexico contained Indigenous ruins or artifacts. Lujan 

149 Memorandum of Understanding Between BLM and NPS for Planning and Program Coordination, January 29, 

1987, Cabinet 1, Drawer 2, Folder A54 Inspections, Surveys, Appraisal, Jewel Cave NM CF.

150 131 Cong. Rec. 19333–19336 (July 17, 1985). 

151 Statement for Management, Jewel Cave National Monument, March 1987, 25.

152 Federal Cave Resources Protection Act and Restriction of Dams in Parks and Monuments: Hearings on S. 927/H.R. 1975 and 

H.R. 1173, Before the Senate Subcommittee on Public Lands, National Parks and Forests of the Committee on Energy and Natural 

Resources, 100th Cong., pp. 49–50 (June 16, 1988) (statement of US Senator Tom Daschle).

153 134 Cong. Rec. H1187 (daily ed. March 28, 1988).
202 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

applauded the civil and criminal penalties in the bill that would to enable federal land managers to 

punish those who damaged cave resources. The bill, Lujan reminded Congress, would allow 

“controlled exploration” in some cases, and in other cases, it would allow “the Secretaries of 

Agriculture and Interior to keep in confidence the location of caves if they can not be adequately 

protected. The Secretaries are also provided with a process to exempt caves from this act, after 

public comment.”154

The Reagan administration initially opposed the Federal Cave Resource Protection Act, 

concerned that it would add more rounds to the planning process.155 The Forest Service was 

skeptical, worried that cave protection would outrank other uses for the land. Forest Service 

Associate Chief George M. Leonard argued, 

. . . not every void, cavity or recess on the Federal lands is worthy of protection. Many are truly 

insignificant. And even where a cave may possess some value, there is a need to provide some way for 

weighing that value against the value of other potential uses.

Leonard opposed the bill until it allowed more discretion for department heads to “make judgments 

as to significance or to balance the value of the cave resource against other multiple use values of the 

area.”156 The Forest Service also requested clearer provisions for criminal penalties and clearer 

explanation of how the act would relate to federal mining laws. Leonard asked, “What are the rights 

and duties of the United States when a cave is discovered in the course of lawful mineral 

activities?”157 While voicing his opposition to the bill, Leonard also admitted that the Forest Service 

had “not made substantial progress in dealing with cave resources” and that a “negligible amount” 

of the Forest Service budget went to cave management.158

US Senator Tom Daschle (D-SD) testified in support of protecting caves, especially those in 

South Dakota. He brought John Scheltens, a caver, to the congressional hearings.159 Scheltens had 

taken Daschle caving at Wind Cave, which helped to open Daschle’s eyes to the importance of 

protecting caves. Daschle explained, 

When I was first approached on this issue, I must confess I was unsure about the need for protective 

legislation. However, after going on my maiden spelunking expedition with my close friend John 

Scheltens, who is here today testifying on behalf of the National Speleological Society, and reading 

154 134 Cong. Rec. H1187 (daily ed. March 28, 1988).

155 134 Cong. Rec. H1187 (daily ed. March 28, 1988).

156 Federal Cave Resources Protection Act and Restriction of Dams in Parks and Monuments: Hearings on S. 927/H.R. 1975 and 

H.R. 1173, Before the Senate Subcommittee on Public Lands, National Parks and Forests of the Committee on Energy and Natural 

Resources, 100th Cong., pp. 36–37 (June 16, 1988) (statement of George M. Leonard, Associate Chief, US Forest Service). 

157 Federal Cave Resources Protection Act and Restriction of Dams in Parks and Monuments: Hearings on S. 927/H.R. 1975 and 

H.R. 1173, Before the Senate Subcommittee on Public Lands, National Parks and Forests of the Committee on Energy and Natural 

Resources, 100th Cong., p. 41 (June 16, 1988) (statement of George M. Leonard, Associate Chief, US Forest Service). 

158 Federal Cave Resources Protection Act and Restriction of Dams in Parks and Monuments: Hearings on S. 927/H.R. 1975 and 

H.R. 1173, Before the Senate Subcommittee on Public Lands, National Parks and Forests of the Committee on Energy and Natural 

Resources, 100th Cong., p. 44 (June 16, 1988) (statement of George M. Leonard, Associate Chief, US Forest Service).

159 Federal Cave Resources Protection Act and Restriction of Dams in Parks and Monuments: Hearings on S. 927/H.R. 1975 and 

H.R. 1173, Before the Senate Subcommittee on Public Lands, National Parks and Forests of the Committee on Energy and Natural 

Resources, 100th Cong., p. 49 (June 16, 1988) (statement of US Senator Tom Daschle).
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 203

more about the subject, I became convinced that caves are indeed a national resource that we must 

act to preserve.

And yet, in spite of the significance of America’s caves, they’re being incredibly abused today. There 

are hundreds of documented examples of malicious destruction. Some have been turned into toxic 

waste dumps, others into shooting ranges, and in hundreds of cases, graffiti have permanently 

destroyed the aesthetic and natural beauty of many of these sites which are obviously millions of years 

old. In Carlsbad Caverns, it is estimated that more than 10,000 formations have already been broken.

Thus far, efforts to protect these caves have been inconsistent and completely inadequate. For caves 

that are integrally included in some Federal land management plans, they’re not even mentioned in 

others. And the reason is simple. There is no specificity with regard to the importance of cave 

resources or their management in Federal law today.

Daschle said the bill was “overdue” and “a modest step,” but one that the NSS and conservation 

organizations supported.160 He also emphasized the need for a confidentiality provision in the bill: 

Currently, cave enthusiasts have more extensive knowledge about the location and nature of caves on 

federal land than many federal land managers. The caving community, however, is reluctant to reveal 

cave sites, fearing that such disclosure will result in abuse of caves. My bill encourages caving 

organizations to share these site locations with federal officials with the understanding that only 

governors or scientists with special needs will be told of their existence. 

This provision is key. We cannot expect federal land planners to protect a resource they do not know 

is in existence. Cooperation and interaction between the speleological community and the government 

will help ensure that land managers understand the nature and extent of their sub-surface resources 

and make wise land use decisions based on that knowledge. 

There is precedent for this kind of withholding provision. The Archaeological Resources Protection 

Act of 1979 (ARPA) has worked well to protect archaeological resources by allowing the withholding 

of information in certain circumstances.161

Jer Thornton of the American Cave Conservation Association also stressed the need for a 

confidentiality provision. Thornton said, “Cavers know where the resource is but often won’t tell a 

federal agency for fear of vandalism.”162

On November 18, 1988, Congress passed the Federal Cave Resource Protection Act (FCRPA). 

In its final form, the FCRPA provided statutory protections for caves that had previously been 

nonexistent. It defined caves, distinguished between significant and non-significant caves, set civil 

and criminal penalties for violation of the act (fines from which would go to protect cave resources), 

and protected information about cave locations. It did not alter existing mineral rights or laws. The 

act required the secretary of the Interior to issue regulations within nine months of the act’s passage, 

160 Federal Cave Resources Protection Act and Restriction of Dams in Parks and Monuments: Hearings on S. 927/H.R. 1975 and 

H.R. 1173, Before the Senate Subcommittee on Public Lands, National Parks and Forests of the Committee on Energy and Natural 

Resources, 100th Cong., pp. 49–50 (June 16, 1988) (statement of US Senator Tom Daschle).

161 Federal Cave Resources Protection Act and Restriction of Dams in Parks and Monuments: Hearings on S. 927/H.R. 1975 and 

H.R. 1173, Before the Senate Subcommittee on Public Lands, National Parks and Forests of the Committee on Energy and Natural 

Resources, 100th Cong., p. 53 (June 16, 1988) (statement of US Senator Tom Daschle).

162 Betsy Marston, “Caves: Hidden, but Vulnerable,” High Country News, December 21, 1987, in Federal Cave Resources 

Protection Act and Restriction of Dams in Parks and Monuments: Hearings on S. 927/H.R. 1975 and H.R. 1173, Before the Senate 

Subcommittee on Public Lands, National Parks and Forests of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, 100th Cong., p. 58 

(June 16, 1988).
204 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

establishing criteria to determine the significance of cave resources. After that, the act directed the 

secretary of the Interior to (1) identify an initial list (that would be updated periodically) of 

significant cave resources on Department of the Interior (DOI) lands “after consultation with 

appropriate private sector interests, including cavers,” (2) regulate and/or restrict the use of caves 

deemed significant under the established criteria, (3) enter into “volunteer management agreements 

with persons of the scientific and recreational caving community,” and (4) appoint appropriate 

advisory committees.

163 (See Appendix C for full text of the FCRPA). Agencies took different 

approaches: the NPS decided to declare all caves as significant, while the Forest Service adopted a 

nominating process for determining which caves would be considered significant.164

Following the passage of the FCRPA, the Forest Service signed a service-wide MOU with the 

NSS. The MOU declared that, since “increased cooperation will promote better management of 

non-renewable cave resources and that our joint efforts will have long term benefits for the 

American public,” specific national forests could make agreements with NSS grottos to protect and 

manage cave resources.165 The Forest Service had not hired staff specializing in cave resources at 

that point, so the agreement with the NSS provided a convenient way to access cave experts and 

comply with new FCRPA regulations. NSS members would, among other things, develop cave 

management plans, inventory cave locations and resources, install and maintain cave gates and signs, 

monitor visitor use and compliance with regulations, conduct informational and educational 

programs, provide surveying and cartographic assistance, provide administrative support for cave 

resource programs, conduct cave cleanup, research cave resources, and develop cave search and 

rescue plans.166

At Jewel Cave, cave resource protection became more challenging because new discoveries were

located primarily under Forest Service land. As of 1988, 12 percent of the known cave was outside 

of the surface boundary of the monument, and just one year later, that figure jumped to 17

percent.

167 NPS managers discussed “a possible resource protection zone consistent with known 

cave resources.” The zone could be expanded to the east and southeast as cavers discovered more 

passageways. Acting Unit Manager Brian Adams reported in 1987 that a plan “to seek additional 

land for the Monument” was under debate and would be addressed as part of the monument’s 

upcoming GMP process. NPS managers were not concerned about selective logging and grazing, 

but they worried about the effects that mining operations and watershed alterations on Forest 

Service lands could have on the cave.168 In 1988, the monument’s Natural Resources Program 

163 Act of November 18, 1988, 102 Stat. 4546 (P. L. 100-691).

164 Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

165 Memorandum of Understanding between the U.S. Department of Agriculture – Forest Service and the National 

Speleological Society, September 30, 1988, 1, Cabinet 1, Drawer 2, Folder A54 Inspections, Surveys, Appraisal, Jewel 

Cave NM CF.

166 Memorandum of Understanding between the U.S. Department of Agriculture – Forest Service and the National 

Speleological Society, September 30, 1988, 1–2.

167 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1988, 6; Superintendent’s Annual Report, 

Jewel Cave National Monument, 1989, 6.

168 Brian Adams to Terry Kilpatrick, February 3, 1987, Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, Folder L1425 Holdings other than 

Federal, Jewel Cave NM CF.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 205

Review identified as a top resource management issue the need to prevent loss of cave resources due 

to mining, especially because newly discovered cave passages were almost entirely under Forest 

Service lands.169

To ensure that cave resources would be protected, the NPS began working with the Forest 

Service and the BLM on a Mineral Entry Withdrawal and Mineral Assessment Report in 1988. They 

proposed to withdraw approximately 5,000 acres from mining entry, similar to the withdrawal 

completed in 1961.170 The BLM participated because it managed mineral rights on federal lands, 

while the Forest Service owned the land. Wiles worked with Rusty Dersch, the head geologist in the 

Forest Service’s Denver office, to determine the extent of the withdrawal.

171 The following year, the 

Forest Service contracted out a mineral report and a legal survey of the monument. Holder noted 

that “this will be the first legal survey of the Monument and we look forward to completion of this 

project.”172

The Forest Service and BLM finalized the mineral withdrawal in 1990. The agreement withdrew 

2,387.22 acres on Forest Service land from mineral entry for 20 years, with an option for the 

secretary of the Interior to extend the period of withdrawal.173 Although temporary, it ensured the 

protection of Jewel Cave in the immediate future and continued a strong tradition of interagency 

cooperation in cave management. District Ranger Frank Cross praised the partnership, declaring 

that “Jewel Cave and the United States Forest Service – BHNF have a great relationship.”174

Surface Resource Management 

The NPS coordinated with the Forest Service and local government to protect surface resources 

at Jewel Cave. Most of the NPS surface resource management consisted of weed control, 

monitoring for grazing trespass, and preliminary surface resource studies. The 1976 Statement for 

Management and the 1983 RMP set the following objectives regarding surface resources: “To 

conserve and perpetuate all native flora, fauna and ecological processes in as near a pristine 

condition as possible” and to foster native plants and animals “through appropriate programs for 

controlling exotics.”175 As was the case with underground resources, the monument had little 

baseline information regarding surface natural resources. Ditmanson commented that “informed 

management is impossible without such data,” and he suggested developing a comprehensive plant 

169 Wiles, “Jewel Cave Exploration from 1979 to 2005”; Natural Resources Program Review, Jewel Cave NM, 1988, 

Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, Folder NN2215 Area Research Plans, Jewel Cave NM CF.

170 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1988, 6.

171 Summary of Research Activities, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1988; Wiles, interview.

172 Steve Holder, Memorandum: Status of Withdrawing Lands from Mineral Location Around Jewel Cave National 

Monument,” January 3, 1989, Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, Folder L1417 Boundary Adjustments, Jewel Cave NM CF; Charles J. 

Hendricks, Director, Watershed, Soils, and Minerals Area Management, to Steve Holder, October 30, 1989, Cabinet 3, 

Drawer 2, Folder A94 – Dept. of Agri. – Forest Service, Jewel Cave NM CF.

173 55 Fed. Reg. 20766 (May 18, 1990).

174 Frank J. Cross to Black Hills National Forest Supervisor, March 29, 1989, Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, Folder L1417 

Boundary Adjustments, Jewel Cave NM CF. 

175 Statement for Management, Jewel Cave National Monument, March 1987, 5. 
206 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

inventory and compiling other wildlife resource information.176 Jewel Cave staff eventually 

completed a vegetation inventory, bird list, and reptile study.177

Weed control in the 1970s focused on the eradication of Canada thistle under a cooperative 

program with the state of South Dakota. In 1973, two rangers surveyed 90 grids at the monument 

and identified and treated just 12 dense patches of thistle (noxious weeds were relatively scarce at 

Jewel Cave prior to the Jasper Fire in 2000). They applied Banvel chemical spray and cut flowering 

plants, mostly found on disturbed land. Because the thistle was widespread throughout the Black 

Hills, managers expected it to return to the monument. “For this reason,” they decided, “it is 

advisable that a yearly survey of the monument be taken to determine and stop regeneration of this 

weed.”178 The treatment program continued for the next few years with success, and by 1975, crews 

had nearly eradicated the heaviest concentration of thistle along Highway 16 in Hell Canyon. They 

found no new concentrations along the road the following year.179 Park Ranger Larry Dilts reported 

that the Banvel treatments had been effective and “very few plants were found this year.”180 The 

thistle eventually returned, however. The 1983 RMP recommended ongoing thistle eradication, 

along with upgrading the herbarium, monitoring beetles, conducting a vegetation baseline study and 

a soil survey, and preparing a vertebrate inventory.181

No grazing permits were issued on monument lands, but cattle continued to trespass from 

neighboring allotments, constituting “the single most unnatural influence imposed on the 

monument which is otherwise managed as a natural area.” Transient cattle—as many as 45 in one 

day—consumed water and forage that wildlife depended upon and introduced noxious weeds.182 A 

lack of fencing contributed to the problem: at the time, the monument had about six miles of border 

and only about one-and-a-half miles of fencing.183 Rocky Mountain Acting Associate Regional 

Director James A. Randall pointed out that it was the cattle owner’s responsibility to keep livestock 

off monument land and preferred that the Forest Service provide funding for fencing.184 The 

176 Natural and Cultural Resource Management Plan and Environmental Assessment for Jewel Cave National 

Monument, May 5, 1983, 4, 16, Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, Folder N16 Management of Natural Resources and Area, Jewel 

Cave NM CF.

177 Rocky Mountain Regional Office, Jewel Cave National Monument, Annual Goals for FY1984, 3.

178 “Canadian Thistle Project, 1973,” 1973, Cabinet 3, Drawer 2, Folder N50 Pest and Weed Control, Jewel Cave 

NM CF.

179 Larry D. Dilts, Memorandum: Canadian Thistle Eradication, August 22, 1975, Cabinet 3, Drawer 2, Folder N50 

Pest and Weed Control, Jewel Cave NM CF.

180 Dilts, Memorandum: Canadian Thistle, June 30, 1976.

181 Natural and Cultural Resource Management Plan and Environmental Assessment for Jewel Cave National 

Monument, May 5, 1983, 8–10, 16.

182 Management Assistant, Jewel Cave National Monument to Superintendent, Wind Cave National Monument, 

Memorandum: Cattle Trespass, November 22, 1976, 2, Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, Folder L24 Encroachments, Jewel Cave 

NM CF; Stephen M. Hurd, Memorandum: Cattle Trespass in Jewel Cave National Monument, December 5, 1974, 

Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, Folder L24 Encroachments, Jewel Cave NM CF.

183 Management Assistant, Jewel Cave National Monument to Superintendent, Wind Cave National Monument, 

Memorandum: Cattle Trespass, November 22, 1976, 2.

184 Randall to Superintendent, Wind Cave National Park, Memorandum: Boundary Fencing, Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, 

Folder L3019 Land Use (special) Grazing, Jewel Cave NM CF.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 207

agencies cooperated to add some fencing on the south side of Highway 16, but it deteriorated within 

a decade.185

Another issue related to cattle arose in 1989, stemming from the terms of the 1965 land 

exchange between the Forest Service and the NPS. A Forest Service cattle watering station, known 

as Prairie Dog Spring, had become part of the monument through the exchange. The Forest Service 

continued to use the spring, as the exchange legislation had provided, by pumping water onto 

adjacent Forest Service land for livestock. By 1989, the equipment was in a poor state of repair and 

the surrounding land was overgrazed. Fred L. Way, wildlife biologist with the Black Hills National 

Forest’s Elk Mountain Ranger District, recommended dismantling the existing structure and 

converting the spring into a water source for wildlife, as well as a source of water and insects for 

bats to feed on. The NPS could develop educational or interpretive signage for the area.186

Fire Management 

The possibility of fire within monument boundaries had increased as a result of the 1965 land 

exchange. The land added to the monument had previously been managed by the Forest Service for 

commercial timber production. After the exchange, the “explosion of young ponderosa pine” 

(known as dog hair growth), a pattern of trees dying along the Highway 16 corridor, and a 75-year 

program of complete fire suppression resulted in an area of high fire risk. On average, the Black 

Hills area experienced 138 fires a year, burning some 780 acres.187

Managers recognized that the history of total fire suppression posed problems for fire 

management and created conditions that could lead to a “catastrophic fire.” They reported that 

“past suppression action has caused an explosion of hazardous fuel, which will require continual 

suppression action.” Jewel Cave completed hazardous fuel reduction activities, like mechanical 

thinning and slash pile burning, in cooperation with the Forest Service and Wind Cave.188 The 1983 

RMP specified that “all wildfires within the Monument are suppressed due to the extensive, highvalue developments located here, its small size and its proximity to neighboring commercial timber.” 

However, the plan also recommended prescribed fire in the monument as an alternative to 

mechanical trimming and slash burning.189

185 Dennis L. Ditmanson to Associate Regional Director, memorandum, December 18, 1986, Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, 

Folder L24 Encroachments, Jewel Cave NM CF.

186 Fred L. Way, Wildlife Biologist, Elk Mountain Ranger District, Black Hills National Forest, “Inspection of 

Prairie Dog Spring with Jewel Cave Personnel,” Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, Folder L3019 Land Use (special) Grazing, Jewel 

Cave NM CF.

187 Natural and Cultural Resource Management Plan and Environmental Assessment for Jewel Cave National 

Monument, May 5, 1983, 16, 23.

188 Herschel E. Schultz and James R. Ellenwood III, “Fire Management Plan, Jewel Cave National Monument, 

1986,” [pdf 30–31], Cabinet 2, Drawer 2, Folder Y14 Wildland Fire Mgt, Wildland Fire Plan, Jewel Cave NM CF; Marvin 

J. Liewer to Albert Hendricks, June 5, 1980, and Lee R. Sutton to Al Hendricks, July 3, 1980, both in Cabinet 1, Drawer 

4, Folder Y1419 Wildland Fire Suppression, Jewel Cave NM CF.

189 Natural and Cultural Resource Management Plan and Environmental Assessment for Jewel Cave National 

Monument, May 5, 1983, 23–24.
208 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

In 1986, the NPS produced a Fire Management Plan for the monument that further promoted 

the concept of prescribed burns. The plan described the role of fire in the past as producing 

nutrients, thinning young seedlings, and opening up parts of the forest for new growth. It noted that 

fire was “not the destructive agent it once was thought to be” but was, “in fact, an important factor 

in maintaining this forest ecosystem.” The plan called for a “long range program to restore the role 

of fire on the Monument.”190 Managers hoped that continued mechanical thinning would eventually 

make the area suitable for management through prescribed burning, and they recommended that 

Wind Cave and Forest Service personnel assist with prescribed burn events, including interagency 

cooperative burns in areas near the monument boundaries.191

The NPS conducted the first-ever prescribed burn at Jewel Cave in October 1986. It was carried 

out “in cooperation with the Black Hills Interagency Fire Group,” with some 45 personnel from 

several state and federal agencies participating. As part of a training course called “Prescribed Fire 

for Practitioners,” three days of classroom instruction preceded the “field exercise” on Thursday 

October 30, when fire was applied to a “44-acre area of open-grown ponderosa pine/meadow.” The 

monument remained open during the exercise, with a park ranger on hand “to interpret the park’s 

prescribed fire program and to answer visitor questions.”192

In 1989, Jewel Cave, Wind Cave, Devils Tower, Mount Rushmore, and the Black Hills National 

Forest signed a five-year MOU outlining procedures for each agency in responding to wildfires in 

the area. The agency detecting the fire would promptly notify the other agency’s dispatch center to 

facilitate quick deployment of fire crews. Each agency had specific response responsibilities, 

depending on the fire’s location and Burning Index. For a Burning Index of moderate and above, 

NPS crews from Wind Cave and Jewel Cave were required to respond to all reported fires on Forest 

Service land within three miles of park boundaries and, if requested, would respond forest-wide.193

Another agreement that year between Jewel Cave and the Black Hills National Forest required staff 

from each agency to cooperate in developing action plans. They agreed to meet at least annually to 

consult on “vegetation/timber management programs that may impact each agency’s resources and 

resolve concerns early in the planning process.”194

Cultural Resources

The primary cultural resource management activity in this period related to the Civilian 

Conservation Corps (CCC) ranger cabin. In 1981, as a result of a field survey of the cabin, Rocky 

190 Schultz and Ellenwood III, “Fire Management Plan, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1986,” [pdf 6]. 

191 Schultz and Ellenwood III, “Fire Management Plan, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1986,” [pdf 30–31].

192 Dennis L. Ditmanson, “News Release: Jewel Cave Announces Fall Prescribed Burn,” October 21, 1986, Cabinet 

1, Drawer 3, Folder K1817 Interpretive Planning Jewel Cave NM CF.

193 Memorandum of Understanding between The Black Hills National Forest and Devils Tower National 

Monument, Mount Rushmore National Memorial, Jewel Cave National Monument, and Wind Cave National Park, 

1989, Cabinet 1, Drawer 2, Folder A54 Inspections, Surveys, Appraisal, Jewel Cave NM CF.

194 Interagency Agreement Between National Park Service, Jewel Cave National Monument and United States 

Forest Service, Black Hills National Forest, 1989, Cabinet 2, Drawer 2, Folder Y1421 Wildland Fire Prescribed Fire, 

Jewel Cave NM CF.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 209

Mountain Regional Director (and former Jewel Cave Management Assistant) Jim Thompson 

concluded that it was eligible for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places. He 

instructed the regional office to submit a nomination. Maintenance crews reroofed the building and 

removed a “a nonconforming, modern addition.”195 They also took steps to improve the appearance 

of the area and “to restore an exterior ‘historic scene’” by removing chain link fencing, dilapidated 

housing, overhead wiring, and asphalt trail surfaces, and regrading and reseeding areas after the 

removals.196

The 1983 RMP laid out a broader cultural resource management program for the monument. It 

provided an overview of the monument’s cultural resources and ideas for preservation and 

interpretation: 

Cultural resources at Jewel Cave National Monument are limited to certain developments at the 

historic entrance to the cave which were constructed by members of the Civilian Conservation Corps 

in the early 1930’s. These developments included the ranger cabin which also functioned as an 

administrative center, the trail to the entrance and the entrance itself. . . . 

Long range plans are to restore the historic scene so that visitors to this part of the Monument will 

have an experience reminiscent of that which could have been received in the early years of the 

National Park Service operation at Jewel Cave.197

However, the NPS lacked data about the “historic scene” that could guide restoration of the area. 

The RMP therefore identified preparation of a Historic Resource Study (HRS) as the monument’s 

top cultural resource management priority. Information from an HRS would inform restoration of 

historic structures and interpretation at the monument.198 The RMP recommended further study of 

the historic CCC cabin to identify needs beyond the minor historic preservation work that had just 

been completed.199 It also recommended identifying and interviewing former CCC members who 

had worked at the Jewel Cave camp, a project of some urgency since that group was aging.200 In 

1987, the revised Statement for Management again listed as one of the monument’s many objectives 

the need “to research the cultural history of the monument and provide for the preservation of such 

195 Harrison Goodall, Field Survey, April 29, 1980, File 3390c, Jewel Cave NM MF; DOI, NPS, RMR, As 

Maintained Roads and Trails within Jewel Cave National Monument, May 30, 1975, eTIC; Rocky Mountain Regional 

Director James B. Thompson to SD State Historic Preservation Officer Junius Fishburne, February 4, 1981, File 3393e, 

Jewel Cave NM MF.

196 Additions to Assessment of Effect Form, undated [May 1984], File 3387h, Jewel Cave NM MF; Rocky Mountain 

Regional Office, Jewel Cave National Monument, Annual Goals for FY1984; Superintendent’s Annual Report, Wind 

Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument, 1983, 15–16; Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave 

National Monument, 1989, 7.

197 Natural and Cultural Resource Management Plan and Environmental Assessment for Jewel Cave National 

Monument, May 5, 1983, 32.

198 Natural and Cultural Resource Management Plan and Environmental Assessment for Jewel Cave National 

Monument, May 5, 1983, 32.

199 Rocky Mountain Regional Office Historic Preservation Team, Historic Administration Building Pres., Jewel Cave 

National Monument, blueprint, approved April 27, 1982, eTIC. 

200 Natural and Cultural Resource Management Plan and Environmental Assessment for Jewel Cave National 

Monument, May 5, 1983, 34.
210 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

resources as may be deemed significant.” It reiterated the need to document the role of the CCC at 

Jewel Cave and to preserve the historic ranger cabin.201

Archeological Investigations 

There were almost no archeological investigations at the site in the 1980s. One exception came 

in 1984, when the NPS proposed several “dugouts” on Forest Service land adjacent to the 

monument in order to collect soil for the monument’s sewage system. After the soil was removed, 

the dugouts would be used by the Forest Service for watering livestock and wildlife. Because the 

project involved ground disturbance, it required an archeological survey to comply with Section 106 

of the 1966 National Historic Preservation Act (P.L. 96-515).202 Forest Service archeologists 

completed the archeological survey and made recommendations for mitigation, which the NPS 

would need to complete since it was an NPS project.203

Administrative History 

As Jewel Cave’s staff grew, managers considered how to use the monument’s history to inform 

management. In 1984, Ditmanson requested funding for an administrative history of the monument, 

since “much of the early history of the Monument has already been lost.”204 He noted, “As the status 

of Jewel Cave continues to grow with the ever-increasing mileage, knowledge of how the area was 

set aside and how it developed will become more important.” Many with knowledge of the early 

history of the monument were elderly, and while some had been interviewed as part of a 75th

anniversary celebration in 1984, others had not.205

In 1986, Ditmanson applied to the NPS Research Center at the University of Wyoming for 

funding to “compile an oral history of the exploration of Jewel Cave” to supplement Herb and Jan 

Conn’s recently published book, The Jewel Cave Adventure: Fifty Miles of Discovery Under South Dakota.

206

Ditmanson wrote, 

Herb and Jan Conn, the primary explorers of Jewel Cave, have written of their experiences in The 

Jewel Cave Adventure. The book, however, does not deal with the subject of how National Park 

Service officials perceived or dealt with the tremendous discoveries the Conn’s were making. The 

book also stops its narrative in the late 1970’s and does not cover how the other individuals involved 

201 Statement for Management, Jewel Cave National Monument, March 1987, 10–11, 26.

202 An Act of October 15, 1966, 80 Stat. 915 (P.L. 96-515). 

203 Lance W. Rom, “A Level III Cultural Resource Inventory of the Jewel Cave Dugouts,” June 1984, Cabinet 3, 

Drawer 1, Folder Archeo Resource for Pole Barn, Jewel Cave NM CF.

204 Rocky Mountain Regional Office, Jewel Cave National Monument, Annual Goals for FY1984, 2; DOI, NPS, 

Development/Study Package Proposal, Research & Prepare an Administrative History, March 30, 1984, Cabinet 2, 

Drawer 3, Folder D2215 #118 Admin. History, Jewel Cave NM CF.

205 NPS, “Anniversary Publication Underway for Jewel Cave National Monument,” press release, April 15, 1983; 

DOI, NPS, Development/Study Package Proposal, Research & Prepare an Administrative History, March 30, 1984.

206 Herb and Jan Conn, The Jewel Cave Adventure: Fifty Miles of Discovery Under South Dakota (St. Louis: Cave Books, 

1977), 21–64. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 211

in the exploration felt about the significance of what they were finding. This study should produce 

both taped and transcribed data for future inclusion in a larger administrative history of the 

Monument.

207

The center, however, funded scientific research topics, not historical ones, so it did not support the 

oral history project.

208 Jewel Cave unit managers submitted additional requests to the Rocky 

Mountain Regional Office for an administrative history through 1989, but none were fulfilled.209

This was perhaps indicative of a disparity that existed between parks in the Rocky Mountain Region, 

where several large, complex parks (Yellowstone National Park, for example) intensified competition 

for funding within the region, sometimes to the detriment of smaller park units. This disparity did 

not exist within the Midwest Region, where most parks were smaller and thus operated on a more 

level playing field.210

Museum Collection 

In 1986, Jewel Cave staff updated and reorganized the interpretive goals for the museum 

collection under three broad themes:

1. The Geology of Jewel Cave – the formation of the cave; scientific significance of various 

cave formations; uniqueness of Jewel Cave.

2. The Story of Man and Human Events Connected to Jewel Cave – discovery, early attempts 

at mining and tourism, exploration, surveying and mapping, National Monument status, 

NPS activities, development, the future.

3. The Natural History of the Surface Area of Jewel Cave National Monument – wildlife, 

Ponderosa Pine forest, fire ecology, plants.211

Items in the collection could be used for exhibits and interpretive programs, and they could be made 

available for researchers to study.212

In 1989, the Rocky Mountain Regional Office initiated a review of all parks’ museum collections 

to ensure compliance with regulations and “long-term preservation” of collections.213 The inspection 

of Jewel Cave revealed that the monument needed to “upgrade collection management to conform 

with present [NPS] standards.” Storage facilities and collection security were not adequate for proper 

207 Dennis Ditmanson to Kenneth L. Diem, September 26, 1986, Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, Folder N2219 Research 

Proposals & Projects, Jewel Cave NM CF.

208 Ken Diem to Park Superintendents and Concerned Natural Resource Managers and Research Scientists, August 

1, 1988, Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, Folder N2219 Research Proposals & Projects, Jewel Cave NM CF.

209 Outline of Planning Requirements, Jewel Cave National Monument, May 15, 1986, 2; Outline of Planning 

Requirements, Jewel Cave National Monument, June 2, 1989, 1–2.

210 Cockrell to Greenwald, April 7, 2020.

211 Herschel E. Schulz, “Jewel Cave National Monument Scope of Collection Statement,” January 10, 1986, 1–2, 

Cabinet 3, Drawer 1, Folder H20 Collections Management & Preserv. (I. Cultural A. Museum), Jewel Cave NM CF.

212 Schulz, “Jewel Cave National Monument Scope of Collection Statement,” January 10, 1986.

213 Richard Strait to Superintendents Rocky Mountain Region, March 16, 1989, Cabinet 3, Drawer 1, Folder 

Museum Storage & Exhibit Space, Jewel Cave NM CF.
212 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

preservation of photographs, historic clothing, and a large cave exploration map. However, the 

monument’s space and staffing limitations made collections management difficult.214

At the request of the Jewel Cave staff, a park curator and museum technician from Badlands 

National Park came “to begin to bring the collections management at Jewel Cave into complete 

compliance with National Park Service policies and procedures.” They catalogued collections, 

suggested supplies and materials needed for proper storage, and installed the Automated National 

Catalogue System (ANCS) on the monument’s computer.215 After their visit, the park curator noted, 

The Chief Ranger and Site Manager are both interested and concerned about the collection, but with 

such a small staff and low budget they have little, if any, time to spend in the museum. But they DO 

want things done right, and would appreciate whatever support they can get from the Regional Office.

The curator called Jewel Cave’s collection “small, neat,” and “very manageable,” commenting that it 

could easily be “a model collection, fully catalogued on ANCS,” if funding became available.216

Interpretation and Education 

The majority of Jewel Cave staff in the 

1970s and 1980s were seasonal interpreters 

(see Figure 98). Al Hendricks later 

characterized Jewel Cave as “primarily an 

interpretive park . . . our primary 

responsibility to the public was making sure 

that they had the opportunity to see Jewel 

Cave, take a cave tour, and learn about the 

features there at the park.”

217 Both 

interpretation and resource management fell 

under a single division chief, and since there 

were no resource management staff until 

1985, the chief of interpretation, resource 

management, and visitor protection focused 

primarily on interpretation. While visitor 

numbers rose steadily, funding and staffing 

did not increase proportionately, which made 

accommodating the demand for cave tours increasingly difficult. The monument’s cooperating 

association assisted with funding interpretive programs to ameliorate the shortage, but 

superintendents and unit managers continued to struggle with an underfunded interpretive program. 

214 [illegible signature], Trip Report, February 15, 1989, Cabinet 3, Drawer 1, Folder Museum Storage & Exhibit 

Space, Jewel Cave NM CF.

215 Jack W. Neckels to Superintendent, Badlands National Park, July 12, 1989, Cabinet 3, Drawer 1, Folder 

Equipment Needs, Jewel Cave NM CF.

216 Valerie Naylor and Marjorie Glass, “Trip Report to the Regional Curator, Rocky Mountain Region,” June 13, 

1989, Cabinet 3, Drawer 1, Folder Museum Storage & Exhibit Space, Jewel Cave NM CF.

217 Hendricks, interview. 

Figure 98. A park ranger staffs the information desk at the 

Jewel Cave visitor center, ca. 1974.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 213

Tours and Visitor Services 

Figure 99. A tour group passes through the “Torture Room” along the Scenic Tour route, 1973.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

In the early 1970s, Jewel Cave staff offered four different tours: the Scenic Tour (the most 

popular tour, which visitors accessed via the new cave elevator) (see Figure 99), the Historic Tour 

(from the Michauds’ entrance to the cave), the Long Spelunking Tour (five to six hours), and the 

Short Spelunking Tour (three to four hours). Monument staff gave cave tours from Memorial Day 

to Labor Day, from 8:30 am until around 7:30 pm (the visitor center closed at 7:45 pm to give tour 

participants time to visit the bookstore before leaving).218 In the wintertime, the Historic Tour was 

not offered, but the staff gave the Scenic Tour on the infrequent occasion that a visitor arrived and 

requested one. For example, on a February day in 1979, Hendricks noted that no one had arrived by 

1:00 pm. Low visitation meant the lights in the cave remained off for most of the winter.219 In the 

218 Hendricks, interview; Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020; Jewel Cave National Monument, informational 

brochure (US GPO, 1972), File 712c, Jewel Cave NM MF; Statement for Management, Jewel Cave National Monument, 

March 1987, SFM-4.

219 Al Hendricks, daily note log, February 10, 1979; June 24, 1979, from Hendricks’ personal files; Wiles, comments

on draft, April 7, 2020.
214 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

1980s, Jewel Cave offered from 3 to 30 tours per day, depending on staff availability and demand of 

visitors.220

Tour groups were limited to 25 people except for the Long Spelunking Tour and the Short 

Spelunking Tour, both of which were limited to 10 participants (see Figure 100).221 Hendricks

explained how the staff regulated tour size on the fly: 

There was a size limit on the tours. I don’t know what it is today, but when I was there, it was twentyfive per tour, on the Scenic Tour. The rule of thumb was that if you had sold up to twenty-four tickets 

and five more people walked in, up to twenty-nine, you could sell the tickets up to twenty-nine. The 

moment you hit twenty-five, or a number between twenty-five and twenty-nine, you stopped selling 

tickets for that tour and you moved on to the next tour. We did not take reservations at that time. 

You had to actually physically show up to purchase tickets.

Figure 100. Herb Conn 

with a Spelunking 

Tour, state of South 

Dakota photograph, 

1975.

Source: NPS, Jewel 

Cave NM.

Tours brought in significant funds for Jewel Cave, and although most it went to a general NPS fund 

rather than staying at the monument, collecting and depositing fees from the tours became a major 

part of the management assistant or unit manager’s job.222

McClanahan wanted staff to wear Class A uniforms while giving all cave tours, which included 

wool pants and wide-brimmed NPS Stetson hats. Hendricks tried to explain to McClanahan that 

such attire was not practical for the Historic Tour. The dusty historic area mucked up uniforms, 

forcing staff to use their own money to dry-clean their wool pants (whereas the less formal uniforms 

could be washed in a machine at home). McClanahan insisted, however, so Hendricks invited him 

for a Historic Tour, which they took with seasonal ranger Bruce Bitz, all in their Class A uniforms. 

Hendricks explained how it went: 

So Bruce took us off on the left hand tour. I believe it was called the Dungeon Route. And that’s 

when I learned that Les [McClanahan], apparently, is also claustrophobic. Which didn’t help. So, 

standing in the first room in the cave, you can look out the natural entrance and you can still see 

220 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Wind Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument, 1983, 14; 

Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1984, 3.

221 Statement for Management, Jewel Cave National Monument, March 1987, SFM-4; Wiles, comments on draft, 

April 7, 2020. 

222 Hendricks, interview. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 215

daylight. It was a nice, bright day out. And so, the room was light, even though there’s no electric

lights; you can still see everything, it’s just fine. But there is this kind of ominous feeling when the 

ranger goes over and closes the gate and puts the padlock on, because you’re now locked in the cave. 

You can still see daylight, but if you’re claustrophobic, that doesn’t help. And sometimes even visitors 

would say, “You know, I think it’s time for me to leave.”

But Les was apparently game. And off we went down the left-hand passage, following the whole tour 

group. Les and I brought up the rear. And almost immediately, you’re practically on your hands and 

knees. And so in we go, and Les is in front of me. And I’m not saying a word. But I did happen to 

notice that within, I’d say, the first fifty feet, he knocked his Stetson off at least four or five times 

because it’s so narrow. You can’t keep it on. And it was probably about a five-minute trek to the next 

room that was big enough to hold the size of the group that we had; the visitors, and Les and me, of 

course. We were considerably late in arriving. But Bruce had waited for us. And then he gave his 

geology talk and told everybody about what they were seeing. And of course, Les and I, and Bruce, 

and all the visitors, were now pretty well covered with cave dirt. And when Bruce finished his talk and 

answering whatever questions there were, he said, “Okay, it’s another five minutes to the next room 

that’s large enough for all of us to gather in. Watch your head as you go on through, and just follow 

me.” And off they went.

Les turned to me, and he said, “Hendricks! You’ve made your 

point.” And he turned around and without another word, he 

beelined it towards the exit.223

After that point, staff were not required to wear Class A 

uniforms while giving historic cave tours (see Figure 101).

Spelunking Tours were led by rangers who had served 

at least one year as a GS-4, who could then be hired as a 

GS-5 Spelunking Tour guide the following year (other 

tours could be led by lower-grade rangers).224 On one fourhour Spelunking Tour in August 1975, a visitor got stuck in 

the “Brain Drain,” a tight squeeze along the route. The 

visitor weighed around 240 pounds, and staff had already 

taken precautions ahead of the tour in case his size became 

an issue (two other employees had met the tour at an 

intersection near the Brain Drain).225 Despite this, the 

visitor remained stuck for almost four full hours. Staff 

brought him blankets and a thermos of coffee to keep him 

warm. Staff eventually chiseled away dogtooth spar to 

extricate him from the squeeze.226

223 Hendricks, interview. 

224 Wiles, interview. 

225 DOI, NPS, Case Incident Record, August 3, 1975, Cabinet 1, Drawer 1, [loose in drawer], Jewel Cave NM CF; 

Thomas P. Martin, account, August 3, 1975, Cabinet 1, Drawer 1, [loose in drawer], Jewel Cave NM CF.

226 John Roth, account, August 3, 1975, Cabinet 1, Drawer 1, [loose in drawer], Jewel Cave NM CF; Wiles, 

comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

Figure 101. Jim Basinger leads a Historic 

Tour in the 1980s.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.
216 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

McClanahan considered discontinuing the Spelunking Tour after the incident, but Management 

Assistant Hurd recommended keeping it. Hurd argued that the Spelunking Tour was an important 

part of the interpretive program, and, if anything, the park simply needed more guides to lead it. 

Hurd also had an idea about how to prevent similar incidents: 

A handspan squeeze should be constructed of concrete that would simulate the Brain Drain. This 

would be placed behind the Visitor Center. All individuals would be required to go through this 

squeeze prior to being allowed to go through the Brain Drain.227

Staff constructed such a device and installed it outside of the visitor center (see Figure 102).

McClanahan discontinued the Long Spelunking Tour out of safety concerns. Even before the 

incident, staff had expressed concerns about groups coming out late and participants being overly 

exhausted. Dilts argued, as Hurd had, that the Spelunking Tour was an “important interpretive 

activity at Jewel Cave” that provided “the more hardy and adventuresome an opportunity to learn 

more about the cave and caving.” He recommended having four guides on staff who could lead the 

Spelunking Tour.228 But the tour consistently failed to bring in enough funds to pay for itself, which 

limited offerings. In 1979, thanks to a $4,500 budget surplus at Wind Cave, Jewel Cave increased

Spelunking Tours to three times a week.229

Figure 102. Jewel 

Cave managers 

developed a 

“Handspan Squeeze” 

to put outside of the 

visitor center, so that 

people thinking of 

going on the 

spelunking tour 

could simulate fitting 

through tight 

passages.

Source: NPS, Jewel 

Cave NM.

227 Jewel Cave NM Management Assistant Stephen M. Hurd to Wind Cave National Park Superintendent, 

memorandum, October 10, 1975, Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, Folder K187 Interp Prospectus, Jewel Cave NM CF.

228 Larry D. Dilts to Management Assistant, Jewel Cave, memorandum, October 9, 1976, Cabinet 1, Drawer 4, 

[loose in drawer], Jewel Cave NM CF. 

229 Al Hendricks, daily note log, March 21, 1979, from Hendricks’ personal files; Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 

2020. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 217

To accommodate visitors who had to wait several hours for a tour during the busy summer 

months, Jewel Cave managers developed additional aboveground programs (see Figure 103). In

1977, Hendricks started scheduling short (15- to 30-minute) presentations by seasonal staff “during 

the busiest part of each day when visitors are waiting up to an hour and a half for a cave tour,” 

which was usually from 11 am to 3:30 pm. During the 1977 season, staff presented 342 of these 

surface programs on topics such as “cave climbing techniques, demonstrations of the use of carbide 

lamps, Black Hills history, [and] fire ecology.”230 Interpretive staff continued to present these short, 

surface programs in the 1980s, expanding the topics to bats, exploration techniques, geology, and 

more.231

Figure 103. Park rangers developed short interpretive programs to give outside of the cave, so that people waiting for 

cave tours had something to do.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

An interpretive nature trail provided another way to give those waiting for cave tours something 

to do. After years of planning, monument staff began working on the interpretive trail in 1981. Staff 

considered several options for a route. They wanted a trail long enough to play out an interpretive 

theme about the local environment, but short enough to allow for a quick return when the next cave 

230 Jewel Cave National Monument Objectives, 1979 FY, 1, Cabinet 3, Drawer 3, Folder A6419 Goals/Objectives 

Long Term Management Plans, Jewel Cave NM CF.

231 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1985, 3.
218 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

tour began. The agreed-upon route ran about 100 yards from the visitor center to a scenic overlook 

of Hell and Lithograph Canyons. It offered viewing of wildflowers, a large variety of grasses and 

forbs, ponderosa pine in various stages of maturity, and stumps illustrating the history of logging in 

the Black Hills. Numbered signs with accompanying pamphlets would explain the specific features, 

and a speaker mounted at the overlook could announce upcoming tours.232 The Burlington 

Northern Railroad donated used railroad ties for trail construction, and Youth Conservation Corps 

(YCC) crews completed the trail in 1984.233

Managers asked for more staffing to meet the demand for tours, but little came through. During 

a period of leaner budgets in the early 1980s, the NPS Washington Office promoted increasing 

volunteer hours as part of “management efficiency.” At Jewel Cave, Chief of Interpretation and 

Resource Management Herschel Schulz used volunteers and SCA interns to supplement paid 

interpretive staff. Schulz’s efforts paid off: in 1982, volunteers had donated 289 hours for both 

interpretation and exploration, but only two years later, volunteers donated 2,296 hours to the 

interpretive program alone. SCA interns gave tours and performed other interpretive duties starting 

in 1984, funded through the Wind Cave/Jewel Cave Natural History Association and a separate 

private donation.234 Schulz essentially “added [the SCA interns] to staff” to make up for a decrease in 

seasonal staff, and he reorganized division funds to hire two seasonal supervisors to manage the 

staff, SCA interns, and volunteers.235By 1987, labor from SCA interns and volunteers allowed Jewel 

Cave to remain open for cave tours through November, but there was no concerted effort to keep 

the visitor center open year-round.236

Even with the help of volunteers and SCA interns, staff struggled to keep up with the demand 

for tours. Ditmanson hypothesized that increased visitation 

may be attributed to a growing awareness of the cave’s stature as one of the longest caves in the 

world, a national effort to divert attention to the lesser-visited park areas, and a local effort to keep 

the media informed of activities at the Monument.237

1986 was the busiest year in the monument’s history up to that point, with 134,973 visitors to the 

monument, 66,012 of whom went on cave tours. (For visitation figures by year, see Appendix E.) In 

the busy summer season, staff could accommodate 710 people per day on tours, but informal 

232 Interpretive Nature Trail notes, undated, Cabinet 3, Drawer 3, Folder Construct Interpretive Trail from Visitor 

Center, Jewel Cave NM CF.

233 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Wind Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument, 1983, 18;

Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1984, 3.

234 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1984, 3; Superintendent’s Annual Report, 

Jewel Cave National Monument, 1985, 3–4.

235 Rocky Mountain Regional Office, Jewel Cave National Monument, Annual Goals for FY1984, 3; 

Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1985, 3–4.

236 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Wind Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument, 1983; 

Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1984, 1; Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave 

National Monument, 1985, 1; Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

237 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1984, 2.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 219

surveys indicated that over 400 people were turned away some days.238 Ditmanson asked the South 

Dakota Tourism office to take Jewel Cave off its promotional brochures, because staff could not 

keep up with existing demand.239

Interpretive planners from Harpers Ferry Center (Bill Clark) and the Rocky Mountain Regional 

Office (Peggy Dolinich) visited Jewel Cave in 1988 to investigate the continued failure to provide 

cave tours for all who wanted to take one.240 They offered the following assessment: 

The immediate and future situation at Jewel Cave is that the demand for tours exceeds the capacity. 

This is based upon the number of rangers available to give tours, the cave capacity for ranger-led 

tours, and the visitation. The current 1⁄2 mile trail can only accommodate four tours an hour, and even 

that is pushing it. Therefore, hiring more rangers will not help the situation. Currently the maximum 

tour capacity is 25 persons. Visitation continues to increase at a rate of 7% per year. Highway 16, the 

state highway that goes right by the entrance to Jewel Cave, is the east-west access to Yellowstone 

National Park. The highway is currently being widened to four lanes [a plan that was not carried out at 

the time]. The park will be affected in 1993 when the road is realigned. All this equates to long waits 

to tour the cave, and the inability to accommodate everyone who wishes to tour the cave. Last year, 

only 60% of those visiting the park were able to tour the cave. Since the cave is the primary resource 

of the park, this is very low.241

Dolinich recommended increasing tour sizes from 25 to 40 people, and she considered, but 

recommended against, opening more of the cave to visitors. A larger group size would necessitate 

widening certain stops along the tour route and adding wayside exhibits, and many Jewel Cave 

employees were concerned that larger groups would lead to increased damage of cave resources.

242

In response to these concerns, Dolinich wrote, 

We believe that the number of persons on the cave tour has nothing to do with the damage to the 

cave. It is rather a function of who is on the tour. Therefore to believe that the ranger is watching 

each and every visitor, keeping them from destroying the cave, is false. The cave is and continues to 

be damaged in the present situation.243

To accommodate even more people, Dolinich suggested developing a self-guided audio tour, 

narrated by Herb and Jan Conn and Art and Peg Palmer. She recommended partnering with 

Antenna Theater, which had recently completed an audio tour for the NPS at Alcatraz Island, to 

238 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1986, 3; Superintendent’s Annual Report, 

Jewel Cave National Monument, 1987, 1; Statement for Management, Jewel Cave National Monument, March 1987, 13, 

23; Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1988, 1.

239 Dennis L. Ditmanson to Eileen Daily, Tour Development Coordinator, South Dakota Tourism, September 4, 

1985, Cabinet 1, Drawer 2, Folder 6.A.1 Correspondence, Jewel Cave NM CF.

240 Peggy Dolinich, Interpretive Planner, Rocky Mountain Regional Office, to Rocky Mountain Regional Director, 

memorandum, October 11, 1988, 1, Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, Folder K1817 Interp Prospectus, Jewel Cave NM CF.

241 Dolinich to Rocky Mountain Regional Director, memorandum, October 11, 1988, 1. Not reflected in these 

numbers is the fact that many people who came to the visitor center did not want to tour the cave. Wiles, comments on 

draft, April 7, 2020. 

242 Dolinich to Rocky Mountain Regional Director, memorandum, October 11, 1988, 2, 4; Wiles, comments on 

draft, April 7, 2020.

243 Dolinich to Rocky Mountain Regional Director, memorandum, October 11, 1988, 2.
220 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

develop the audio tour and a spin-off video.244 A self-guided tour would require an electronic 

security system with video cameras monitoring visitors, which Jewel Cave staff worried would be 

difficult to operate in the humid cave environment (where even phones malfunctioned) and 

ineffective in deterring damage to cave resources.245

The Rocky Mountain Regional Office supported the plan to increase the tour group limit, but 

Holder expressed concerns about the self-guided tour. He suggested the problem be remedied by 

expanding staff, so that interpreters could offer tours every 15 minutes, using schedules in which 

interpretive staff each gave four tours per day—a grueling pace for employees, but better than the 

self-guided alternative, Holder believed.246 He explained, 

The idea of developing a self-guiding tour on the caliber of the Alcatraz experience is exciting but I 

think it needs to be made clear that the park still considers this method of interpretation an option 

and not necessarily the final solution. One thing that needs to be remembered is that no matter what 

means of interpretation the park decides to present, whether it is media or personnel services based or 

a combination of both, all visitors to the park will not be served. In your trip report you correctly state 

that “the immediate and future situation at Jewel Cave is that the demand for tours exceeds the 

capacity”, but this situation will always exist. Visitation to the park is already close to or beyond that 

which that cave itself can sustain. One solution may be to open more cave for visitation, but this 

option would have the greatest negative impact on the cave and [is] therefore not appropriate. What 

we need to seek is the best method of utilizing or adapting present cave development that protects the 

cave and its resources while allowing as many visitors as possible the opportunity to learn about and 

experience the cave.247

The Conns and the Palmers strongly opposed self-guided tours and a security system at Jewel Cave, 

and they were not willing to participate in recording the audio tour.248 To support their position, 

Herb and Jan Conn solicited feedback on the idea from other cavers. Dwight Deal thought it would 

be a “huge mistake,” and Dave Schnute was “equally distressed at the prospect of self-guided tours.” 

The Conns wrote to Holder, 

Jewel Cave means a lot to us. We’ve devoted many years of our lives to it in one way or another, and 

we would hate to see it despoiled for the sake of increasing visitation or as an experiment in modem 

technology.249

The Conns and Palmers went on an exploratory trip in 1989 “to investigate the possibilities of 

additional tours from the existing elevator landings within Jewel Cave,” in lieu of self-guided audio 

244 Dolinich to Rocky Mountain Regional Director, memorandum, October 11, 1988, 3–4.

245 Mike Wiles later noted that self-guided tours at Carlsbad Caverns, where there is more room for visitors to 

maneuver than at Jewel Cave, have resulted in damage to or theft of thousands of stalactites. Wiles, comments on draft, 

April 7, 2020: Steve L. Holder to Rocky Mountain Regional Director, memorandum, December 13, 1988, 2, Cabinet 1, 

Drawer 3, Folder K1817 Interp Prospectus, Jewel Cave NM CF.

246 Note on memo from Peggy Dolinich to RMR Director, October 11, 1988, 1, Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, Folder K1817 

Interp Prospectus, Jewel Cave NM CF; Holder to Rocky Mountain Regional Director, memorandum, December 13, 

1988, 2; Steve L. Holder to Herb and Jan Conn, May 8, 1989, Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, Folder K1817 Interp Prospectus, 

Jewel Cave NM CF; Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020.

247 Holder to Rocky Mountain Regional Director, memorandum, December 13, 1988, 1.

248 Holder to Rocky Mountain Regional Director, memorandum, December 13, 1988, 2.

249 Herb and Jan Conn to Steve Holder, May 3, 1989, Cabinet 3, Drawer 2, Folder N3023 Speleology Jewel Cave, 

Jewel Cave NM CF.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 221

tours. They suggested four possibilities: 1) a walking tour at the upper landing, between 20 and 40 

minutes; 2) a wheelchair tour, which would require removing the manmade wall to the left of the 

lower elevator landing and adding bridges and ramps; 3) a shorter (15-minute) walking tour, that 

would follow the wheelchair tour; 4) and a different route of the shorter walking tour. They 

proposed these as guided tours.250 Wiles reviewed these tour options several years later and 

recommended a 45-minute tour loop going east from the Target Room, but no new tours resulted.251

Ultimately, Holder and Adams decided to increase the size of the scenic tour from 25 to 40 and 

to keep offering only guided tours. They briefly experimented with self-guided tours, but the Conns 

again rallied the caving community to object to these, and the self-guided tours were discontinued.252

Even with these changes, waits of one-and-a-half-hours or longer remained common during the 

1989 season.253

Tours brought in increasing amounts of money as group size went up and offerings expanded. 

Jewel Cave tour fee revenue was $116,847 in 1983; $130,482 in 1984; $137,249 in 1986; and 

$161,845 in 1989.254 Some of those funds came back to Jewel Cave directly, in compliance with a 

1972 law (P.L. 92-347) that provided for a portion of recreational use fees collected on federal lands 

to return to the federal lands “for the enhancement of the fee collection system.”255 Parks could use 

these funds for things like hiring staff who collected fees or gave the tours that the user fees paid 

for. In 1988, Holder reported that “the effective use of fee enhancement funds” had enabled the 

hiring of additional interpretive rangers at Jewel Cave and a longer visitor season.256

In addition to tours, interpretive staff worked on a variety of projects throughout the 1980s. 

They updated slide files, prepared interpretive handouts, researched historical information about the 

park, and updated educational programs.257 Staff partnered with local schools through the Custer 

County Environmental Education Coordinating Committee—members were Jewel Cave, Wind 

Cave, Custer State Park, Black Hills National Forest, the BHPFA, and the Custer County School 

System—to develop an environmental education program for grade school students.258 Jewel Cave 

250 Herb Conn, Jan Conn, Art Palmer, Peggy Palmer, Trip Report, Jewel Cave, August 3, 1989, Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, 

[untitled orange folder], Jewel Cave NM CF. 

251 Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

252 Wiles, interview; Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

253 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1989, 5.

254 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Wind Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument, 1983, 1; 

Superintendent’s Annual Report, Wind Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument, 1984, 1; 

Superintendent’s Annual Report, Wind Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument, 1986, 1;

Superintendent’s Annual Report, Wind Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument, 1989, 1.

255 An Act of July 11, 1972, 86 Stat. 459 (P.L. 92-347). 

256 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1988, 5.

257 Research Projects at Jewel Cave National Monument by Seasonal Staff, Status Report, 1984, Cabinet 3, Drawer 

4, Folder N2219 Research Proposals & Projects, Jewel Cave NM CF; Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave 

National Monument, 1984, 3.

258 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1989, 5.
222 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

had no junior ranger program as of 1988, but staff hoped to develop one in the future, if funding 

and staffing became available.259

Jewel Cave partnered with the Forest Service and other NPS sites in interpretive programming. 

In 1987, Jewel Cave initiated a ranger exchange with Wind Cave. On scheduled days, a Jewel Cave 

ranger and Wind Cave ranger would swap places. The objective of the program was “to provide job 

diversity for the employees involved and to develop a cadre of employees that can provide tours at 

either park and provide emergency assistance when needed.” Holder found the swap to be 

“beneficial for the two park areas and the Rangers involved.”260 The ranger exchange program 

continued into 1989.261 Jewel Cave also entered a three-year agreement with the Black Hills National 

Forest (1988–1990) for a cooperative visitor services program, through which the NPS and the 

Forest Service shared the costs of supporting a volunteer position. The NPS provided housing at 

Jewel Cave, an NPS uniform, a vehicle as needed, and informational materials for distribution, while 

the Forest Service provided a job description, day-to-day supervision, and a daily stipend.262 The 

volunteer could thus represent both the NPS and the Forest Service and could inform tourists about 

activities available in the Black Hills generally.263

Brochure and Maps 

The NPS produced a new mini-folder (brochure) for Jewel Cave National Monument in 1972, to 

reflect the new visitor center and the new tours.264 Two years later, Management Assistant Steve 

Hurd asked the Harpers Ferry Center (HFC) to help with professionalizing the Jewel Cave map by 

fixing lettering, highlighting different cave tour trails, and showing the four different primary cave 

levels in color.265 Hurd had tested out an uncolored version of the map, but he did not think that it 

was adequate.266 The HFC was not able to help at the time and suggested that Hurd ask the Denver 

Service Center (DSC), but it is not clear whether the DSC ended up helping with a new map.267 In 

259 Steve Holder to Mary L. Peterson, November 4, 1988, Cabinet 1, Drawer 4, [loose in drawer], Jewel Cave NM 

CF.

260 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1987, 4.

261 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1989, 5.

262 Memorandum of Understanding Between Jewel Cave National Monument and Black Hills National Forest, 

Agreement No. MU—1569-8-8002, March 16, 1988, Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, Folder A54 Inspections, Surveys, Appraisals 

Jewel Cave NM CF. 

263 Project Description, Volunteer, attached to Memorandum of Understanding Between Jewel Cave National 

Monument and Black Hills National Forest, Agreement No. MU—1569-8-8002, March 16, 1988, Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, 

Folder A54 Inspections, Surveys, Jewel Cave NM CF.

264 Dave Todd, Annual Budget Request, for Informational Printing (Free and Sales), Jewel Cave National 

Monument, February 17, 1972, Cabinet 1, Drawer 2, Folder 6.A.2 Annual Budget Requests Printing 10-81, Jewel Cave 

NM CF.

265 Stephen M. Hurd to Bruce Hopkins, March 11, 1974, Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, Folder K38 NPS Publications, Jewel 

Cave NM CF.

266 Hurd to Hopkins, March 11, 1974.

267 Bruce Hopkins to Stephen M. Hurd, April 3, 1974, Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, Folder K38 NPS Publications, Jewel 

Cave NM CF.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 223

1979, the HFC printed a Jewel Cave map, although it is not clear whether it was the same as the 

1972 one or if it was new.268

In 1987, the NPS printed the first Jewel Cave brochure in the new unigrid format, after having 

denied requests from Jewel Cave managers for a new brochure earlier in the 1980s.269 The NPS 

Division of Publications solicited content, images, and advice from Jewel Cave staff for the new 

brochure. The Division of Publications determined the front side would be interpretive content with 

a brief introduction to the cave. The back side would be titled “Exploring Jewel Cave” and would 

include a history of exploration and information about cave tours, surface activities, and general 

visitor information. The NPS asked the Conns to review the brochure for accuracy and asked for 

their permission to include excerpts from the 1981 reprint of their 1977 book, The Jewel Cave 

Adventure.

270

Maintenance and Facilities Management 

The Jewel Cave facilities management division consisted of a full-time maintenance lead, a few 

seasonal employees, and, starting in 1988, a subject-to-furlough maintenance employee.271 Some of 

the seasonal employees were long-term. For instance, Don Lytle was a seasonal maintenance 

employee for over two decades. He won a DOI “Special Achievement Award” in 1984 for assuming 

maintenance lead responsibilities for 10 months while the position was vacant.272 Jewel Cave’s 

equipment as of the late 1980s consisted of a pickup truck, a Bobcat frontloader/backhoe, a utility 

vehicle, a sedan, a hatchback, a harvester/snowblower, a utility trailer, two fire pumpers, and a dump 

truck.273 Wind Cave sent its maintenance crew and machinery to assist Jewel Cave staff for major 

projects like road paving or snow plowing, and Jewel Cave staff occasionally assisted Wind Cave 

with similar heavy lifts. Wind Cave possessed specialized large machinery like dump trucks, road 

graders, and steel face rollers that Jewel Cave did not have.274

Starting in 1984, Jewel Cave hosted a 12-week, non-residential YCC program comprising four 

enrollees and one NPS GS-4 employee as a group leader (see Figure 104). The goal of the YCC 

program was “to provide gainful employment for 15 through 18 year old males and females; to 

268 Al Hendricks, daily note log, June 11, 1979, from Hendricks’ personal files.

269 Jewel Cave NM, Annual Budget Request, “Jewel Cave Mini-folder,” May 31, 1983, Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, Folder 

K42 Publications/Other, Jewel Cave NM CF; Steve Holder to Chief, Branch of Natural History, Division of 

Publications, Harpers Ferry Center, memorandum, June 30, 1987, Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, Folder K38 NPS Publications, 

Jewel Cave NM CF.

270 Bruce Hopkins, Chief, Branch of Natural History, Division of Publications, to Jewel Cave Unit Manager, 

memorandum, July 9, 1986, Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, Folder K38 NPS Publications, Jewel Cave NM CF.

271 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1988, 1.

272 “Don Lytle honored at Jewel Cave,” Custer County Chronicle, September 5, 1984, Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, Folder 

K1817 Interpretive Planning, Jewel Cave NM CF.

273 Statement for Management, Jewel Cave National Monument, March 1987, 19–20; Superintendent’s Annual 

Report, Wind Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument, 1983, 17–18; Superintendent’s Annual Report, 

Jewel Cave National Monument, 1989, 8–9.

274 Statement for Management, Jewel Cave National Monument, March 1987, 8.
224 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

develop an environmental understanding of the park’s resources; and to accomplish needed 

conservation work on park lands.”275 YCC crews assisted Jewel Cave maintenance staff with a variety 

of projects, including trail maintenance, housing maintenance, repair of signs and gates, fuel 

reduction, janitorial work, natural resource management, and other miscellaneous tasks.276 In later 

years, the monument shortened the program to eight weeks.277

Figure 104. Jewel Cave had Youth Conservation Corps (YCC) crews assisted with trail maintenance and other tasks, 

ca. 1984.

Source: Jewel Cave NM. 

Even with the help of YCC workers, maintenance needs exceeded available staff and funding 

levels. In 1984, Ditmanson evaluated cyclic maintenance needs of the monument and came up with 

over $239,000 of needed improvements. Ditmanson wanted to develop a property inventory and 

275 Gary A. Shelley to Jewel Cave NM Unit Manager, memorandum, August 31, 1984, Cabinet 3, Drawer 3, Folder 

A98 Conservation and Preservation YCC Program, Jewel Cave NM CF. 

276 Rocky Mountain Regional Office, Jewel Cave National Monument, Annual Goals for FY1985, 1; Youth 

Conservation Corps Work Projects, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1987, and William Waxler, Jewel Cave National 

Monument YCC Program Review, 1987, Cabinet 3, Drawer 3, Folder A98 Conservation and Preservation YCC 

Program, Jewel Cave NM CF; Brian R. Adams to Joe Helmcamp, memorandum, March 21, 1990, Cabinet 3, Drawer 3, 

Folder A98 Conservation and Preservation YCC Program, Jewel Cave NM CF.

277 NPS, Youth Conservation Corps Program Review, Jewel Cave National Monument, August 8, 1987, Cabinet 3, 

Drawer 3, Folder A98 Conservation and Preservation YCC Program, Jewel Cave NM CF; Adams to Helmcamp, 

memorandum, March 21, 1990.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 225

maintenance guide for the monument’s structures, but staff did not accomplish either task.278 They 

made progress on routine maintenance in 1986, but Congress failed to appropriate construction 

funding for projects that Ditmanson considered important, such as installing a second elevator, 

constructing a 12-unit apartment building, developing a picnic ground and comfort station, and 

expanding the visitor center and shop facility. These goals were the monument’s top four priorities, 

but none of them ranked highly on the Rocky Mountain Regional Office’s list. Installing a second 

elevator, the park’s first priority, was the region’s 391st.

279

Starting in 1989, Jewel Cave switched to the Maintenance Management System (MMS). This was 

a service-wide initiative that grew out of a June 1984 report by the Government Accountability 

Office (GAO) entitled, “The National Park Service Needs a Maintenance Management System.”280

That report drew attention to the growing backlog of maintenance needs in the system and the 

disorganized way the agency maintained and serviced existing structures and equipment.281 Its 

findings prompted Congress to pass legislation requiring the NPS to implement an MMS to track 

maintenance and operations of NPS facilities. The legislation defined MMS as:

(1) a work load inventory of assets including detailed information that quantifies for all assets 

(including but not limited to buildings, roads, utility systems, and grounds that must be maintained) 

the characteristics affecting the type of maintenance work performed;

(2) a set of maintenance tasks that describe the maintenance work in each unit of the National Park 

System;

(3) a description of work standards including frequency of maintenance, measurable quality standard 

to which assets should be maintained, methods for accomplishing work, required labor, equipment 

and material resources, and expected worker production for each maintenance task;

(4) a work program and performance budget which develops an annual work plan identifying 

maintenance needs and financial resources to be devoted to each maintenance task;

(5) a work schedule which identifies and prioritizes tasks to be done in a specific time period and 

specifies required labor resources;

(6) work orders specifying job authorizations and a record of work accomplished which can be used 

to record actual labor and material costs; and

(7) reports and special analyses which compare planned versus actual accomplishments and costs and 

can be used to evaluate maintenance operations.282

In 1988, NPS Director William Penn Mott Jr. required regional directors to comply with the new 

MMS for the first time.283 At Jewel Cave, tracking had started in 1986, and staff completed their first 

278 Rocky Mountain Regional Office, Jewel Cave National Monument, Annual Management Goals for FY1986, 1, 3.

279 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1986, 4–5; Statement for Management, Jewel 

Cave National Monument, March 1987, 6.

280 Jewel Cave NM, Maintenance Management Implementation Final Report, March 1989, 1–2, Cabinet 2, Drawer 

3, Folder A6437 Maintenance Management 1989–, Jewel Cave NM CF. 

281 GAO, “The National Park Service Needs a Maintenance Management System,” June 1, 1984, i–vi. 

282 Act of October 24, 1984, 98 Stat. 2718 (P. L. 98-540).

283 NPS Director to Regional Directors, memorandum, October 31, 1988, Cabinet 1, Drawer 4, [loose in drawer], 

Jewel Cave NM CF.
226 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

MMS report in March 1989. To implement the new system, Jewel Cave staff began an inventory 

existing features in the monument and assessed deferred maintenance on those features in labor 

hours and cost.284 To keep current with the MMS, staff collected data, wrote reports, filed updates, 

and trained personnel on the system.285 Through one MMS initiative—identifying surplus equipment 

at parks and selling it to other parks when possible—Jewel Cave purchased Wind Cave’s surplus 

five-ton dump truck in 1988.286

Visitor Center Maintenance 

The elevator in the new visitor center malfunctioned often, sometimes during thunderstorms 

and sometimes for no particular reason. Issues occurred often enough to disrupt tour schedules.287

The elevator was under warranty, and contractors replaced “worn and unsafe cables” in 1987. 

Hendricks, Ditmanson, and Holder all tried to get funding for a second elevator, especially in light 

of the heavy demand for cave tours, but the Rocky Mountain Regional Office did not consider it a 

priority.

288

Otherwise, the visitor center required only minimal maintenance during the 1970s. The roof 

leaked a little in 1979 and was repainted later in the year using cyclic maintenance funds.289 The NPS 

finally reroofed the visitor center in 1987.290 Maintenance crews installed 45 storm windows in the 

1980s as part of energy-saving retrofits.

291 In 1985, after the hydrology study found a water leak 

under the visitor center sidewalk and wooden deck, crews repaired the deck.

292

When an environmental sanitation consultant found “unacceptably high” radon levels in the 

visitor center in 1987, Philip C. Nyberg of the EPA advised that the radon likely entered the visitor 

284 Jewel Cave NM, Maintenance Management Implementation Final Report, March 1989, 6, 8, 11, 17. This 

inventory remained incomplete for several decades. Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

285 Jewel Cave NM, Maintenance Management Implementation Final Report, March 1989, 6.

286 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1989, 8–9.

287 Al Hendricks, daily note log, September 7, 1979, from Hendricks’ personal files; Al Hendricks, daily note log, 

September 16, 1979, from Hendricks’ personal files; Hendricks, interview. 

288 Jewel Cave NM, Briefing Statement, February 198[7?], Cabinet 3, Drawer 2, Folder F34 Budget Execution (2), 

Jewel Cave NM CF; Steve L. Holder, to Rocky Mountain Regional Director, Attention: Peggy Dolinich, memorandum, 

December 23, 1988, Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, Folder K1817 Interp Prospectus, Jewel Cave NM CF; Statement for 

Management, Jewel Cave National Monument, March 1987, 6; Hendricks, interview.

289 Al Hendricks, daily note log, February 7, 1979, from Hendricks’ personal files; Al Hendricks, daily note log, June 

25, 1979, from Hendricks’ personal files.

290 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1987, 6; Reroof Visitor Center, Headquarters, 

Jewel Cave National Monument, blueprint, March 23, 1987, eTIC; Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National 

Monument, 1984, 6.

291 Jewel Cave National Monument Objectives, 1979 FY, 1; Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National 

Monument, 1986, 4–5; DOI, NPS, DSC, Install Insulated Glass in V.C., Headquarters, Jewel Cave National Monument, 

July 24, 1986, eTIC; Jewel Cave National Monument Objectives, 1980 FY, 1.

292 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1985, 7–8.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 227

center through the elevator shaft as a result of cave breathing.

293 Nyberg recommended replacing the 

existing elevator doors with “pairs of well sealed revolving doors on each level,” providing “a more 

positive air seal” and minimizing intrusion of outdoor air into the cave, with switches indicating to 

staff at the front desk whether the doors were closed.294 If the problem persisted, Nyberg 

recommended that the NPS consider isolating the elevator lobby from the rest of the visitor center’s 

air circulation system.295 Nyberg noted that monitoring staff exposure to radon had been curtailed 

somewhat because of budget cuts, but levels remained high enough to require staff be monitored 

routinely as required by NPS Directive 14.296 A year later, radon levels were still elevated, and no 

changes had been made. Holder recommended 

venting the elevator shaft to the outside with a suction fan to create a negative pressure in the shaft. 

This fan could be controlled by a barometric switch which would shut off the system when the cave 

breathes in. 

In the visitor center, a set of doors would be installed across the hallway leading to the elevator. The 

air returns in the basement, main floor, the air handlers room, and the penthouse would be located 

elsewhere. Positive pressure created in this area would always force air into the negative pressure of 

the elevator shaft thus not allowing the radon to enter the visitor center.297

The doors were installed, which drastically reduced radon levels for many years.298

Cave Trail Maintenance 

Inside the cave, the asphalt surface of the Scenic Tour route laid in 1972 had “been worn very 

smooth” as a result of 600,000 people taking tours in the space of 13 years. This created a safety 

hazard, especially in wet areas of the cave.

299 In 1985, the NPS used Park Restoration and 

Improvement Program (PRIP) funds to hire a crew of 14 local day laborers, who rehabilitated the 

Scenic Tour route in just five weeks, three weeks ahead of schedule.300 The new surface was concrete 

with a “heavily brushed surface for better footing” and a lighter coloring for improved visibility.301

293 Philip C. Nyberg, EPA Region VIII, Radiation Programs Branch, Radon Investigation Jewel Cave National 

Monument, April 5–8, 1988, 1, Cabinet 2, Drawer 4, Folder D22 Construction, Jewel Cave NM CF.

294 Nyberg, Radon Investigation Jewel Cave National Monument, April 5–8, 1988, 2.

295 Nyberg, Radon Investigation Jewel Cave National Monument, April 5–8, 1988, 3.

296 Nyberg, Radon Investigation Jewel Cave National Monument, April 5–8, 1988, 3.

297 Steve Holder to Chief, Construction and Maintenance, RMR, memorandum, January 26, 1989, Cabinet 2, 

Drawer 4, Folder D22 Construction, Jewel Cave NM CF.

298 Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

299 NPS, “Trail Rehabilitation Underway at Jewel Cave National Monument,” press release, March 8, 1985.

300 NPS, “Trail Rehabilitation Underway at Jewel Cave National Monument,” press release, March 8, 1985; 

Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1985, 8; NPS, “Special Achievement Awards 

Presented at Jewel Cave National Monument,” press release, September 10, 1985, Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, Folder K1817 

Interpretive Planning, Jewel Cave NM CF.

301 NPS, “Trail Rehabilitation Underway at Jewel Cave National Monument,” press release, March 8, 1985.
228 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

The process of removing the asphalt and installing concrete was tricky, since most of the cave was 

difficult to access. An NPS press release explained the situation: 

Virtually, all of the half-mile trail was inaccessible to powered equipment. Thus, all of the 12,000 

pounds of asphalt had to be carried out of the cave by hand, and some 56,000 pounds of concrete was 

taken in by the same method. The route required negotiating a labyrinth of twists, turns, ramp, bridge 

and platforms while carrying a 30–40 pound load. In addition, the delicate cave environment required 

that extreme caution be exercised to minimize the impact of the project.302

Ditmanson recalled that workers carried the concrete into the cave using inner tubes on their 

shoulders.303 Dilts described the process: 

We had a maintenance tunnel that came in, and we mixed our concrete out there. We’d fill up a tire 

inner tube, half tire, and throw it up on our shoulders then carry that down to where we were 

working. . . . It also became a little competitive in that the crew was divided into two teams. Each 

team tried to outdo the other. It made the job a little more fun.304

The 14 workers who rehabilitated the cave trail received an award for their efforts.305

Crews made other minor improvements to the Scenic Tour over the next several years. In 1986, 

they replaced light fixtures along the trail and added waterproof switches at each fixture.

306 YCC 

crews cleaned cave handrails and cleaned and replaced cave steps.307 And in 1989, maintenance 

crews widened six areas on the route to accommodate larger groups, part of the decision to expand 

cave tours from 25 to 40 people.308

Surface Roads, Trails, and Maintenance Buildings 

Aboveground, maintenance staff and YCC crews maintained park roads within the monument 

and built the new interpretive nature trail. They repaved the sidewalk from the historic ranger cabin 

to the historic cave entrance, sealed sidewalk cracks, painted handrails, extended the interpretive 

nature trail, and installed benches.309 They slurry-sealed the parking lot and chipped and sealed the 

302 NPS, “Special Achievement Awards Presented at Jewel Cave National Monument,” press release, September 10, 

1985.

303 Ditmanson, interview. 

304 Dilts, interview. 

305 NPS, “Special Achievement Awards Presented at Jewel Cave National Monument,” press release, September 10, 

1985.

306 Rocky Mountain Regional Office, Jewel Cave National Monument, Annual Maintenance Goals for FY1986, 4, 

Cabinet 3, Drawer 3, Folder A6419 Goals/Objectives Long Term Management Plan, Jewel Cave NM CF; Wiles, 

comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

307 Youth Conservation Corps Work Projects, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1987, and William Waxler, Jewel 

Cave National Monument YCC Program Review, 1987; Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National 

Monument, 1988, 7.

308 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1989, 7.

309 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1989, 7–8; Dilts, interview. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 229

main entrance road.310 In 1985, YCC crews built and installed a new entrance gate that Schulz had 

designed, made of aluminum-colored steel.311 Jewel Cave acquired surplus picnic tables from Wind 

Cave, which the maintenance staff refurbished and installed near the main parking area, on the fill 

from the 1968 excavation of the elevator shaft. They moved other picnic tables from the historic 

area to the new picnic area and removed the old campsites and pit toilets at the historic area.312

In conjunction with energy-saving retrofits occurring at the visitor center, maintenance crews 

retrofitted the maintenance building by installing storm windows and a drop ceiling to save fuel.313

They erected a pole barn in 1984, intended as a recreational hall for the staff. Two years later, 

maintenance staff hosted a “shed-raising” party to raise another pole barn in the maintenance yard, a 

long building with a series of garage door bays for storing equipment and supplies. Planning had 

been underway for several years, and several groups had donated materials. NPS, Forest Service, and 

Custer State Park employees came to help. The 30-odd people who showed up raised the pole barn 

in just one day. When they finished, they gathered for a chili potluck. An NPS write-up reported, 

“Enthusiasm for the project was infectious.”

314

Housing 

As early as 1973, Jewel Cave managers began working with the Rocky Mountain Regional 

Office, Wind Cave, and the Denver Service Center to design three 12-unit apartment buildings, two 

three-bedroom residences, and walking areas around them, to replace existing trailers that were in 

rough condition.315 Rocky Mountain Regional Director Lynn H. Thompson wrote to US Senator 

James Abourezk (D-SD) about the need for permanent, year-round housing, for which Congress 

would need to appropriate an estimated $713,000.316 Managers wanted the housing to be located at 

the monument rather than off site, because travel from Custer generally took 40 to 45 minutes 

round-trip, and the roads were often impassable in the winter and spring. Some staff should be 

required to be on site, they argued, 

so that trained manpower is readily available for emergencies such as forest fires, building fires, and 

storm damage; for protection of lives and property; and to provide around-the-clock protection to the 

entire installation against vandalism, potential arsonists, poachers, thieves, out-of-season hunters, etc. 

310 DOI, NPS, Slurry Seal, Visitor Center Parking Lot, Jewel Cave National Monument, June 3, 1989, eTIC; DOI, 

NPS, Pave Parking Lot, Visitor Center Parking Lot, Jewel Cave National Monument, March 25, 1988, eTIC.

311 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1985, 8; Rocky Mountain Regional Office, 

Jewel Cave National Monument, Annual Goals for FY1985, 1; Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

312 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Wind Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument, 1983, 18; Wiles, 

comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

313 Jewel Cave National Monument Objectives, 1980 FY, 1.

314 “Jewel Cave Hosts ‘Barn – Raising,’” July 18, 1986, Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, Folder K38 NPS Publications, Jewel 

Cave NM CF; Statement for Management, Jewel Cave National Monument, March 1987, 17; Wiles, comments on draft, 

April 7, 2020.

315 Planning Directive, Jewel Cave National Monument, September 18, 1973, 1–2, Cabinet 1, Drawer 2, Folder D18 

Outline for Planning Requirements, Jewel Cave NM CF. 

316 Lynn H. Thompson to Sen. James Abourezk, March 17, 1975, 1, Cabinet 2, Drawer 4, Folder D2215 – JECA 

Project Construction Proposals, Jewel Cave NM CF.
230 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Continuity of operation of facilities such as water and sewer systems and cave operations requires 

trained personnel available at the Monument. The Monument at this time has no permanent yeararound housing and it is critical for safety, administration protection, and maintenance that this area 

be provided with year-around housing.317

Stubs for the proposed housing had been installed during construction at the new development area 

in the late 1960s, but no funding had ever been allocated for the buildings.318

Figure 105. This cabin, built by the US Biological Survey at Wind Cave in 1916 and transferred to Jewel Cave in 1959, was torn 

down in 1980.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

317 Employee Housing Jewel Cave National Monument, attached to Lester F. McClanahan to RMR Director, 

memorandum, March 28, 1975, 2, Cabinet 2, Drawer 4, Folder D2215 – JECA Project Construction Proposals, Jewel 

Cave NM CF.

318 Employee Housing Jewel Cave National Monument, attached to McClanahan to RMR Director, memorandum, 

March 28, 1975, 2.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 231

In 1978, the NPS built two identical modular houses with three bedrooms each. They were 

supposed to be followed by two more houses the next year, but those never arrived.319 An additional 

three-bedroom mobile home arrived in 1980 for use by seasonal employees. At this point, the NPS 

declared several houses at the historic area as excess property, including the old kit trailers and 

Transa-Hut.320 One of the structures disposed of was “Building 10,” a cabin built by the US 

Biological Survey in 1916 and used as a bunkhouse for game ranch employees at Wind Cave (see 

Figure 105). The NPS likely had acquired the cabin in 1934, when the game ranch was 

disestablished, and moved the building from Wind Cave to Jewel Cave around 1959. A lean-to room 

was added sometime after the move.321 Although no one had used Building 10 for three years due to 

electrical issues and structural instability, demolishing a building that was more than 50 years old 

required Rocky Mountain Regional Office and South Dakota State Historic Preservation Office 

approval to comply with the National Historic Preservation Act.322 Another new modular house was 

installed in 1987 (Quarters 13) to replace an older trailer, which was removed.323 Quarters 11 and 12 

(modular houses built in 1978), and 13 were originally intended to provide required occupancy for 

the unit manager, the chief ranger, and the chief of maintenance. However, permission was granted 

over the years for the employees in each of these positions to live off-site.324

In 1988, the NPS completed a Housing Management Plan for Jewel Cave. It echoed earlier 

recommendations in calling for on-site housing to address safety concerns, resource protection, and 

staff convenience.325 Employees paid rent to live in these houses, amounting to $8,751 in 1987, 

$11,750 in 1988, and an estimated $12,331 in 1989.326 The Housing Management Report noted that 

“approximately one-half of the quarters income goes toward amortizing the three mobile homes 

installed since 1979.” The remaining rental income was insufficient to perform adequate upkeep.327

Crews did what they could to maintain housing, including installing new roofs, painting, upgrading 

utilities and lighting, redoing trails, installing new appliances, and adding flagstone walkways.328 They 

319 Statement for Management, Jewel Cave National Monument, March 1987, 17; Jewel Cave NM, Housing 

Management Plan, April 28, 1988, 6, Cabinet 2, Drawer 3, Folder D34 Buildings, Jewel Cave NM CF; Contracting 

Officer Mary L. Reiter to Sun Rise Construction Company, December 13, 1979, Cabinet 2, Drawer 2, Folder work 

Order 1569-7102-404 Construct Two 3-Bedroom Residences-JECA, Jewel Cave NM CF; Al Hendricks, daily note log, 

May 1, 1979, from Hendricks’ personal files; Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

320 Jewel Cave NM, Housing Management Plan, April 28, 1988, 6; US, DOI, Requisition, Property Review Board, 

Rocky Mountain Region, June 4, 1980, Cabinet 2, Drawer 2, Folder Contract CX-1200-1-B003 Mobile Homes, Jewel 

Cave NM CF; Wind Cave NP Superintendent to RMR Director, memorandum May 15, 1980, Cabinet 2, Drawer 4, 

Folder D5031 Sanitation Matters, Jewel Cave NM CF.

321 DOI, Report of Survey, RS1560-2-0004, August 17, 1982, 3, File 3389m, Jewel Cave NM MF.

322 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Wind Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument, 1983, 2. 

323 Larry Dilts to Contracting Officer, RMR, memorandum, January 8, 1980, Cabinet 2, Drawer 4, Folder CX1200-

6-B024 Century Housing, Jewel Cave NM CF; Jewel Cave NM, Housing Management Plan, April 28, 1988, 6, 10.

324 Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

325 Jewel Cave NM, Housing Management Plan, April 28, 1988, 7–8.

326 Jewel Cave NM, Housing Management Plan, April 28, 1988, 12.

327 Jewel Cave NM, Housing Management Plan, April 28, 1988, 10.

328 Rocky Mountain Regional Office, Jewel Cave National Monument, Annual Goals for FY1985, 3; 

Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1986, 4–5; Rocky Mountain Regional Office, Jewel 
232 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

took steps to abate radon in the housing, installed new decks, and installed water saver toilets and 

shower heads.329 They also hooked up new units to water and sewer lines.330

Since most housing was in fairly bad shape, the NPS recommended replacing the remaining 

trailers (which had been installed in 1964) with eight two-bedroom units from the Housing 

Corporation of Ft. Morgan, Colorado.331 Instead, the NPS began compliance planning for a new 12-

unit apartment complex to replace six temporary quarters.332 MAC Construction in Rapid City won a 

bid for a smaller, four-unit modular apartment in 1989, and it completed installation in October 

1990 at a cost of $211,087.33.333 The park also created two basement units. One was actively used 

(Quarters 14E), but the other (Quarters 14F) became home to the park’s museum collection and 

uniform cache.334 This helped the housing situation, but Ortega noted that Jewel Cave needed the 

other eight units to replace obsolete trailers.

335

Utilities 

As of 1978, Jewel Cave’s water supply came from a 700-foot well, located 200 feet southeast of 

the picnic area. The water was chlorinated and pumped to a 100,000-gallon concrete reservoir. The 

supply was adequate, but the NPS considered constructing an additional well or increasing storage 

capacity as a precautionary measure.336 In 1983, the Public Health Service (PHS) recommended 

drilling a second well, in light of some technical problems with the first well.337 The NPS completed 

Cave National Monument, Annual Maintenance Goals for FY1986, 1–2; Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave 

National Monument, 1987, 6; Youth Conservation Corps Work Projects, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1987, and 

William Waxler, Jewel Cave National Monument YCC Program Review, 1987.

329 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1989, 7–8.

330 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1988, 7.

331 Jewel Cave NM, Housing Management Plan, April 28, 1988, 6, 11, Cabinet 2, Drawer 3, Folder D34 Buildings, 

Jewel Cave NM CF.

332 Richard A. Strait to Junius Fishburne, April 5, 1989, File 3384c, Jewel Cave NM MF. 

333 Completion Report, October 25, 1990, Cabinet 2, Drawer 2, Folder D52 Jewel Cave Modular Housing Project, 

MAC Construction Co., Inc. Building #14 Jewel Cave NM, CX1200-9-C056, Jewel Cave NM CF; RMR to Jewel Cave 

NM Superintendent, fax cover sheet, August 31, 1989, Cabinet 2, Drawer 2, Folder D52 4-Plex Housing Units at JECA 

IFB-1200-9-C056 MAC Construction Co., Rapid City, SD, Jewel Cave NM CF.

334 Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

335 Ernest W. Ortega to RMR Director, memorandum, November 16, 1989, Jewel Cave NM CF, Cabinet 1, Drawer 

2, Folder D18 Outline for Planning Requirements, Jewel Cave NM CF.

336 Albert V. Soukup, Report on Survey of Environmental Health Facilities, Jewel Cave National Monument, South 

Dakota, June & August 1978, 1, Cabinet 2, Drawer 4, Folder D5031 Sanitation Matters, Jewel Cave NM CF.

337 Albert V. Soukup, USPHS Environmental Sanitation Survey Report Work List, August 22, 1983, Cabinet 2, 

Drawer 4, Folder D5031 Sanitation Matters, Jewel Cave NM CF. Neither well draws water from the Madison, which is 

dry; but from the upper Deadwood Formation. Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 233

the second well in 1984, close to the first well location. Both wells retrieve water from sandstone in 

the upper Deadwood Formation.338

For solid waste, Jewel Cave contracted with a disposal company that hauled the waste to a 

landfill in Rapid City.339 Environmental sanitation inspectors found the disposal system satisfactory 

in the mid-1980s.340 As of 1989, Jewel Cave did not have a recycling program on site. Adams 

explained that a recycling program was “not feasible or cost effective due to limited number of staff 

& transportation cost.”341

Sewage disposal still occurred on site, using a septic tank in the historic area and a sewage lagoon 

at the new development.342 To meet “public health service inspection standards” in the historic area 

of the monument, the NPS in 1977 installed two larger septic tanks and a gravity line leading to a 

leach field in Hell Canyon, demolished the old septic tank, and partitioned one cell of the existing 

sewage lagoon to maintain adequate depth.343 In 1980, the sewage lagoons were “virtually empty due 

to low flows” (possibly because the clay tile pipe was broken and leaking). The sewer line was then

slip-lined, the small triangular cell was removed from the lagoon and the remaining two cells were 

lined with a plastic barrier. Then, in 1983, the PHS found the lagoons “full and overflowing” and 

recommended dividing one of the unused cells into two cells to handle the overflow.344 The NPS 

allocated PRIP funding to change the lagoon to three cells in 1984.345 The environmental sanitation 

consultant returned and reported, “for the first time in many years, I was impressed with the 

condition of the sewage lagoons, they were well maintained, the weeds were cut, and the sewage was 

not creating any odor problems.”346 He called the changes to the sewage lagoon “amazing!”347

338 Dilts, interview; Statement for Management, Jewel Cave National Monument, March 1987, 18; Superintendent’s 

Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1984, 6.

339 Hurd, Statement for Management, Jewel Cave National Monument, December 3, 1975.

340 Albert V. Soukup to Jewel Cave NM Area Manager, memorandum, July 11, 1985, Cabinet 2, Drawer 4, Folder 

D5031 Sanitation Matters, Jewel Cave NM CF. 

341 Brian Adams, Solid Waste Recycling Questionnaire, Jewel Cave, undated [ca. November 1989] Cabinet 2, 

Drawer 4, Folder D5031 Sanitation Matters, Jewel Cave NM CF. 

342 Hurd, Statement for Management, Jewel Cave National Monument, December 3, 1975.

343 Jewel Cave National Monument Objectives, 1979 FY, 1; Albert V. Soukup, Report on Survey of Environmental 

Health Facilities, Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota, June & August 1978, 2, Cabinet 2, Drawer 4, Folder 

D5031 Sanitation Matters, Jewel Cave NM CF.

344 Albert V. Soukup, Report on Evaluation of Environmental Health Facilities, Jewel Cave National Monument, 

South Dakota, March 1980, Cabinet 2, Drawer 4, Folder D5031 Sanitation Matters, Jewel Cave NM CF; Albert V. 

Soukup, USPHS Environmental Sanitation Survey Report Work List, August 22, 1983, Cabinet 2, Drawer 4, Folder 

D5031 Sanitation Matters, Jewel Cave NM CF. 

345 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1984, 6.

346 Albert V. Soukup to Wind Cave NP Superintendent, memorandum, June 25, 1984, Cabinet 2, Drawer 4, Folder 

D5031 Sanitation Matters, Jewel Cave NM CF. 

347 Albert V. Soukup to Jewel Cave NM Area Manager, memorandum, July 11, 1985, Cabinet 2, Drawer 4, Folder 

D5031 Sanitation Matters, Jewel Cave NM CF. 
234 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

The good news did not last long. In 1985, an investigation showed that liquid from the lagoons 

was leaking into the cave system.348 In addition, some of the sewer lines had completely collapsed, 

and others were leaking.349 To address these problems, maintenance crews and contractors sliplined 

the sewer lines.350 Alexander, Davis, and Alexander’s hydrology study then found that effluent was 

still seeping into the cave, due to the lack of lining in the third cell.351 Maintenance crews lined that 

cell in 1989 (see Figure 106).352

Figure 106. Relining the sewage lagoon, ca. 1989.

Source: NPS Jewel Cave NM.

For electric service, the NPS renewed the Black Hills Electric Cooperative permit through 

1988.353 While the cooperative owned and maintained the surface electric lines, the NPS owned and 

348 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1985, 8; Statement for Management, Jewel 

Cave National Monument, March 1987, 24.

349 Assessment of Effect Form, “Sewer Line Repair 87002 Package #J91,” February 27, 1987, File 3385v, Jewel 

Cave NM MF.

350 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1987, 6–7; Contracting Officer Keith Warner 

to Janice Camp, April 15, 1987, Cabinet 3, Drawer 2, Folder Rehab Third cell sewer lagoon, Jewel Cave NM CF.

351 Alexander and Davis, “Hydrogeologic Study of Jewel Cave/Wind Cave: Final Report – Year 2,” August 1987, 3.

352 Assessment of Effect Form, “3rd Cell Sewage Lagoon Rehabilitation, 87003 Package #J00,” February 27, 1987, 

File 3385zb, Jewel Cave NM MF; Larry D. Dilts, Installation of Sewer Lagoon Liner, July 2, 1987, Cabinet 2, Drawer 2, 

Folder D5217 CX 1200-7-B031 Mousel Construct, Jewel Cave NM CF; Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave 

National Monument, 1989, 8; Dilts, interview. 

353 Hurd, Statement for Management, Jewel Cave National Monument, December 3, 1975.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 235

maintained the electrical system within the cave.354 For telephone service, the NPS renewed the 

Bison State Telephone Company special use permit for telephone lines through 1984, and then 

through 1990.355 As noted above, maintenance crews buried power lines in the historic area in the 

early 1980s as part of a series of changes to make the area more visually pleasing.356 All housing units 

had phone service by 1985, and most had internal phone extensions.357 The Bison State Telephone 

Company also provided Jewel Cave with a radio system (170.050 MHz with 103.5 Hz Channel 

Guard).358

Law Enforcement

As with firefighting efforts, Jewel Cave National Monument entered into cooperative 

agreements for law enforcement. In 1976, Congress passed a bill that granted the secretary of the 

Interior “concurrent legislative jurisdiction within units of the National Park System” and directed 

the secretary to “diligently pursue the consummation of arrangements” with each state in which an 

NPS unit was located.359 On August 27, 1980, in response to the 1976 act, South Dakota Governor 

William J. Janklow signed a state law ceding concurrent jurisdiction on NPS lands in South Dakota 

to the United States.360

In September 1980, Jewel Cave and Wind Cave formalized an agreement with the Custer County 

Sheriff’s Office to implement concurrent jurisdiction. The agreement aimed to “provide National 

Park Service law enforcement personnel with a capability to legally perform protection activities, 

within the scope of their employment, when enforcing South Dakota State Criminal Code” within 

NPS boundaries. NPS law enforcement would provide copies of case incident reports to the 

sheriff’s department as part of “reciprocal exchange of information.”361 The director of the NPS 

commented, “this action will allow for more efficient conduct of both State and Federal functions 

within the parks.”362

354 Statement for Management, Jewel Cave National Monument, March 1987, 18.

355 Hurd, Statement for Management, Jewel Cave National Monument, December 3, 1975; Statement for 

Management, Jewel Cave National Monument, March 1987, 7.

356 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Wind Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument, 1983, 18; 

Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1984, 6.

357 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1985, 8.

358 Statement for Management, Jewel Cave National Monument, March 1987, 19.

359 An Act of October 7, 1976. 90 Stat. 1939 (P.L. 94-458). 

360 Memorandum of Understanding Between the National Park Service and the Custer County Sheriff’s 

Department, August 12, 1999, 1, Cabinet 2, Drawer 2, Folder Inspections, Surveys, Appraisals, Jewel Cave NM CF.

361 Memorandum of Cooperative Agreement Between the Custer County Sheriff’s Office and Wind Cave National 

Park and Jewel Cave National Monument, September 1980, 2–3, Drawer 1, Folder 2.A.1 1980 Custer County 

Agreements, Jewel Cave NM CF.

362 Russell E. Dickenson to William J. Janklow, June 9, 1980, Drawer 1, Folder 2.A.1 1980 Concurrent Jurisdiction 

Establishment, Jewel Cave NM CF.
236 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

In 1986, the monument received a new law enforcement sedan, which replaced an older unit (a 

station wagon equipped to handle a stretcher) that did not meet NPS standards.363 A low-band radio 

with the state police frequencies was installed in the monument’s patrol vehicle to facilitate 

interagency cooperation. Few law enforcement incidents occurred at the monument, but the NPS 

coordinated with the South Dakota Department of Transportation and the Custer County Sheriff’s 

Department in responding to traffic accidents on Highway 16 near the monument boundaries.364

Conclusion

From 1972 to 1989, Jewel Cave staff 

expanded the interpretive and resource 

management programs at Jewel Cave. The new 

visitor center brought in many more visitors for 

elevator-access cave tours. The funding from the 

tours, combined with use of volunteers and 

cooperation with other organizations, enabled 

the NPS to expand programming at Jewel Cave. 

The first part-time cave management staff 

assisted with preliminary development of 

baseline data for the cave, which then informed 

resource management and visitor operations. 

Additional studies were still needed, as was a 

second elevator into the cave. As cavers logged 

the 75th mile of passageway and kept discovering 

more and more cave, the NPS cooperated 

increasingly with Forest Service officials and 

other partners to ensure the protection of fragile 

cave resources (see Figure 107). 

363 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Wind Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument, 1986, 1; Wiles, 

comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

364 Statement for Management, Jewel Cave National Monument, March 1987, 7.

Figure 107. Caver in a fissure near Corrigan Passage, ca. 

1984.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 237

Chapter 6: Independent Administration 

(ca. 1990–1999) 

From 1990 to 1999, Jewel Cave National Monument (Jewel Cave) transitioned from a small staff 

of generalists to a slightly larger staff of specialists in cave resource management, interpretation, and 

administration. Some of that specialization was made possible by partnering with other National 

Park Service (NPS) units in the Black Hills. Superintendent Kate Cannon prioritized the completion 

of biological and geological studies of Jewel Cave to establish baseline scientific data, which had 

been lacking, and she secured funding to construct an elevator in the second shaft that had been 

drilled two decades prior. She also spearheaded partnerships with the Forest Service that led to a 

cooperative agreement for cave management and a land exchange that protected portions of Jewel 

Cave outside of the monument’s approximately 1,274 surface acres. During this time, a nationwide 

NPS reorganization shifted responsibility for the South Dakota parks from the Rocky Mountain 

Regional Office in Denver, Colorado, to the Midwest Regional Office in Omaha, Nebraska.

General Administration

Personnel 

In 1990, Wind Cave National Park Superintendent Ernest Ortega hired Kate Cannon, who had 

previously been the concessions specialist at Glen Canyon National Recreation Area, as 

superintendent of Jewel Cave (see Figure 108). Like previous managers of the monument, Cannon 

reported to the Wind Cave superintendent, but she was the first manager of Jewel Cave to hold the 

title “superintendent” rather than “assistant manager” or “unit manager.”1As required, she 

communicated with the Rocky Mountain Regional Office through the Wind Cave superintendent, 

but she managed Jewel Cave without close oversight from the Wind Cave superintendents who 

succeeded Ortega, Marty Ott and then Jimmy Taylor.2

As of 1990, Jewel Cave’s staff consisted of five permanent employees: the superintendent; a 

chief ranger of interpretation, resource management, and visitor protection (Brian Adams and then 

Tom Casey); a lead interpreter (Donna Bentley); and a maintenance leader (Larry Dilts). Dilts’ title 

changed to chief of maintenance in 1992.

3 The monument also had twenty-five seasonal or 

1 Ernest Ortega, interview by Jackie Gonzales, April 22, 2019, Santa Fe, NM; Kate Cannon, interview by Emily 

Greenwald, June 13, 2019, Moab, UT; Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1990, 2, 

Cabinet 1, Drawer 2, Folder A2621 Annual Reports, Jewel Cave National Monument Central Files, Custer, SD (hereafter 

Jewel Cave NM CF).

2 Marty Ott, interview by Jackie Gonzales, April 24, 2019, Kanab, UT; Cannon, interview. 

3 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1990, 2; Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel 

Cave National Monument, 1991 and 1992, 1, files provided by Katie Atkins, Folder 1991 & 1992 Superintendents 

Report, Jewel Cave NM CF; Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1993, 3, files provided by 

Katie Atkins, Folder 1993 Superintendents Report, Jewel Cave NM CF.
238 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

temporary employees, including six Youth Conservation Corps (YCC) employees, one Student 

Conservation Association (SCA) intern, and one student intern. Cannon continued recruitment 

efforts at Lakota College to hire American Indian employees.4

In 1991, Cannon hired Mike Wiles into the first nonseasonal cave resource management position at Jewel Cave: a 

full-time term (not to exceed four years) park ranger–

resource management (cave technician). In 1992, the 

monument received funds to hire a full-time, permanent cave 

resource specialist for the first time.5 After advertising it 

competitively, Tom Casey hired Wiles to fill the position.6

In 1997, Cannon changed the roles of the lead interpreter 

(Karen Rosga, who had replaced Bentley) and Cave Specialist 

Mike Wiles into division chiefs. This meant the monument 

now had formal and separate divisions of Interpretation and 

Resource Management.7 Casey remained the generalist chief 

ranger, but with his scope reduced to law enforcement and 

emergency management, since Rosga and Wiles now led the 

interpretation and resource management divisions and 

reported directly to the superintendent.8 This shift was part 

of a broader, service-wide initiative to convert generalist park 

rangers into specialists. Rangers would be hired into one of 

three specialist series—interpretation, resource management, 

or law enforcement—rather than performing functions in all three areas.9 Creating separate divisions 

allowed Jewel Cave staff to specialize in their respective fields and led to enhanced interpretive 

programming and more in-depth resource management. 

Cannon left Jewel Cave in 1997 to take a management position with the Bureau of Land 

Management (BLM). A series of acting superintendents followed her, until Wind Cave 

Superintendent Taylor hired Peggy O’Dell in early 1998. O’Dell remained for a little less than two 

years, followed by acting superintendents until mid-2000. The Midwest Regional Office used these 

acting appointments to prepare division chiefs from other parks to be superintendents. Frequent 

4 Kate Cannon to H. Paul Friesma, Professor, Center for Urban Affairs and Policy Research, Northwestern 

University, December 13, 1990, Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, Folder N4617 Demography, Jewel Cave NM CF.

5 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1991 and 1992, 2.

6 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1993, 1; Mike Wiles, interview by Jackie 

Gonzales, June 26 and 27, 2019, Custer, SD. 

7 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1996, 1, 3, files provided by Katie Atkins, 

Folder 1996 Superintendents Report, Jewel Cave NM CF.

8 Wiles, interview; Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1996, 1, 5; Lawrence E. 

Johnson to J. J. Martin, memorandum, November 17, 2011, Cabinet 1, Drawer 1, Folder 2.D 2011 David Yim, Jewel 

Cave NM CF.

9 Paul Menard, interview by Jackie Gonzales, April 9, 2019, Sequim, WA. 

Figure 108. Kate Cannon became 

superintendent of Jewel Cave in 1990.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 239

turnover in leadership between 1997 and mid-2000 made management for remaining staff members 

more difficult than it had been during Cannon’s tenure.10

Black Hills Administrative Group 

In 1995, the NPS reorganized as part of the Clinton-Gore “National Partnership for Reinventing 

Government” program. To cut staff and trim payroll, the NPS reduced the number of regions from 

ten to seven and eliminated 1,400 permanent positions. South Dakota parks, including Jewel Cave, 

were transferred from the Rocky Mountain Regional Office back to the Midwest Regional Office in 

Omaha, Nebraska, which had last administered South Dakota parks in 1974, an absence of 21 years. 

Initially, Jewel Cave staff found the transition difficult, because they had built relationships with 

people at the Rocky Mountain Region and now had to start again with the Midwest Region. Cannon 

recalled that the move ultimately benefitted Jewel Cave, because the Midwest Regional Office was 

especially good at dealing with smaller parks, whereas in the Rocky Mountain Region, smaller parks 

had to compete for funding with large flagship parks like Yellowstone.11

The budget cuts that accompanied the reorganization left regional offices with less funding for 

regional administrative positions, such as contracting officers, budget specialists, and human 

resources (HR) employees.12 Administrative staff at individual parks were expected to take on these 

duties, but a small park like Jewel Cave lacked the capacity to do so. Prior to 1996, Wind Cave staff 

performed most of the administrative tasks for Jewel Cave, including HR, payroll, contracting, 

budgeting, and purchasing. Jewel Cave had hired Jill Hart as its first full-time administrative officer 

(AO) in 1996, and it had a GS-3/4 office clerk, Marie Curtain, who worked under the 

superintendent and then under Mike Wiles after Cannon left (Curtain later took on additional 

responsibilities relating to the monument’s museum collection program and invasive species 

control).13 These two staff members would not be able to absorb all of the functions that were being 

transferred down from the regional level. 

Wind Cave AO Paul Menard, who had been hired by Taylor in 1996, devised a solution. He 

realized that administrative staff at Wind Cave and Jewel Cave were devoting significant time to IT 

needs as staff increasingly relied on computers and the internet to manage the sites. However, 

neither Wind Cave nor Jewel Cave had the funding to hire an IT employee outright. Mount 

Rushmore was in a similar position.14 After running some numbers, Menard developed a proposal to 

10 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1997, 1, files provided by Katie Atkins, Folder 

1996 Superintendents Report, Jewel Cave NM CF; Cannon, interview; “Margaret G. (Peggy) O’Dell Named New 

Superintendent of Jewel Cave National Monument,” news release, February 11, 1998, Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, Folder 

K3415 Press Releases, Jewel Cave NM CF; David Given, interview by Jackie Gonzales, April 9, 2019, Port Hadlock, 

WA; Wiles, interview; Menard, interview.

11 Cannon, interview; Wiles, interview; Given, interview; Ron Cockrell, Midwest Regional Historian, NPS, to Emily 

Greenwald, April 7, 2020.

12 Field Manager, Jewel Cave National Monument, to CMT Chairperson, Great Plains System, memorandum, June 

25, 1996, Cabinet 3, Drawer 3, Folder A74 Shared Services, Jewel Cave NM CF; Menard, interview. 

13 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1996, 1, 5.

14 Menard, interview. 
240 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

pool the administrative funds of Wind Cave, Jewel Cave, and Mount Rushmore in order to support 

an IT person, a budget specialist, and an overseeing AO (Menard). Menard called the proposed unit 

the Black Hills Administrative Group (BHAG). He used park size, budget, staffing levels, and needs 

to calculate how much each park would contribute to the BHAG and what services they would get 

out of it. He left the superintendents’ clerks (such as Curtain) out of the equation.15

Menard pitched the BHAG idea to the superintendents of Wind Cave and Mount Rushmore 

(Cannon had already left Jewel Cave, so there was no permanent superintendent at the time), who 

supported it, as did the Midwest Regional Office. Having administrative support staff stationed at 

parks enabled quicker and more personal support than a regional office could provide. Since funding 

came from park budgets, the BHAG also eased financial pressure on the trimmed-down regional 

office. While other multipark groupings have existed in the NPS, the BHAG may have been unique 

in that park staff proposed it to the regional office, rather than the other way around.16

The BHAG worked so well in its first year that park superintendents, Midwest Regional Office 

staff, and Menard discussed how a similar grouping might cover HR and contracting functions. The 

Midwest Regional Office had struggled to provide these services to its parks since the 1995 

reorganization. They created the NEKOTA group, which encompassed all 11 parks in Nebraska, 

North Dakota, and South Dakota. The NEKOTA group handled HR, contracting, and purchasing. 

The BHAG, which covered different functions (budgeting, IT, and basic administration), continued 

to function alongside the NEKOTA group and remained limited to Jewel Cave, Wind Cave, and 

Mount Rushmore. Menard was the lead AO for both the BHAG and the NEKOTA group.17

Jewel Cave staff reported a relatively smooth transition to the BHAG and NEKOTA group.18

Employees in both groups retained a primary office duty station, but they traveled often to the other 

parks they covered. The primary downside for Jewel Cave was losing its first dedicated, full-time AO 

(Hart), who became a shared budget specialist working from Mount Rushmore. Despite this, the 

BHAG and NEKOTA group provided Jewel Cave staff with better access to administrative 

functions than had been available in the past.19

Partners 

Jewel Cave partnered closely with community organizations and the cooperating association that 

ran the bookstore, the Black Hills Parks and Forests Association (BHPFA). The NPS maintained the 

cooperative agreement with the BHPFA to run the bookstore, and BHPFA remained the “NHA” 

(natural history association) for the monument. Wind Cave’s park naturalist no longer ran the 

15 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1996, 1, 5; Menard, interview; Jill Hart, 

interview by Jackie Gonzales, June 27, 2019, Custer, SD. 

16 Given, interview; Menard, interview; Hart, interview; Mike Wiles, comments on draft administrative history, April 

7, 2020. 

17 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1998, 1–2, files provided by Katie Atkins, 

Folder 1996 Superintendents Report, Jewel Cave NM CF; Menard, interview. 

18 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1998, 2.

19 Menard, interview; Hart, interview; Wiles, interview. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 241

cooperating association, as had been customary in the past, but many seasonal staff served as 

BHPFA board members. Some friction existed among the BHPFA executive director, the board, 

and NPS representatives in the early 1990s, but it appears to have smoothed out as the decade 

progressed.20

The bookstore at Jewel Cave was in the visitor center. Items for sale were displayed on one wall 

of the octagonal lobby and on a set of standalone two-sided shelves about four feet from the wall. 

Some smaller items, like postcards and camera film, were sold at the front desk. From 1990 until 

1997, sales at Jewel Cave’s bookstore were higher than those at Wind Cave, despite there being no 

separate, dedicated space for sales items at Jewel Cave.21 From sale proceeds, the BHPFA funded an 

annual cave management intern. Interns served a full year, received a $100/week stipend, and 

assisted with cave management, interpretation, the fire program, and the park’s webpage.22 In 1998, 

the association began selling Jewel Cave: The Story Behind the Scenery, which Rosga wrote with help from 

other monument staff. Unlike other publications sold at the Jewel Cave bookstore, this one dealt 

with both cave and surface resources.23

Cannon maintained close ties with the Custer Chamber of Commerce, as previous 

superintendents had done. It appears that ties to the Newcastle Chamber of Commerce diminished 

in this period. Cannon fostered relationships with the tourism community of the Black Hills and all 

of South Dakota. She provided informational packets to local motels, restaurants, and other 

businesses so they would have accurate and up-to-date information about Jewel Cave to share with 

people visiting the Black Hills. She proposed an annual “Community Day” to give local residents 

and businesspeople a closer look at Jewel Cave, but it appears this never occurred.24

General Planning 

In 1989, the Rocky Mountain Regional Office initiated the process of completing General 

Management Plans (GMPs) for Jewel Cave and Wind Cave. The two plans were separate, but the 

NPS funded and worked on them concurrently.25 Jewel Cave’s GMP would update the outdated 

1962 Master Plan. Planner Roberta McDougall from the NPS Denver Service Center (DSC) led the 

planning team, Rocky Mountain Regional Office staff conducted the environmental review 

20 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1996, 1–2; Superintendent’s Annual Report, 

Jewel Cave National Monument, 1998, 5.

21 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1997, 5; Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 

2020. 

22 Later, when the BHPFA directed aid funds away from the internship, Wiles used funds from the resource 

management portion of elevator transportation fees to fund the cave management intern for several years. Wiles, 

comments on draft, April 7, 2020; Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1997, 7; 

Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1998, 7.

23 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1998, 4.

24 Park Staff Action Statements, Jewel Cave National Monument Management Assessment, 1993, Cabinet 1, Drawer 

2, Folder D18 Outline for Planning Requirements, Jewel Cave NM CF.

25 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1990, 6.
242 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

processes, and Jewel Cave staff assisted with public outreach and processing public comments.26 In 

August 1990, McDougall and her team completed a Task Directive and Development Concept Plan 

for the GMP, which described project requirements and scope.27 The task directive listed the 

following issues for the GMP to address: future use of the historic area, long waits for cave tours, 

insufficient office space for staff in the visitor center, and managing cave areas outside of the 

monument boundaries.28

In February 1991, the planning team visited Jewel Cave and Wind Cave to see the units in 

person and to discuss the process and any concerns with staff. 29 Following their visit, work on the 

GMP stalled due to Rocky Mountain Regional Office staff being pulled to other projects. It resumed 

in 1992.30 In July 1993, the NPS finished a complete draft of the GMP and the associated draft 

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and released them for public comment.31 Following the 

incorporation of public input, the NPS published the final GMP and EIS in 1994. The GMP called 

for expanding the visitor center “to accommodate a 50-seat auditorium and additional exhibit space” 

and suggested opening “a new cave area . . . for visitor use.” Other infrastructure recommendations 

included adding to administrative and maintenance space, increasing capacity of the sewage and 

water systems, making facilities accessible to persons with disabilities when feasible, and installing 

fire and intrusion alarms “in the cave and all facilities.”32

Concessions 

In the early 1990s, the BHPFA managed soft drink and snack machines in the breezeway next to 

the visitor center, but the park had no other concessionaires on site.33 In 1996, in response to visitor 

requests for food or beverage services at the monument, Jewel Cave entered into a contract for 

vending machines at the visitor center. To comply with the federal Randolph-Sheppard Act of 1936, 

26 Roberta McDougall, Task Directive, General Management Plan and Development Concept Plan, Package 110, 

Wind Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument South Dakota, August 1990, 19, Cabinet 1, Drawer 2, 

Folder D18 General Management Plan/DCP, Jewel Cave NM CF.

27 “FY-91 General Management Plan Program,” attached to Richard A. Strait to Rocky Mountain Region 

Superintendents, memorandum, August 17, 1990, Cabinet 1, Drawer 2, Folder D18 General Management Plan/DCP, 

Jewel Cave NM CF.

28 McDougall, Task Directive, General Management Plan and Development Concept Plan, Package 110, Wind Cave 

National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument South Dakota, August 1990, 10–12.

29 Team Captain, Central Team, Branch of Planning, DSC, to Manager, Central Team, DSC, memorandum, 

February 25, 1991, Cabinet 1, Drawer 2, Folder D18 Planning Program, Jewel Cave NM CF.

30 Kenneth Raithel Jr., to Rocky Mountain Regional Director, memorandum, July 11, 1991, Cabinet 1, Drawer 2, 

Folder D18 General Management Plan/DCP, Jewel Cave NM CF; Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave 

National Monument, 1991 and 1992, 7.

31 NPS, “Draft Future Plans for Jewel Cave National Monument Released for Public Review of Comment,” news 

release, July 14, 1993, Cabinet 1, Drawer 2, Folder D18 General Management Plan/DCP, Jewel Cave NM CF.

32 NPS, Final General Management Plan/Environmental Impact Statement, Jewel Cave National Monument, South 

Dakota, June 1994, iv, Jewel Cave National Monument Digital Files (hereafter Jewel Cave NM DF). 

33 Annual Statement for Interpretation, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1991, 18, Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, Folder 

K1817 Interp Prospectus, 1991, Jewel Cave NM CF; Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 243

which required “that vending machine operations on federal property be operated by blind persons 

whenever possible,” the NPS awarded the contract for vending services to Myron Eggers of Custer 

in 1996.34 The next year, the agency began a new contract with Larry Renz, who remained the 

concessionaire for vending services at Jewel Cave for several years.35

Law Enforcement and Safety 

While the Jewel Cave chief ranger had law enforcement duties in addition to interpretation and 

resource management responsibilities, Jewel Cave had no dedicated law enforcement staff in the 

1990s.36 Instead, the NPS entered into agreements with the Custer County Sheriff’s Office to 

cooperate on law enforcement at Jewel Cave, Wind Cave, and Mount Rushmore. The agreements 

were renewed every five years.37 In addition, Jewel Cave fell under the Department of the Interior’s 

(DOI’s) agency-wide cooperative agreements for law enforcement with the Department of 

Agriculture (USDA). The DOI and USDA signed a memorandum of agreement (MOA) on 

February 27, 1990, allowing for cross-designation of law enforcement powers across the Forest 

Service, NPS, BLM, Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), and US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 

They shared services under the “closest forces” concept, meaning that the closest available law 

enforcement would respond to emergencies and incidents. Each management unit was required to 

complete a supplemental MOA.38 The units in the Black Hills area entered into a supplemental 

MOA later in 1990, which covered the Black Hills National Forest, Nebraska National Forest, Wind 

Cave, Jewel Cave, Mount Rushmore, Badlands, and Devils Tower. The MOA provided for crossdesignation on investigative operations, security or law enforcement operations “during wildland 

fires or other major events or incidents,” and emergency assistance calls.39

In the absence of full-time law enforcement personnel, Jewel Cave struggled with vandalism at 

the historic cave entrance, a longstanding problem.40 To deal with this, Cannon required the chief 

34 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1996, 1; An Act of June 20, 1936, 49 Stat. 1559 

(P.L. 74-732).

35 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1997, 5; Superintendent’s Annual Report, 

Jewel Cave National Monument, 1998, 5.

36 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1997, 2; Superintendent’s Annual Report, 

Jewel Cave National Monument, 1996, 5–8. 

37 Memorandum of Understanding Between the National Park Service and the Custer County Sheriff’s Department, 

August 12, 1999, 1–6, Cabinet 2, Drawer 2, Folder Inspections, Surveys, Appraisals, Jewel Cave NM CF.

38 Associate Deputy Chief Charles R. Hartgraves to Regional Foresters, March 29, 1990 and attached Memorandum 

of Agreement between the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the U.S. Department of the Interior, February 27, 1990, 

Cabinet 2, Drawer 2, Folder Inspections, Surveys, Appraisals, Jewel Cave NM CF.

39 Interagency Supplemental Memorandum of Agreement USDA-USDI Law Enforcement Between Black Hills 

National Forest and Nebraska National Forest and National Park Service [numerous], November 28, 1990, Cabinet 2, 

Drawer 2, Folder Inspections, Surveys, Appraisals, Jewel Cave NM CF.

40 Project Statement, Jewel Cave NM, April 1, 1998, Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, Folder N2219 Research Proposals & 

Projects, Jewel Cave NM CF.
244 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

ranger, the cave specialist, and the interpretive lead to live on-site in park housing. This meant staff 

were present 24/7 and could quickly report issues to the Custer County sheriff.

41

A 1997 Visitor Management-Resource Protection Assessment Program (VRAP) analysis 

concluded that Jewel Cave needed 3.17 full-time equivalent (FTE) law enforcement staff, but no 

funding became available for those positions.42 In 1998, Curtain completed a Park Safety Program 

Statement of Purpose for Jewel Cave, as required by the Midwest Regional Office.43 The plan 

established a Safety Committee and safety officer, and delineated their responsibilities. Committee 

members reviewed accident reports, took follow-up actions after accidents, reviewed employee 

complaints, monitored the workplace for safety compliance, advised management on safety and 

health issues, and trained employees in safety matters.44

Facilities Management 

During the 1990s, Chief of Maintenance Larry Dilts and his crew oversaw the building of a 

second elevator, maintained structures within the cave, built a new building to house low-flow

vacuum toilets to alleviate overflowing in the sewage lagoon, completed a joint housing structure 

with the Forest Service in Custer, installed fiberoptic cables to bring internet to monument offices, 

and cooperated with the South Dakota Department of Transportation on Highway 16 

improvements. The maintenance division worked closely with the interpretive and resource 

management divisions. Although the maintenance division had several buildings to house equipment 

and workshops, it requested additional space for storage and shopwork.

45

Elevator 

Plans for the visitor center in the late 1960s had included two elevators into the cave, and the 

contractor at that time excavated an elevator shaft large enough to accommodate both. However, 

the NPS ran out of funding before the contractor could build the second elevator. After the visitor 

center opened in 1972, Jewel Cave unit managers advocated construction of the second elevator, 

which they argued would accommodate more people on tours and to ensure safety of visitors in the 

event that one of the elevators malfunctioned. Even with a second elevator, however, the tour route 

41 NPS, Certifications of Required Occupancy, February 14, 1995, 3, Cabinet 2, Drawer 3, Folder D34 Buildings, 

Jewel Cave NM CF; NPS, Final General Management Plan/Environmental Impact Statement, Jewel Cave National 

Monument, South Dakota, June 1994, 102.

42 Jewel Cave National Monument Law Enforcement Needs Assessment, July 8, 2003, 9, Cabinet 1, Drawer 1, 

[loose in drawer], Jewel Cave NM CF.

43 Statement of Purpose for the Documented Safety Program at Jewel Cave National Monument, April 22, 1998, 

cover page, Folder 2.A.1 1998 JECA Safety Program, Jewel Cave NM CF.

44 Statement of Purpose for the Documented Safety Program at Jewel Cave National Monument, April 22, 1998, 1–

4.

45 McDougall, Task Directive, General Management Plan and Development Concept Plan, Package 110, Wind Cave 

National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument South Dakota, August 1990, 12.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 245

itself remained the limiting factor for accommodating visitors to the cave. Citing safety reasons, the 

NPS proposed evaluating the need for a second elevator as part of the GMP process.46

As work on the GMP continued, the existing elevator experienced a series of malfunctions that 

raised further safety concerns. For several months, it was out of service, and cave tours proceeded 

through the maintenance access tunnel.47 US Senator Larry Pressler (R-SD) heard about the 

problems and wrote to Rocky Mountain Regional Director Robert M. Baker: 

It is quite obvious that installing a second elevator would improve the current safety situation at Jewel 

Cave National Monument. In fact, the availability of a second elevator for rescue and evacuation 

purposes could literally mean the difference between life and death if an underground emergency were 

to occur. In addition, the availability of a second elevator would expand the number of tours which 

could be accommodated each year during the busy summer months. Last year over 25,000 visitors 

were turned away because all of the cave tours were full. Many visitors waited two hours or longer to 

take a tour. Thus, a second elevator would improve the quality of visitor services. 

The serious safety issue and the potential for tourism enhancement make very compelling arguments 

for reducing Jewel Cave’s current reliance on a single, twenty-year old elevator. I respectfully request 

that a second elevator at Jewel Cave National Monument be installed as quickly as possible. I also 

would appreciate being kept apprised of any actions taken by the National Park Service to address this 

situation.48

Assistant Rocky Mountain Regional Director John King responded that the Rocky Mountain 

Regional Office shared Pressler’s concern. He continued, 

We recently contracted with an independent elevator consulting company to assess the condition of 

our elevators, analyze maintenance and rehabilitation needs, and provide an estimate of upgrade and 

repair costs. Their report was recently received and will provide the basis for a prioritized elevator 

improvement program for both Wind Cave and Jewel Cave. 

The report findings, together with the safety and visitor service issues that you are aware of, make it 

clear that the installation of a second elevator at Jewel Cave is of paramount importance. The cost to 

do this, however, is substantial and will require program adjustments that will affect start-up or 

completion of other regional projects that are of equal significance. 

This year, we are committed to insuring that elevators at both park areas are fully inspected, tested, 

and certified safe for public use. Inspections are complete at Wind Cave, and the elevators are fully 

operational. The inspection of the elevator at Jewel Cave revealed the need to replace several 

components, and we expect that this will be completed and service restored not later than mid-May. 

In addition, we have allocated funds to prepare the design and specifications for a second elevator. 

We are hopeful that we can then contract for the installation of the new elevator early in FY93.49

46 McDougall, Task Directive, General Management Plan and Development Concept Plan, Package 110, Wind Cave 

National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument South Dakota, August 1990, 11.

47 NPS, “Cave Access Altered at Jewel Cave,” news release, March 1992, Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, Folder K3415 Press 

Releases, Jewel Cave NM CF; NPS, “Jewel Cave Mother’s Day Open House Cancelled,” news release, April 20, 1992,

Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, Folder K3415 Press Releases, Jewel Cave NM CF.

48 Senator Larry Pressler to Rocky Mountain Regional Director Robert M. Baker, March 6, 1992, Cabinet 2, Drawer 

3, Folder D24 Elevator Modrn. & Installation, Jewel Cave NM CF.

49 John A. King, for Rocky Mountain Regional Director Robert M. Baker, to Senator Larry Pressler, March 31, 

1992, Cabinet 2, Drawer 3, Folder D34 Buildings, Jewel Cave NM CF.
246 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Cave tours had reached capacity, and Cannon reported, “There is little potential for increasing the 

number of visitors on cave tours further until we have two working elevators and fund a significant 

number of additional interpretive positions.”50 In the meantime, Cannon and her staff developed 

motorized and manual methods to extract visitors—one by one—from a stuck elevator cab. She 

also had a backup generator installed, so that the elevator could be used to bring people out of the 

cave in the event of a power failure.51

Contractors Lerch, Bates & Associates, Inc., completed an “Elevator Clinic Report” on March 

20, 1992, with recommendations for modernizing the existing elevator and installing a second. Based 

on these recommendations, Cannon and Dilts prepared “specifications for elevator installation and 

rehabilitation” and sent them to the Rocky Mountain Regional Office.52 Among other things, they 

recommended that “the existing elevator car should be retrofitted with a side door and that 

specifications for the new car should include both a side and top door.”53 After completion of the 

design and specifications, construction began in October 1993, under the Rocky Mountain Regional 

Office’s oversight.54 No cave tours operated during the winter of 1993–1994, while the elevator 

work continued.55 Contractors completed installation of the new elevator in 1994, and the NPS 

opened it to the public. 

For the rest of the 1990s, most elevator maintenance was minor and related to upkeep. Repairs 

usually were completed through a service contract, although maintenance crews assisted with minor 

fixes.56 Cannon began an “elevator cost recovery” fund with money from cave tours fees. NPS units 

were allowed to retain some proceeds from fees collected on site for transportation needs, and she 

made the case that the elevator was an essential mode of transportation to the primary resource of 

the park, the cave.57 From every cave tour ticket, 75 cents went to the new fund for elevator cost 

recovery, and 75 cents went to cave resource protection. In 1997, using these funds, the monument 

added “an elevator car-to-car rescue system” and trained staff in its use (that practice has since been 

deemed unsafe).58 In 1999, the retained fees amounted to an estimated $37,000 for elevator 

maintenance and $37,000 for cave protection (which the resource management division used to hire 

50 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1991 and 1992, 7.

51 Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

52 Martin C. Ott to Rocky Mountain Regional Director, memorandum, May 22, 1992, Cabinet 2, Drawer 3, Folder 

D34 Buildings, Jewel Cave NM CF. 

53 Untitled, May 20, 1992, attached to Martin C. Ott to Rocky Mountain Regional Director, memorandum, May 22, 

1992, Cabinet 2, Drawer 3, Folder D34 Buildings, Jewel Cave NM CF.

54 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1991 and 1992, 4; Superintendent’s Annual 

Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1993, 2.

55 “Jewel Cave hours change,” Hot Springs Star, December 21, 1993, Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, Folder K34 News Media, 

Jewel Cave NM CF; NPS, “Jewel Cave National Monument,” news release, undated [ca. January 1993], Cabinet 1, 

Drawer 3, Folder K3415 Press Releases, Jewel Cave NM CF.

56 Larry Dilts, interview by Jackie Gonzales, April 17, 2019, Colby, KS. 

57 It is unclear what year this program began, but it was ongoing by 1997. Wiles, interview; Cannon, interview. 

58 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1996, 3.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 247

cave resource management staff).59 Maintenance crews and contractors conducted ongoing repairs 

to control water leaks into the elevator shaft, paint the walls and divider beams, and repair the 

elevator ropes and brakes as needed.60

Visitor Center 

Maintenance of the visitor center building in the 1990s included replacing aging parts, 

fireproofing, and planning for a possible redesign. Crews removed asbestos in 1990 and replaced the 

visitor center deck over the following two years.61 Dilts, his team, and maintenance employees from 

Wind Cave began infrastructure modifications for the installation of an emergency power generator 

in the visitor center, to supply the visitor center and the elevator during a power outage. Contractors 

installed the generator in 1997, the same year the visitor center received a new metal roof.62

In 1995, Larry Klein Design/Point Zero Design assessed the visitor center to “mak[e] 

recommendations to alleviate congestion and increase the quality of visitor experience at the park.” 

The resulting report explained, 

There are two principle [sic] problems with the visitor experience during peak season at Jewel Cave 

National Monument. The current process for purchasing cave tour tickets creates long waiting 

periods, overcrowding and congestion in the visitor center and the outside terrace area. The waiting 

time for tours can be as long one and one-half to two hours with tours selling out by the middle of 

the afternoon. The lack of interesting exhibits and additional visitor experiences is a year-round 

problem at the center, but is especially aggravated during the long waiting periods encountered in 

peak season. 

A third major problem at the center is the lack of sufficient administrative staff space.63

The report also noted flow problems caused by multiple entrances, the location of the information 

desk, and the location of the ticket desk.64 The consultants recommended changing the layout of the 

visitor center, installing new interpretive exhibits, changing the ticketing process, and improving 

59 NPS, “FY 1999 Budget and Annual Performance Plan for Jewel Cave National monument are Available for 

Public Review,” news release, April 14, 1999, Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, Folder K3415 Press Releases, Jewel Cave NM CF.

60 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1997, 6; Superintendent’s Annual Report, 

Jewel Cave National Monument, 1998, 5.

61 Larry Dilts to Jewel Cave NM Unit Manager, memorandum, February 2, 1990, Cabinet 2, Drawer 3, Folder D26 

Reports, Jewel Cave NM CF; Larry D. Dilts, “Replace Visitor Center Deck,” undated [ca. June 1992], Cabinet 2, Drawer 

4, Folder D22 Construction, Jewel Cave NM CF.

62 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1997, 6; Superintendent’s Annual Report, 

Jewel Cave National Monument, 1998, 6; Larry D. Dilts, “Visitor Center Generator,” November 25, 1991, Cabinet 2, 

Drawer 4, Folder D22 Construction, Jewel Cave NM CF.

63 Larry Klein Design/Point Zero Design, “Jewel Cave National Monument Planning Report,” October 1995, 1–2, 

National Park Service Electronic Technical Center (hereafter eTIC).

64 Larry Klein Design/Point Zero Design, “Jewel Cave National Monument Planning Report,” October 1995, 2.
248 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

signage.65 In 1997, Dilts’ crew remodeled the visitor center’s administrative office space to add a new 

office and copy room, but none of the other proposed changes were made.66

Cave Tour Structures

In 1991, Dilts initiated a structural survey of the Jewel Cave tour routes in response to issues 

that had arisen at Mammoth Cave. There, the humid cave environment had corroded aluminum 

handrails and weakened the structures to the point of being unsafe.67 The humidity “causes the 

protective oxide surface layers on aluminum and stainless steel to become hydrated,” which “renders 

the oxide more vulnerable to attack by chloride ion.”68 Dilts received funding from the Rocky 

Mountain Regional Office for a DSC structural engineer, Richard Ohmstede, to conduct a structural 

survey of aluminum structures on Jewel Cave’s scenic tour route.69 Ohmstede reported that the 

aluminum structures were “generally found in good condition” and able to support design loads, 

with the exception of two platforms. He recommended ongoing cleaning of corrosion from 

structures in order to extend their lifespan. In addition, he suggested, “If stair treads continue to 

crack and replacement becomes prohibitively costly the park may want to experiment with a 

different tread type such as fiberglass or bar grading. These may have a longer life under the heavy 

usage that occurs at Jewel Cave.”70

Concerns about corrosion of the cave tour structures continued, and in 1999, the NPS 

contracted Black & Veatch to report on the condition of the cave’s aluminum structures. Black & 

Veatch noted, “More than one type of corrosion mechanism is at work, including galvanic corrosion 

and surface and pitting corrosion.” They concluded that the corrosion could not be prevented, but 

“its rate of progression can be considerably slowed.” Black & Veatch recommended that 

maintenance crews make minor changes to the structures over the following years and indicated that 

the cost should be “relatively modest.”71 They recommended other improvements, including 

augmenting structural supports as needed, replacing corroding stair tread attachment bolts with 

stainless steel bolts, and evaluating coating options for rails and anchor bolts72

65 Larry Klein Design/Point Zero Design, “Jewel Cave National Monument Planning Report,” October 1995, 2–6.

66 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1997, 6.

67 Rick Olson, “Aluminum Handrail Corrosion in Mammoth Cave,” eTIC.

68 Rick Olson, “Corrosion of Handrails Along Cave Tour Routes,” Cave Research Foundation 1991 Annual Report, 

eTIC. 

69 Larry D. Dilts, “Cave Structural Strength Survey,” undated [ca. August 1991], Cabinet 2, Drawer 4, Folder D22 

Construction, Jewel Cave NM CF; Homer L. Rouse to Jewel Cave Unit Manager, memorandum, January 24, 1991, and 

Jewel Cave Scope of Work: Load rate walking tour platforms, stairs, and bridges for pedestrian traffic, December 3, 

1990, both in Cabinet 2, Drawer 3, Folder D34 Buildings, Jewel Cave NM CF.

70 Richard Ohmstede, “Structural Inspection Report Cave Tour Structures: Jewel Cave National Monument, South 

Dakota,” August 1991, Cabinet 2, Drawer 3, Folder D34 Buildings, Jewel Cave NM CF.

71 Black & Veatch, “Summary Report on the Corrosion and Condition of the Existing Aluminum Structural 

Assemblies Within the Cave, Jewel Cave National Monument,” June 1999, 1-1–1-3, eTIC. 

72 Black & Veatch, “Summary Report on the Corrosion and Condition of the Existing Aluminum Structural 

Assemblies,” June 1999, 6-6. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 249

In the historic area of the cave, maintenance crews replaced and repaired wooden cave tour 

structures. In 1996, crews replaced rotting wooden staircases along the Heavenly Route. None of the 

staircases were original material, having been replaced several times since the Michaud and CCC 

eras.

73 In 2000, they began replacement of eight flights of deteriorating wooden stairs along the 

Dungeon Route, work that continued through 2001.

74

Sewage

Due to heavier than normal rainfall and high visitation, the sewage lagoons at Jewel Cave 

continued to have overflow issues in the 1990s, raising concerns because studies had shown that 

leaks affected cave hydrology.75 The 1990 GMP Task Directive identified sewage leaks as a way in 

which infrastructure affected natural resource management.76 To minimize water going into the 

lagoon, maintenance staff installed low-flow toilets in the visitor center and low-flow toilets and 

showers in the housing area in 1991 (Cannon made some calculations that showed staff living on 

site made significant contributions to overall water use at the monument).77 Although the new toilets 

“cut sewage production by over 60%,” the overflow problems persisted.78

In 1993, Cannon and Dilts took emergency measures to mitigate overflow from the sewage 

lagoon. Dilts and his crew built earthen berms around the lagoons, but that was still not enough to 

stop the overflow.79 Cannon received permission from the NPS, the Forest Service, and the state of 

South Dakota to construct a “temporary spray irrigation field” on Forest Service land 

“approximately a mile down Hell Canyon.” Dilts and his crews “virtually completely discharged” the 

contents of two of the three cells over a 10-day period. Cannon recognized that this was not a 

permanent solution but that it “bought the time needed to resolve the sewage problem 

permanently.”80

Heavy rains continued, and overflow of the lagoons remained a problem. In spring 1996, Dilts 

installed vacuum toilets in a new building, constructed across the patio from the visitor center and 

with a large tank in the basement of the building. Dilts and Cannon hoped that the vacuum toilets 

would lower water levels in the lagoons and prevent future overflow at a cheaper price than building 

73 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1996, 3.

74 Jewel Cave NM Superintendent Peggy O’Dell to Central Files, memorandum, April 3, 2000, Cabinet 3, Drawer 1, 

Folder 2004 send to NARA 2034 Restoration/Historic Area Stairs 1988–2004 subsurface, Jewel Cave NM CF.

75 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1985, 8, files provided by Katie Atkins, Folder 

1984 Superintendent’s Report, Jewel Cave NM CF; Statement for Management, Jewel Cave National Monument, March 

1987, 24, Cabinet 1, Drawer 2, Folder D18 Statements for Management, Jewel Cave NM CF.

76 McDougall, Task Directive, General Management Plan and Development Concept Plan, Package 110, Wind Cave 

National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument South Dakota, August 1990, 11.

77 Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

78 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1991 and 1992, 4.

79 Kate Cannon to Bernie [last name unknown], July 30, 1993, Folder D5039 Sewer Lagoon Irrigation Project, Jewel 

Cave NM CF.

80 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1993, 3.
250 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

new sewage lagoons.81 The vacuum toilets were very loud, and in 1998, Dilts worked with a 

contractor (Vemco) to minimize the noise.82 In the meantime, the interpretive division created signs 

explaining the reason for installing toilets that made such a loud “vroomp” sound.83

Still, the vacuum toilets did not solve the problem of overflow, and in 1998, Dilts again 

requested emergency discharge of the lagoons by spray irrigation.84 In July 1999, Jewel Cave received 

permission from the South Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources and the 

Forest Service to irrigate one lagoon cell onto Forest Service land (bacteria levels were low enough 

that the state deemed it safe).85 O’Dell requested permission to irrigate the second cell, as well as 

funds for a long-term solution to the overflow issues.86 In the meantime, Dilts and his staff 

underwent training needed to conduct annual testing of the sewage lagoon, so that they would not 

have to bring in staff from other parks for that task.87

Solid Waste

In 1997, monument staff conducted a solid waste audit. They found that the monument 

produced 16,600 pounds of waste each year, of which 4,200 was recycled. Over half of the waste 

from the housing area was food waste, so the audit recommended adopting an employee 

composting program.

88 A recycling program already initiated in the housing area was “extremely

effective” (emphasis in original) at over 90 percent compliance. Office waste was 40 percent paper, 

so the audit recommended installing paper recycling bins at each employee desk.89 The audit 

recommended installing a trash compactor to reduce the number of times the sanitation contractor 

visited Jewel Cave, and to install blow driers instead of providing paper towels in the historic area 

restrooms (the visitor center restrooms already had driers).90

The audit also addressed the “Boneyard,” a storage area on monument grounds where staff 

deposited miscellaneous items. Materials stored there were often no longer needed by the park, 

81 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1996, 2; Dilts, interview; Cannon, interview; 

Wiles, interview. 

82 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1998, 5.

83 Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

84 Eric Meintsma to Larry Dilts, December 10, 1998, Cabinet 2, Drawer 4, Folder D5039 Sewer Lagoon Irrigation 

Project, Jewel Cave NM CF.

85 Larry Dilts, “Sewer Lagoon Irrigation Project,” October 29, 1999, Folder D5039 Sewer Lagoon Irrigation Project, 

Jewel Cave NM CF.

86 The irrigation occurred the following decade. See Chapter 7 for more. Peggy O’Dell to Dave Given, July 26, 

1999, Folder D5039 Sewer Lagoon Irrigation Project, Jewel Cave NM CF.

87 Midwest Region Public Health Service Consultant to Superintendent, Jewel Cave NM, memorandum, February 5, 

1999, Cabinet 2, Drawer 4, Folder D5039 Sewer Lagoon Irrigation Project, Jewel Cave NM CF.

88 Jewel Cave National Monument Solid Waste Audit Summary, Summer 1997, 1, Cabinet 2, Drawer 4, File D5031 

Sanitation Matters, Jewel Cave NM CF.

89 Jewel Cave National Monument Solid Waste Audit Summary, Summer 1997, 2. 

90 Jewel Cave National Monument Solid Waste Audit Summary, Summer 1997, 2. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 251

including aluminum steps, barbed wire, old tin garbage cans, metal posts, fire extinguishers, and 

porcelain toilets. The audit recommended surveying the area periodically to assess what needed to 

stay there and what could be removed, which resulted in crews hauling several large items to Rapid 

City for recycling soon after the audit.91

Housing

As of 1990, Jewel Cave’s housing was substandard and inadequate. Trailers installed in the 1960s 

and 1970s were in poor condition, and the frequent repairs they required drained the monument’s 

operating funds92 The 1990 Housing Management Plan recommended replacing the remaining 

outdated trailers with two additional fourplexes.93 Crews replaced three of the existing two-bedroom 

trailers with two fourplexes in the same general area (the housing and administration area uphill 

from the main visitor center).94 It recommended keeping some housing on monument grounds, 

since it was helpful to have staff on site while the visitor center was closed, in order to protect the 

monument from vandalism and fire, and to help visitors as needed.95 Three permanent employees 

were “required occupants” in order to ensure safety at the monument (Mike Wiles, Donna Bentley, 

and Tom Casey).96 Seasonal staff lived in trailers on site and in the historic Civilian Conservation 

Corps (CCC) cabin.97

The 1994 GMP and a 1995 Housing Management Plan concluded that Jewel Cave needed to 

continue to provide housing because local towns lacked sufficient rental capacity for seasonal 

employees, and older and non-local employees did not usually accept positions offered without 

housing. Some of the older trailers still needed to be replaced.98 However, comments on the GMP 

included concerns that building more structures on monument grounds could harm fragile cave 

resources below. The final GMP concluded that building housing off site was not feasible.99

91 Jewel Cave National Monument Solid Waste Audit Summary, Summer 1997, 2; Marie Curtain to Mike Wiles, June 

1, 1998, Cabinet 3, Drawer 2, Folder N26 Reports, Jewel Cave NM CF. In the mid-2000s, a maintenance leader had 

everything removed from the Boneyard. Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

92 McDougall, Task Directive, General Management Plan and Development Concept Plan, Package 110, Wind Cave 

National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument South Dakota, August 1990, 11.

93 Attachment to Housing Management Plan, Jewel Cave, 1990, Cabinet 2, Drawer 4, Folder D3423 Buildings –

Individual, Jewel Cave NM CF. 

94 Attachment to Housing Management Plan, Jewel Cave, 1990; Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave 

National Monument, 1990, 5. 

95 Housing Management Plan, Jewel Cave, 1990, 9, Cabinet 2, Drawer 4, Folder D3423 Buildings – Individual, Jewel 

Cave NM CF.

96 NPS, Certifications of Required Occupancy, February 14, 1995, 3.

97 Tom Casey to InterMountain Field Area Regional Historical Architect, memorandum, May 28, 1995, Cabinet 3, 

Drawer 1, Folder H4219 Historic Structure Report (Ranger Cabin), Jewel Cave NM CF.

98 Jewel Cave National Monument Housing Management Plan, 1995, 4–6, Cabinet 2, Drawer 3, Folder D34 

Buildings, Jewel Cave NM CF; NPS, Final General Management Plan/Environmental Impact Statement, Jewel Cave 

National Monument, South Dakota, June 1994, 102. 

99 Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020; NPS, Final General Management Plan/Environmental Impact 

Statement, Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota, June 1994, 89. 
252 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Later, the NPS began to reconsider building seasonal employee housing off site.100 In 1996, 

Cannon, Hart, and Midwest Regional Office staff forged a partnership with the Forest Service to 

build joint seasonal employee housing in Custer.101 That year, Forest Supervisor John Twiss “made 

the commitment that the [Jewel Cave] housing facility could be built in the USFS compound 

whether or not it included any USFS housing.”102 The Midwest Regional Office helped to secure 

funding, and in 1997, the NPS planned, the Forest Service designed, and the NPS contracted out the 

construction of a ten-unit housing complex on Forest Service land just outside of Custer.103

The joint NPS-Forest Service housing complex was dedicated in September 1998 and finalized 

in 1999. The agencies held a ribbon-cutting ceremony in October 1998, which Cannon (by then the 

former superintendent), O’Dell, and District Ranger Mike Lloyd attended.104 The final agreement 

allotted nine beds to NPS employees and five to the Forest Service.105 The NPS obtained office 

furniture and supplies for inside of the building. The two agencies signed a contract for the Forest 

Service to provide maintenance. This was one of the first examples in the country of interagency 

cooperation on a housing project.106 Following completion of the Custer apartments, Jewel Cave 

disposed of three on-site trailers. 

Wiles coordinated a project, in partnership with a private construction contractor and the 

National Guard, to remove asphalt from the unused portion of the housing parking lot in order to 

reduce artificial surface runoff and protect cave resources. They then transported material from a 

large dirt pile in Hell Canyon (created during the original excavation of the sewer lagoons) to the 

former housing site to restore the area to near-natural topography and restored vegetation at the 

site.107

Highway 16 

In the late 1980s, the South Dakota Department of Transportation (SDDOT) had improved the 

section of the highway from Custer to just east of Jewel Cave. SDDOT planned next to improve 

and reroute the section of Highway 16 that went through the monument. This including bypassing 

several dangerous curves, which SDDOT planned to do by relocating the road and erecting a bridge 

100 Jewel Cave National Monument Housing Management Plan, 1995, 7.

101 Hart, interview; Cannon, interview. 

102 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1996, 2.

103 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1997, 6; NPS, Justification for New and/or 

Replacement Housing, February 12, 1997, Cabinet 2, Drawer 3, Folder D34 Buildings, Jewel Cave NM CF; Hart, 

interview. 

104 “Employee Housing – a first in the nation,” Custer Chronicle, October 22, 1998, Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, Folder 

K3415 Press Releases, Jewel Cave NM CF.

105 “Employee Housing – a first in the nation,” Custer Chronicle, October 22, 1998.

106 Hart, interview; Menard, interview; Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1998, 2, 5.

107 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1998, 2, 7; Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 

2020. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 253

over Hell Canyon, as Senator Peter Norbeck had first proposed back in the 1930s (see Chapter 3).108

Jewel Cave staff assisted the state with the environmental and cultural review processes starting in 

1990.109 Ortega wanted SDDOT to commit to paying for a new access road to the Jewel Cave visitor 

center, if one was needed after the rerouting.110 SDDOT held public meetings in November 1990 in 

Custer and Newcastle, and the NPS assisted with developing the design and provided comments in 

on the proposed rerouting in 1991.111

SDDOT completed the Environmental Assessment for the Highway 16 realignment in January 

1993.112 The realignment project proposed eliminating sharp curves, moderating the grading of the 

road, and building a bridge over Hell Canyon. These changes shifted the road’s alignment through 

Jewel Cave to the north.113 Abandoned sections of the road within the monument would either be 

used as access roads or recontoured to original grade and revegetated.114

Plans to reroute Highway 16 stalled for several years due to a lack of funding, but Jewel Cave 

resource management staff prepared “Highway Stipulations” as part of an updated Resource 

Management Plan (RMP). These included: 

- All roads must be designed at no more than 10-mph design speeds through the monument.

- Construction must be halted if cave resources are encountered. Resource management staff 

would investigate and propose a mitigation. 

- SDDOT must mitigate runoff however possible to protect cave (such as using less salt or 

installing catchment basins and/or retention ponds).

- Plans must include measures to decrease erosion, including using native soils and limited 

tree removal. 

- Fencing should not be directly adjacent to the highway, but SDDOT should build a fence 

on the monument boundary north of the present highway. 

The NPS requested that SDDOT complete a new boundary survey when rerouting Highway 16, 

because “the legal description of the Monument is partially based on the centerline of U.S. Highway 

108 RobertaMcDougall, Task Directive, General Management Plan and Development Concept Plan, Package 110, 

Wind Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument South Dakota, August 1990, 11.

109 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1990, 6.

110 Jewel Cave NM Superintendent to files, memorandum, January 2, 1991, Cabinet 2, Drawer 3, Folder D30 US16 

recon. Chronology/Comments, Jewel Cave NM CF.

111 Jewel Cave NM Superintendent to files, memorandum, January 2, 1991; US DOT, FHWA, SDDOT, 

Environmental Assessment and Programmatic Section 4(f) Evaluation, January 29, 1993, 14, Cabinet 2, Drawer 3, 

Folder D30 US16 recon. Final Draft/Approval, Jewel Cave NM CF; Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

112 Jim Nelson, Environmental Engineer, SDDOT, to Kate Cannon, Jewel Cave National Monument, 

memorandum, January 29, 1993, Cabinet 2, Drawer 3, Folder D30 US16 recon. Final Draft/Approval, Jewel Cave NM 

CF.

113 Nelson to Cannon, memorandum, January 29, 1993.

114 US DOT, FHWA, SDDOT, Environmental Assessment and Programmatic Section 4(f) Evaluation, January 29, 

1993, 4–5.
254 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

16, where it winds up the west side of Hell Canyon,” and an altered roadbed would therefore mean 

an unclear western boundary of the monument.115

The Custer Chamber of Commerce and US Congressman Tim Johnson (D-SD) supported the 

rerouting of Highway 16 and the construction of a bridge over Hell Canyon, which would cost 

roughly $21.7 million. Johnson spoke before the House Subcommittee on Surface Transportation to 

request authorization of the $17.3 million federal share of the project, but no funding was 

forthcoming for the next several years.116 In late 1999, the rerouting and bridge project remained 

tentative, subject to federal funding levels. Despite SDDOT efforts to move it forward, it was 

difficult to find funding for the bridge without detracting from other pressing needs.117 

Surface Trails 

In the 1990s, monument staff formalized and named two previously extant surface trails. The 

“Canyons Trail” connected Lithograph Canyon with Hell Canyon, providing a path for visitors to 

walk between the main visitor center and the historic area of the monument. This route was a 

footpath, about 18 inches wide, that staff had used to go between the two areas since the 1970s. To 

establish a formal trail, maintenance crews widened the path, installed water bars, and laid gravel on 

it. The second trail was the “Walk on the Roof Trail,” meaning the “roof” of the cave. This trail 

utilized the interpretive nature trail built by YCC crews in the 1980s. That trail departed from the 

visitor center and was about a quarter mile long.118 

Natural Resource Management 

During the 1990s, cavers found significant additional segments of Jewel Cave outside of the 

monument boundaries. The new segments even extended beyond the Forest Service land that had 

been withdrawn from mineral entry in 1990. Resource managers therefore spent much of the 1990s 

trying to figure out how to protect the cave outside of monument boundaries. They continued 

efforts to develop baseline studies of underground and aboveground biological and geological 

processes in order to better manage the cave. And the first full-time cave resource management 

employee at Jewel Cave learned from and shared resources with cave specialists at other NPSmanaged caves and others in the caving community. 

115 Appendix C: Highway Stipulations, Resource Management Plan, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1999, 21–23, 

Jewel Cave NM DF. 

116 “Chamber supports Hell Canyon Bridge project,” Custer Chronicle, March 31, 1994, Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, Folder 

K3415 Press Releases, Jewel Cave NM CF.

117 “Construction of bridge to span Hell Canyon,” High Country Herald, March 17, 1999, Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, Folder 

K3415 Press Releases, Jewel Cave NM CF; Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

118 Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020; Jewel Cave Squad Notes, October 16, 2001, Jewel Cave NM DF; 

Superintendent to Central Files, memorandum, March 24, 2008, Cabinet 1, Drawer 2, Folder 2007, Jewel Cave NM CF.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 255

Cave Exploration 

Mike Wiles held the permit to explore Jewel Cave in the late 1980s and early 1990s, as Herb and 

Jan Conn had before him. He had initially shared the permit with Ken Allgier, but when Allgier 

moved away, Wiles became the sole permit holder and lead explorer (although Adams sometimes 

allowed others to lead caving trips).

119 Wiles remained the primary explorer of the cave and managed 

the exploration program, but he still was required to request permission from Jewel Cave 

management to explore, as previous permit holders had done. He continued under an annual permit 

until Adams and Holder decided to manage cave exploration under a special use permit. The time 

Wiles or other employees spent in the cave exploring was as volunteers: no one was ever paid for 

exploration work.120

At the beginning of the decade, there were around 82 known miles of Jewel Cave.121 A major 

breakthrough occurred in the early 1990s on the southeastern edge of the known cave. That 

launched a boom in activity southeast of the monument boundaries, with cavers discovering 

approximately six miles a year for several years (see Figure 109). The known cave now extended 

significantly outside of the area of Forest Service land withdrawn from mineral extraction in 1990.122

As of 1993, there were 10 known miles of cave passages outside of the monument’s western 

boundary and 15.2 miles outside of its south and eastern boundary.123 In 1994, cavers found the 

cave’s 100th mile. Upon returning to the surface, they were greeted by staff and friends in a 

celebration prepared by the Conns. Subsequent discoveries during the 1990s were mostly in this 

southeastern corner in the cave, beyond Hurricane Corner and Seventh Heaven.124

Figure 109. Exploration of Jewel Cave continued in the 1990s.

Source: Jewel Cave NM.

119 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1993, 1; Wiles, interview. 

120 Wiles, interview; Marc Ohms, interview by Jackie Gonzales, June 30, 2019, Custer, SD; Rene Ohms, interview by 

Jackie Gonzales, June 28, 2019, Custer, SD; Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

121 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1990, 4.

122 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1991 and 1992, 3; Mike Wiles, “Jewel Cave 

Exploration from 1979 to 2005,” talk, Jewel Cave 200-mile Reunion, Custer, SD, June 29, 2019.

123 Michael E. Wiles, Jewel Cave Exploration, Summary Report, Jan. 1 to Dec. 31, 1993, Cabinet 3, Drawer 2, 

Folder N2621 Annual Exploration Reports, Jewel Cave NM CF.

124 Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 
256 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

The new leads in the far southeastern corner of the cave eventually took six or seven hours to 

reach, leaving only four hours for additional exploration before cavers had to turn back. To remedy 

this, caver Joel Despain suggested setting up a camp inside of Jewel Cave, such as the one at 

Lechuguilla in Carlsbad Caverns National Park. Many of the active explorers had concerns that a 

camp would damage the resource and be simply a “lazy person’s way” to explore. But, with leads so 

far out, Wiles decided the concerns could be mitigated and drafted a preliminary underground 

camping policy.125

Wiles and other cavers first set up a trial camp, halfway between Seventh Heaven and the Big 

Duh. When that worked, they established the first full cave camp near the Big Duh, which they 

called “southeast camp.” Wiles led the first overnight exploration trip in June 1997.126 The team left 

a small kitchen, supplies, and sleeping bags at southeast camp, to avoid having to carry items back 

and forth every time.127 Camping allowed explorers to spend more time surveying in remote 

locations.128 With the first cave camp set up, new discoveries continued at a rapid pace, and by 1998, 

there were over 115 miles of known cave.129

As exploration took cavers deeper into the cave, the need for a Search and Rescue (SAR) Plan 

became apparent. Wiles completed a draft SAR plan in 1996, and staff placed rescue stashes at 

strategic locations in the cave.130 Wiles rewrote the plan the following year in cooperation with Wind 

Cave, in order to ensure the two policies were consistent.131 The revised plan emphasized the 

fundamental differences between cave and surface SAR operations. For example, “Moving an

injured caver in a stretcher from the end of the cave would take at least three days, and could 

potentially involve the use of over 100 cavers.” It continued, “There are some situations where the 

body of a deceased caver would be interred within the cave, rather than needlessly endangering 

cavers attempting a body recovery.” It noted that parts of the cave “are exceedingly fragile” and 

“SAR activities are likely to result in resource damage. . . .” The plan advised, “While the interests of 

the patient will always be kept in mind, NPS resource preservation mandates much be considered as 

well. These concerns will likely slow the progress of rescue teams through some areas.”132 The plan 

included basic procedures for a SAR operation in the cave and contact lists of local NPS leadership, 

125 Wiles, interview; Marc Ohms, interview. 

126 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1997, 7; Marc Ohms, interview; Wiles, 

interview. 

127 Dan Austin, “Jewel Cave Exploration from 2005 to Present and the Southwest Splinter Breakthrough,” talk, 

Jewel Cave 200-mile Reunion, Custer, SD, June 29, 2019.

128 Wiles, “Jewel Cave Exploration from 1979 to 2005”; Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National 

Monument, 1998, 7.

129 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1998, 7.

130 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1996, 4.

131 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1997, 7.

132 Emphasis in original. Cave Search and Rescue Plan: Jewel Cave National Monument, February 1999, 1, Cabinet 

2, Drawer 2, Folder D18 Cave Search & Rescue Plan, Jewel Cave NM CF.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 257

technical specialists (cavers familiar with Jewel Cave), and other local cavers. Later, staff added Cave 

Rescue Pre-Planning documents.133

Cave Research and Resource Management 

Cannon, like the Jewel Cave managers in the late 1980s, requested funding for baseline studies in 

order to better assess condition changes and to inform interpretation of the cave.134 Cannon 

emphasized this point to staff at the Rocky Mountain Regional Office and the DSC who completed 

the GMP, and they responded by calling for baseline studies in the GMP task directive.135 Cannon 

and Wiles also updated the 1983 RMP to include more on managing cave resources, which the 1983 

plan had only “marginally” addressed.136 Efforts in the early 1990s to develop a cave management 

plan stalled due to lack of staff time and ongoing negotiations with the Forest Service about 

managing cave resources under forest lands.137

Cave lint and algae continued to build along the scenic route, potentially damaging cave 

resources. Cave lint is material resulting from human activity, made up of “clothing fiber, hair, skin, 

and other small particles left unintentionally by visitors.”138 In 1992, Jewel Cave received funding to 

continue lint control through periodic vacuuming and using collection tarps below platforms and 

stairs along the Scenic Tour route, and to control algae through shielding light fixtures (algae grew 

near lights due to the heat the lights emitted).139

In 1994, Pat Jablonsky, who had led an annual “lint camp” in Carlsbad Caverns since 1988 to 

remove accumulated materials from the cave, completed a study of lint in Jewel Cave.140 Jablonsky 

and her team researched the composition and characteristics of the lint in Jewel Cave and 

recommended ways to slow its accumulation.141 Jablonsky concluded, 

Microscopic analyses of lint samples collected at Wind Cave, Jewel Cave, and other tour caves, clearly

demonstrates that it is composed of more than fabric fibers. Other major components are mineral 

133 Cave Search and Rescue Plan: Jewel Cave National Monument, February 1999, 1–6.

134 Kate Cannon to Rocky Mountain Regional Director, memorandum “Natural Resources Project Funding FY ’91 

Proposals,” February 28, 1991, Cabinet 2, Drawer 2, Folder D18 Resources Management Plan, Jewel Cave NM CF.

135 McDougall, Task Directive, General Management Plan and Development Concept Plan, Package 110, Wind 

Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument South Dakota, August 1990, 13.

136 Outline of Planning Requirements, Jewel Cave National Monument, May 30, 1990, Cabinet 1, Drawer 2, Folder 

D18 Outline for Planning Requirements, Jewel Cave NM CF.

137 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1993, 4.

138 Pat Jablonsky, et al., Final Report: Develop Preventive Measures For Future Accumulations Of Cave Lint, Wind 

Cave National Park, June 1, 1994, 1, Jewel Cave NM DF. 

139 Project Statement, Natural Resource Preservation, Restoration, and Mitigation Program, Jewel Cave NM, 

“Control Algae,” 11992, Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, Folder N2219 Research Proposals & Projects, Jewel Cave NM CF.

140 NPS Cave and Karst Programs, “Carlsbad Cavern Restoration,” Inside Earth 15, no. 2 (Fall 2012): 10. 

141 Jablonsky, et al., Final Report: Develop Preventive Measures For Future Accumulations Of Cave Lint, Wind 

Cave National Park, June 1, 1994, 1. 
258 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

particles, wood, insect parts, human hair, other animal hair, fungus, processed tobacco, paper, and a 

number of other, not obviously, identifiable materials.142

Jablonsky suggested strategies to minimize the lint accumulation, including air showers, electrical 

ionization techniques, surfaced and curbed trails for easier cleanup, routine trail surface cleaning (but 

not sweeping, which just kicks up the lint into the air), and trail features that “clean footwear” like 

the mats or runners used in the entryways of public buildings.143 The monument tried out air 

showers, but they demonstrated no additional benefit. The curbed trails were installed in 2020.144 As 

a result of Jablonsky’s research and input, Jewel Cave and Wind Cave hosted lint cleaning camps for 

the first time in 1994, modeled on the camp held at Carlsbad. Jablonsky noted that the camp was 

“highly successful,” and Jewel Cave held it annually for many years.145

From 1992 to 1995, John Moore, an associate professor of Biological Sciences at the University 

of Northern Colorado, and several of his graduate students completed biological surveys of Jewel 

Cave and Wind Cave. They analyzed sediments to determine the cave’s microbiota and the origin of 

organic carbon inputs. They reported,

In both Wind Cave and Jewel Cave the highest concentrations of carbon inputs and biota were at the 

entrances and along the tour routes. The distribution of lint input rates was closely coupled to the 

tour routes. Heterotrophic bacterial and fungal densities in these locations approached those found in 

soils collected outside the entrances. Beyond the tour routes, lint deposition dropped of[f] markedly in 

both caves, more so in Jewel Cave than in Wind Cave. Within Jewel Cave, the high bacterial and 

fungal densities closely paralleled lint deposition, and mammal activity. This pattern was less apparent 

in Wind Cave. . . . Both caves supported Protozoa, nematode and arthropod populations. While 

Protozoa were found throughout the caves, nematode and arthropod were largely restricted to the 

entrances, tour routes and well travelled corridors.

We concluded that the cave ecosystems are largely detritus-based. There is strong coincidental 

evidence that human activity has impacted the caves by increasing carbon inputs in the form of lint or 

by augmenting entrances thereby increasing access to rodents and bats. The increased carbon inputs 

has facilitated the colonization of several arthropod and nematode species from immediately outside 

the cave and from accidental introduction by tourists. The increase in species diversity that is 

coincidental with areas impacted by humans and small mammals is restricted to tour routes and 

entrances at Jewel Cave, and beyond these areas at Wind Cave.146

Jewel Cave supported a number of resource management projects, and personnel to carry them 

out, with funds from the elevator cost recovery fund supported by cave tour fees. Wiles completed 

mapping efforts as part of his 1992 Master of Science thesis, completed in part on NPS time since it 

was directly related to management of Jewel Cave resources. In the late 1990s, Wiles mapped out 

142 Jablonsky, et al., Final Report: Develop Preventive Measures For Future Accumulations Of Cave Lint, Wind 

Cave National Park, June 1, 1994, 4.

143 Jablonsky, et al., Final Report: Develop Preventive Measures For Future Accumulations Of Cave Lint, Wind 

Cave National Park, June 1, 1994, 14–15.

144 Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020.

145 Jablonsky, et al., Final Report: Develop Preventive Measures For Future Accumulations Of Cave Lint, Wind 

Cave National Park, June 1, 1994, 74; Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1997, 7; 

Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1998, 6.

146 John C. Moore, Survey of the Biota and Trophic Interactions Within Wind Cave and Jewel Cave, South Dakota, 

August 15, 1996, 1, Jewel Cave NM DF. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 259

cave under private land in the Pass Creek Area.147 In 1997 and 1998, the US Geological Survey 

(USGS), Marsha Davis (a Jewel Cave seasonal employee who had co-authored the monument’s 

hydrology study), and private contractors Ted Jennings and Mark Fahrenbach completed a geologic 

mapping project.148 Staff measured radon levels throughout the cave and found that levels tended to 

decrease deeper in the cave (at least toward southeastern camp).149 They monitored microclimates in 

Jewel Cave, including how additional entrances affected cave climate and airflow (see Figure 110). 

As a result of this work, Wiles researched, and maintenance crews installed, stainless steel air lock 

doors in the Upper Cave and Lower Cave elevator lobbies.150

Figure 110. Volunteer D. Kruse monitors temperature in Jewel Cave, 1991.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

The monument received funding from the NPS and the Wind Cave and Jewel Cave Natural 

History Association to inventory and monitor bat populations at the historic entrance to the cave.151

David J. Worthington and Michael A. Bogan used the funds to complete a study of the Jewel Cave

147 Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

148 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1997, 7; Superintendent’s Annual Report, 

Jewel Cave National Monument, 1998, 6.

149 Monitoring Jewel Cave Microclimate and Radon Concentrations, undated [c. 1995], Cabinet 3, Drawer 2, Folder 

N3615 Pollution/Environmental Quality – Air, Jewel Cave NM CF; NPS, Jewel Cave National Monument, “Geologic 

Resources Inventory Report,” March 2009, 14, eTIC.

150 McDougall, Task Directive, General Management Plan and Development Concept Plan, Package 110, Wind 

Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument South Dakota, August 1990, 12; Project Statement, Natural 

Resource Preservation, Restoration, and Mitigation Program, Jewel Cave NM, “Restore Normal Airflow”, 1992, Cabinet 

3, Drawer 4, Folder N2219 Research Proposals & Projects; Monitoring Jewel Cave Microclimate and Radon 

Concentrations, undated [ca. 1995], Cabinet 3, Drawer 2, Folder N3615 Pollution/Environmental Quality – Air, Jewel 

Cave NM CF.

151 Mini-Proposal, Competitive Cooperative Research Program, “Inventory and monitor bat populations,” 1992, 

Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, Folder N2219 Research Proposals & Projects, Jewel Cave NM CF.
260 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

bat population, including its history and how cave entrance modifications had affected populations 

over the years.152 They concluded, 

While it is possible and perhaps likely that Jewel Cave was not used by bats at the time of its discovery 

and subsequent development by humans, it appears to have been used extensively by bats since at 

least the late 1950’s, and continues to be an important winter roosting site. Even if bats were not 

historic occupants of Jewel Cave, the large number of bats now using the cave suggests that Jewel 

Cave is a significant resource, especially for P. townsendii. Colonies of over 1,000 individuals of this 

species are known to exist presently in the eastern United States (C. Stihler, B. Kennedy, pers. 

comm.), but hibernating colonies approaching this size in the west are rare.153

Worthington and Bogan analyzed how a new gate at the historic entrance might affect bats using the 

cave. They advised that any gate to replace the 60-year-old entrance gate should allow for passage of 

bats, not affect air flow, and be installed in the summer so as not to disturb the bat hibernacula.

154

The gate installed copied the original in every detail except it had horizontal rather than vertical bars 

in the middle section, in order to allow for the easier passage of bats. Bogan oversaw bat research at 

Jewel Cave for the remainder of the 1990s, and Jewel Cave staff conducted an annual winter count 

of hibernating bats.155

Bogan also partnered with Cynthia A. Ramotnik to conduct a field survey for small mammals in 

summer 1993. Cannon provided them room in the pole barn for a laboratory and allowed them to 

camp near monument headquarters (the pole barn is now called the “Training Facility”).156 They 

found mostly small mammals and several medium-sized mammals, as well as several amphibians and 

reptiles, all residing on the surface except for the bats. Their work provided baseline data about the 

occurrence of animals at Jewel Cave.157 Ramotnik, a curator, collected and prepared specimens to be 

added to Jewel Cave’s museum collection.158

Jewel Cave superintendents continued to request funding for a cave management plan, but it was 

not forthcoming. In the meantime, staff worked on other supplemental plans to improve 

management of cave resources. In 1998, Wiles completed a Draft Human Use Document, an 

internal guide that Wiles intended “to provide basic concepts to help our staff offer helpful answers 

152 David J. Worthington and Michael A. Bogan, Cave Entrance Modification and Potential Impact on Bat 

Populations at Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota, February 19, 1993, 1, Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, Folder N1427 

Bats – JECA Bogan & Worthington, Jewel Cave NM CF.

153 Worthington and Bogan, Cave Entrance Modification, February 19, 1993, 2.

154 Worthington and Bogan, Cave Entrance Modification, February 19, 1993, 5–6.

155 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1996, 4; Superintendent’s Annual Report, 

Jewel Cave National Monument, 1997, 7; Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1998, 7; 

Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

156 Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

157 Michael A. Bogan and Cynthia A. Ramotinik, Baseline Surveys for Mammals at Jewel Cave National Monument 

South Dakota, March 1, 1994, Files 1783a–k, Jewel Cave NM MF. 

158 U.S. Biological Survey Collections Manager Cindy Ramotnik to Donna Bentley, March 3, 1995, Files 1781a–b, 

Jewel Cave NM MF. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 261

to difficult questions” about human impacts on the cave.159 The document addressed human-caused 

contamination of the cave from runoff that originated on roads, parking lots, sidewalks, roofs, 

lawns, and the sewage lagoons. To reduce contamination from its own facilities, the NPS had, 

replaced asphalt cave trails with concrete; reduced algae growth by annual treatment and by modifying 

our lighting system; installed air lock doors; installed lint collection tarps; facilitated restoration camps; 

installed vacuum toilets; moved seasonal housing off-site; begun a photomonitoring program; 

conducted water-quality and biologic studies; monitored underground fuel tanks; reduce[d] our use of 

hazardous materials; contained spills of used oil, antifreeze, and fuels; established conservationminded exploration policies; reduced tour size; restored disturbed land; used bio-control of exotic 

plants rather than pesticides; conducted geologic mapping to identify vulnerable areas; had public land 

overlying known cave passages removed from mineral entry; and encouraged a land exchange that will 

place more land under the Federal Cave Resources Protection Act. Wind Cave is taking action to 

mitigate the effects of parking lot runoff, and we will likely follow in their steps after evaluating the 

effectiveness of their efforts.160

As part of the initiatives to mitigate contamination of the cave through surface runoff, Jewel Cave 

had also requested funding to measure the precise impact of human sewage on cave resources.161

In 1999, O’Dell approved a new RMP, updated by Wiles, that dealt with cave resources more 

thoroughly than the 1983 RMP had. The new RMP listed the park’s resource management 

objectives: 

To understand, monitor, maintain, restore and protect the natural systems and conditions that exist in 

Jewel Cave.

To plan and manage surface resources and developments in order to maintain, restore, and protect 

natural systems and conditions within Jewel Cave National Monument.

To work with the Black Hills National Forest and neighboring landowners to ensure that land uses 

adjacent to the monument do not threaten portions of the Jewel Cave system that extend beyond park 

boundaries.

To identify, document, and protect significant vegetative and wildlife resources within the Monument.

To identify, document, preserve and protect significant cultural resources within the monument.162

The RMP listed what baseline information existed for the monument, the current conditions of 

natural resources, threats to those natural resources, and future plans for managing both natural and 

cultural resources.163 It identified three top priorities for additional natural resources baseline data: 

(1) a study of microclimate and airflow dynamics, (2) an inventory and map of cave microbiology, 

and (3) completion and analysis of the bat survey.164

159 Mike Wiles to Chief of Resource Management, memorandum, “Human Use Issues,” July 14, 1998, Cabinet 3, 

Drawer 4, Folder L7617 Statements & Studies – NPS Areas, Jewel Cave NM CF. 

160 Wiles to Chief of Resource Management, memorandum, “Human Use Issues,” July 14, 1998.

161 Project Statement, Jewel Cave NM, April 1, 1998.

162 Resource Management Plan, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1999, 6, Jewel Cave NM DF. 

163 Resource Management Plan, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1999, 6–16. 

164 Resource Management Plan, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1999, 13. 
262 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Cooperation with Other Caves 

In 1991, the NPS renewed a service-wide memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the Cave 

Research Foundation for cooperative cave management, along with a Declaration of Mutual 

Interest.165 The Cave Research Foundation was a non-profit, all-volunteer organization, established 

in 1957 and dedicated to researching cave and karst features.166 The agreement stated that the Cave 

Research Foundation could conduct studies to help understand cave/karst systems in the National 

Park System; the NPS could use results of the foundation’s studies in its cave management policies 

and for interpretive purposes; the foundation had permission for field operations, surveying, and 

mapping, as long as it provided the NPS the maps and results of its research; and the foundation 

would obtain NPS approval before making public statements about caves on NPS lands.167 Jewel 

Cave never utilized this agreement.168

Jewel Cave continued to benefit from its association with the National Speleological Society 

(NSS). Cave specialists at NPS sites across the country knew each other through the NSS and 

maintained a strong network. Cavers at Jewel Cave had been involved in the NSS for decades, 

including Herb and Jan Conn, Art and Peg Palmer, and Dwight Deal. In the 1990s, Wiles, Marc 

Ohms, Rene Ohms, Steve Baldwin, Stan Allison, and other cavers active at Jewel Cave were all 

members of the NSS and many attended annual NSS conventions. Through this national network, 

they shared experiences from Jewel Cave and learned from cavers elsewhere. For instance, after 

attending an NSS convention in 1991, Art Palmer wrote to Wiles about surveying progress at 

Lechuguilla.169

Similarly, the International Congress of Speleology (ICS) provided valuable opportunities to 

learn from managers of other caves. After attending the ICS meeting in 1997, Wiles asked to visit 

Mammoth Cave National Park to observe cave management procedures with the park ecologist, 

Rick Olson. O’Dell explained to Mammoth Cave Superintendent Ronald R. Switzer, 

Last August Mike had an opportunity to visit with Rick at the International Congress of Speleology. 

He found it helpful to discuss the different solutions to management issues arrived at in different NPS 

units, and felt the interaction to be very productive. I believe that further discussion during an on-site 

165 F. Eugene Hester to Regional Directors, memorandum, April 29, 1991, Cabinet 2, Drawer 2, Folder A54 

Inspections, Surveys, Appraisals, Jewel Cave NM CF; Declaration of Mutual Interest by the National Park Service, 

Department of the Interior, and the Cave Research Foundation, Cabinet 2, Drawer 2, Folder A54 Inspections, Surveys, 

Appraisals, Jewel Cave NM CF.

166 Declaration of Mutual Interest by the National Park Service, Department of the Interior, and the Cave Research 

Foundation.

167 Memorandum of Understanding Between the National Park Service, Department of the Interior and the Cave 

Research Foundation, April 1991, Cabinet 2, Drawer 2, Folder A54 Inspections, Surveys, Appraisals, Jewel Cave NM 

CF.

168 Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

169 Art & Peg Palmer to Kate, Brian, Mike, and all, July 17, 1991, Cabinet 3, Drawer 2, Folder N3023 Palmer, Art & 

Peg, Jewel Cave NM CF.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 263

visit would be beneficial to both parks. We would greatly appreciate the opportunity for Rick to show 

Mike around your park and discuss ecosystem management issues.170

Wiles attended and presented at Mammoth Cave’s Annual Science Conference and participated in a 

Cave Research Foundation caving trip to re-survey a known area of Mammoth Cave.171 Wiles 

subsequently reported, 

This first-hand experience helped me understand some of the differing practices of cavers in different 

regions regarding such matters as: travel speed, pack size and contents, type of clothing, and camping 

(not often done in Mammoth Cave). Such considerations are as well thought-out as at Jewel. The 

conclusions are different, however, because of nature of the cave itself, as well as the attitudes of the 

surrounding community.172

Wiles and Olson discussed relationships between NPS cave sites and nearby landowners, 

microclimates and entrance changes’ effects on them, archeological resources, bat populations, 

hydrology, vandalism mitigation, and tour policies.173Their discussions led to a later collaboration 

between Mammoth Cave and Jewel Cave to coordinate a meeting of all cave management and 

natural resource specialists in the NPS, in order to share best practices and learn from each other.174

In 1998, Congress established the National Cave and Karst Research Institute (NCKRI) (P.L. 

105-325). The NPS was tasked with the initial planning for the new organization, and Wiles served 

on NCKRI’s steering committee, chaired by Zelda Bailey.175 The organization’s purpose was to: 

• further the science of speleology;

• centralize and standardize speleological information;

• foster interdisciplinary cooperation in cave and karst research programs;

• promote public education;

• promote national and international cooperation in protecting the environment for the benefit 

of cave and karst landforms; and

• promote and develop environmentally sound and sustainable resource management practices.

170 Peggy O’Dell to Ronald R. Switzer, Mammoth Cave National Park Superintendent, July 6, 1998, Cabinet 3, 

Drawer 2, Folder N3023 Geologic Features – Speleo., Jewel Cave NM CF.

171 Mike Wiles, Mammoth Cave trip report, July 31, 1998, Cabinet 3, Drawer 2, Folder N3023 Geologic Features –

Speleo., Jewel Cave NM CF.

172 Mike Wiles, Mammoth Cave trip report, August 1, 1998, Cabinet 3, Drawer 2, Folder N3023 Geologic Features 

– Speleo., Jewel Cave NM CF.

173 Mike Wiles, Mammoth Cave trip report, July 28, 1998, and July 30, 1998, Cabinet 3, Drawer 2, Folder N3023 

Geologic Features – Speleo., Jewel Cave NM CF.

174 Ronald R. Switzer to Jewel Cave NM Superintendent, memorandum, July 24, 1998, Cabinet 3, Drawer 2, Folder 

N3023 Geologic Features – Speleo., Jewel Cave NM CF; Larry Dilts for Peggy O’Dell to Mammoth Cave National Park 

Superintendent, October 5, 1998, Cabinet 3, Drawer 2, Folder N3023 Geologic Features – Speleo., Jewel Cave NM CF.

175 An Act of October 30, 1998, 112 Stat. 3038 (P.L. 105-325); Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 
264 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

NCKRI was based in New Mexico and was a partnership among the NPS, the New Mexico Institute 

of Mining and Technology (a state institution), and the City of Carlsbad.176

Cooperation with Forest Service on Cave Management (including Pass 

Creek Land Exchange) 

As cavers discovered more and more passageways under Forest Service property, Cannon and 

Wiles faced the challenges of managing parts of the cave that fell outside monument lands. The 1990 

GMP task directive (for the GMP finalized in 1993) noted that “long-standing concerns about 

activities on adjoining lands have intensified” with the discoveries of more cave under Forest Service 

land.177 During the GMP process, NPS planners concluded that Jewel Cave’s enabling legislation and 

the Federal Cave Resource Protection Act “clearly provides authority for boundary changes 

necessary to protect the cave.”178 However, boundary changes required an act of Congress, a high 

bar that would be difficult to clear. 

In order to protect cave resources in the meantime, Cannon entered into a 1991 interagency 

agreement with the Black Hills National Forest “for cooperative management of those sections of 

Jewel Cave that underlie USFS lands.”179 Forest Service and NPS officials met annually pursuant to 

the agreement and updated each other about cave management, research projects, and the most 

recent cave maps. Cannon investigated the possibility of another mineral withdrawal, in addition to 

the one completed in 1990.180

The agencies also pursued protecting Jewel Cave through land exchanges between the Forest 

Service and owners of private land above the cave. This was a particularly attractive solution for the 

Pass Creek area, where the cave lay under private land owned by a variety of individuals (the cave is 

only known to go under three parcels but is expected to cross under many more). Some landowners 

in the Pass Creek area had penetrated cave passages (not all of which were necessarily connected to 

known cave) while drilling water wells. Since the Federal Cave Resource Protection Act of 1988 only 

applies to caves on federal land, federal agencies had no legal recourse if a landowner drilled into the 

cave with ill intent, or if pollutants leaked from private land into the cave. In addition to the 

potential problems caused by drilling, the NPS had concerns about the possibility of private septic 

tanks or pesticides leaking into the cave.181

176 National Cave and Karst Research Institute, “About NCKRI,” accessed November 21, 2019, 

http://www.nckri.org/about_nckri/about_nckri.htm. 

177 McDougall, Task Directive, General Management Plan and Development Concept Plan, Package 110, Wind 

Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument South Dakota, August 1990, 12.

178 Team Captain, Central Team, Branch of Planning, DSC, to Manager, Central Team, DSC, memorandum, 

February 25, 1991, 2.

179 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1991 and 1992, 3.

180 Kate Cannon to Roberta Moltzen, March 30, 1993, Cabinet 2, Drawer 2, Folder A54 Inspections, Surveys, 

Appraisals, Jewel Cave NM CF.

181 Bob Paulson and Corissa Busse, interview by Jackie Gonzales, June 26, 2019, Rapid City, SD; Wiles, interview; 

Cannon, interview; Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 265

In the mid-1990s, Cannon approached The Nature Conservancy (TNC) about orchestrating a 

land exchange in coordination with the Forest Service. An exchange can be more politically 

expedient than a boundary expansion, because it can be designed to result in no net increase of 

federal lands and requires no act of Congress. Land exchanges are also a useful management tool for 

the Forest Service, since they can allow the agency to fill inholdings while also getting rid of lands 

that are isolated or do not contribute to the agency’s mission (it is difficult for a federal land 

management agency to sell off lands). The Forest Service already had a long-term defragmentation 

plan, and an exchange at Jewel Cave could help them to implement it.182 

In 1996, Cannon spoke with Joe Satrom in Bismarck, the director of TNC’s North Dakota and 

South Dakota programs, and launched an exchange of private land with the Forest Service to 

protect cave resources. The Forest Service provided TNC with a list of private landowners in the 

Pass Creek Area, and TNC staff began contacting the landowners to see if any would be interested 

in selling their properties at fair market value. TNC hired a licensed appraiser to evaluate the 

properties and purchased the first three tracts in 1996 with money from an internal Land Protection 

Fund (LPF).183 In 1997, Satrom passed the project off to Bob Paulson, TNC’s new South Dakota 

director. That year, TNC purchased an additional 399.54 acres and continued negotiations with 

other landowners.184

TNC eventually acquired 15 properties in the Pass Creek area. When TNC acquired a property, 

it coordinated with the Forest Service to either auction off the buildings or burn them, and then it 

rehabilitated the vegetation on the land. Meanwhile, the Forest Service identified nine parcels of land 

that it could dispose of, mostly in and around Custer. One parcel was part of the high school 

football field and another was part of the Custer airport. The appraiser and USGS staff then 

evaluated the parcels for land value and type—any exchange of federal land would have to ensure 

that there was no net loss of wetlands. During the back-and-forth, the Forest Service pulled several 

possible tracts off the table.185 

The Pass Creek Land Exchange was finalized in April 2000, as a four-way agreement among the 

NPS, the Forest Service, TNC, and the Custer County Commission. In the final exchange, TNC 

purchased 15 parcels comprising 366 acres in the Pass Creek area and donated them to the Forest 

Service, in exchange for seven tracts in and around Custer, which TNC acquired from the Forest 

Service and sold to private parties on the same day. The City of Custer acquired parcels that 

previously belonged to the Forest Service on the airport runway, the town dump, and the high 

school football field. It also acquired other developable parcels, which was helpful to the city since it 

is surrounded by national forest lands and therefore has difficulty expanding its tax base. The Custer 

182 Paulson and Busse, interview; Wiles, interview; Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

183 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1996, 1, 3; Paulson and Busse, interview. 

184 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1997, 1; Paulson and Busse, interview. 

185 Paulson and Busse, interview.
266 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Housing Authority purchased 10 acres of land that it then sold to developers. The NPS provided 

$1,000 for closing costs, the agency’s only financial contribution to the exchange.186

The land exchange allowed the Forest Service to dispose of unwanted parcels, the NPS to 

protect Jewel Cave, and the City of Custer to expand economically. It did not fully work out for 

TNC, however. The value of the tracts TNC had purchased exceeded the value of the Forest Service 

tracts, and because the land exchanged had to be equal in value, TNC was left with one remnant 

tract of land. Since 2000, TNC has owned, managed, and paid taxes on this parcel in the Pass Creek 

area. As of 2019, someone had leased the land for grazing, which lowered TNC’s tax burden and 

ensured the land was managed. TNC still wanted to donate the property to the Forest Service if 

possible, since TNC is not in the business of managing widespread or isolated lands.187

Paulson commented that the turnover in federal agencies makes land exchanges difficult for 

third-party partners. He explained, 

When I started with Joe and went to the first meeting, there were two of us with the Conservancy. 

There were 13 feds in the room, federal people: USGS, BLM, Park Service, Forest Service. When we 

finished the land exchange . . . in 2000, it had been going for a while, that was year four, I was the 

only Nature Conservancy staffer and there were 16 feds in the room. But none of the 16 were the 

original 13. Within four years,. . . . complete turnover. So we became the institutional memory. And 

nobody knew why they were doing it, or why it was important.188

O’Dell was out of town for that final meeting and Wiles was unable to attend, but Wiles did hold 

some institutional memory on the part of the NPS, and he and O’Dell expressed strong support for 

the project.189

TNC in South Dakota has completed numerous land exchanges with the Forest Service and the 

state, but the organization has become increasingly reluctant to get involved in exchanges because of 

the amount of time they take and the risk of being saddled with managing land that had been 

intended for donation the Forest Service. Paulson elaborated, 

So it has become quite cumbersome. And it’s also something on the Forest Service side that nobody 

gets credit for, because the way supervisors move through their positions. If a forest supervisor starts 

a land exchange, they’re not the one that’s going to finish it. So it’s always kind of like an asterisk at 

the end of their annual report. Because nobody gets credit for it. It just takes too long. And technically 

we’re in year 24 [of the Pass Creek Land Exchange], we’ve owned this land for 24 years, waiting to get 

it into the Forest Service. And paying taxes on it and having to maintain it.

190

The South Dakota director who succeeded Paulson, Corissa Busse, has approached Wiles, other 

NPS officials, and the Forest Service about arranging another land exchange to transfer the 

remaining parcel at Pass Creek to Forest Service ownership. But the proposed exchange has been 

caught in the lengthy environmental review processes and has lacked a champion in either the NPS 

186 “Nature Conservancy enjoys growth spurt,” Rapid City Journal, May 17, 2002; Paulson and Busse, interview; 

Wiles, interview.

187 Paulson and Busse, interview. 

188 Paulson and Busse, interview. 

189 Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

190 Paulson and Busse, interview. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 267

or the Forest Service. Paulson and Busse both noted that land exchanges are successful when there 

is someone at a federal agency willing to push it (which Paulson said Cannon did at Jewel Cave) and 

when the agency has staff that really understand the complexities of the process (Busse identified 

Cindy Hockelberg with the Forest Service as such a person). As of 2019, TNC remained interested 

in exchanging the final parcel at Pass Creek but was reluctant to engage in new exchanges out of 

concern for being left again with excess land.191

Fire 

In 1991, the Forest Service, the NPS, the states of South Dakota and Wyoming, and two 

Wyoming counties (Weston and Crook) signed an agreement for “Cooperative Use of Prescribed 

Fires” in the Black Hills. All of the signatory agencies agreed to “cooperate in prescribed burning 

projects where such cooperation best serves the public interest and where it is mutually beneficial.” 

The agreement aimed to increase efficiency and cost-effectiveness, and it included provisions for 

such collaboration.192

Figure 111. Jewel Cave 

held several prescribed 

burns in the 1990s, in 

partnership with other 

NPS units, the Forest 

Service, and the state of 

South Dakota. Here, a 

prescribed burn in 1990.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave 

NM.

Around the same time, Jewel Cave initiated a Hazard Fuel Reduction Program to decrease the 

risk heavy vegetative growth posed to the monument’s built infrastructure. Casey reported, 

On the surface, the intense overloading of hazard fuels presents a great risk to the park’s real 

property, including the park Visitor Center, maintenance area and housing area. Mechanical thinning 

around the park’s developed zone over the last several years has lessened the threat to real property, 

but the rest of the park is still in great danger of uncontrollable wildfire. The uncontrolled overgrowth 

191 Paulson and Busse, interview. 

192 1991 Interagency Agreement for Cooperative Use of Prescribed Fire Between USDA, Forest Service, USDI, 

National Park Service, South Dakota Division of Forestry, Wyoming State Forestry Division, Weston County, Wyoming, 

and Crook County, Wyoming, March 1991, 1, Cabinet 2, Drawer 2, Folder Inspections, Surveys, Appraisals, Jewel Cave 

NM CF.
268 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

of the park’s forest resources is also encouraging bug and pest disease in and around the park. Since 

the park is surrounded by National Forest lands there is great concern by the Forest Service regarding 

the threat of a major forest fire occurring in the area. A Fire Management Plan was approved in 1987 

and the park is now in the process of implementing a comprehensive mechanical thinning and 

prescribed burning program funded by the Hazard Fuel Reduction Program.193

Forest Service and Wind Cave firefighting staff assisted Jewel Cave with mechanical thinning and 

prescribed burns (see Figures 111 and 112).

Casey completed a Wildland Fire Prevention Plan for Jewel Cave in 1992. All parks were 

required to have such plans. The plan for Jewel Cave sought to “reduce the threat of human caused 

wildland first through employee and visitor awareness and education”194 During the prior decade, 

only 2 human-caused fires had occurred at the monument, both in 1991, and 11 human-caused fires 

had occurred within a three-mile radius of the monument. The plan defined zones within the park 

and spelled out risks, hazards, and value of each zone, as well as enforcement and education actions 

needed in each zone.

195

Figure 112. Hazardous fuel 

reduction at Jewel Cave

through mechanical 

thinning, 1991.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave 

NM.

193 Annual Statement for Interpretation, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1991, 16.

194 Jewel Cave National Monument, Wildland Fire Prevention Plan, August 1992, 1, Cabinet 2, Drawer 2, [loose in 

drawer], Jewel Cave NM CF.

195 Jewel Cave National Monument, Wildland Fire Prevention Plan, August 1992.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 269

In 1994, Peter M. Brown of the Forest Service’s Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment 

Station developed a fire history of Jewel Cave. Using “fire scars recorded in dendrochronologicallydated tree ring series,” Brown determined past fire frequency, timing, spatial patterning, and “the 

maximum age structure of ponderosa pine communities in the Jewel Cave area.”196 He concluded, 

It is obvious that these forests are not burning today nearly as often as they did in the past. Even the 

longest interval recorded by trees at Jewel Cave (78 years from 1706 to 1785 at JCS) has been 

exceeded by the absence of fire events during the twentieth century settlement period. . . . Meaningful 

reintroduction of fire as a[n] ecosystem process should be a prime component of any management 

strategy to restore natural conditions at Jewel Cave National Monument.197

The same problem existed across the country: forest areas had burned far less frequently than 

they had previously, due to a century of fire suppression. Following an especially devastating fire 

season in 1994, the DOI and USDA completed a Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy and 

Program Review Report. In response to a directive in that report to “reduce flammable wildland 

fuels and restore fire as an ecosystem process,” the NPS organized four five-person fire modules 

around the country that would be dedicated to prescribed fire activities and assist with regional and 

national needs. It later expanded to eight modules of seven people each, one of which was stationed 

at Jewel Cave.198

The Jewel Cave Fire Use Module comprised a GS-7 module leader, a GS-6 assistant leader, and 

five GS-5 forestry technicians. NPS general funding for fires paid for the crews’ salaries, and Jewel 

Cave housed the staff. Parks in the Midwest Region (including Jewel Cave) could request the use of 

the module for prescribed fires only, not for suppression. The idea was to reduce fuels on public 

lands and to reduce the likelihood of catastrophic fires, which had become increasingly frequent 

because of fire suppression policies and a warming climate.199

The USDA and DOI maintained cooperative fire protection agreements for all public lands in 

the Black Hills area.200 Units included in that agreement were the Black Hills National Forest, Jewel 

Cave, Wind Cave, Devils Tower, and Mount Rushmore. The local plan included procedures for 

creating a crew, reporting a fire, using resources, contact points, and initial attack.

201 In 1997, the 

196 Peter M. Brown, “Fire History of the Southern Black Hills, South Dakota,” June 13, 1994, 3, File 1670c, Jewel 

Cave NM MF.

197 Brown, “Fire History of the Southern Black Hills, South Dakota,” June 13, 1994, 9, File 1670i, Jewel Cave NM 

MF.

198 1999 Jewel Cave Fire Use Module, [1999], NPS, Cabinet 2, Drawer 2, Folder Y14 Jewel Cave Fire Module, Jewel 

Cave NM CF.

199 1999 Jewel Cave Fire Use Module, [1999], NPS.

200 Interagency cooperative Fire Protection Agreement Between DOI and USDA and the State of South Dakota, 

May 1995, Cabinet 2, Folder 2, Folder 1995 SD State Interagency Fire Protection Cooperative Agreement, Jewel Cave 

NM CF. 

201 Annual Operating Plan to Interagency Cooperative Fire Protection Agreement, May 26, 1999, Cabinet 2, Drawer 

2, Folder Y14 Wildland Fire Mgt, Wildland Fire Plan, Jewel Cave NM CF.
270 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

NPS was included in a nationwide agreement for cooperative fire management among the BLM, 

BIA, NPS, USFWS, and the Forest Service.

202

Jewel Cave conducted several prescribed fires in the 1990s in cooperation with the Black Hills 

National Forest, Wind Cave, Mount Rushmore, and Devils Tower. A prescribed burn in 1990 

encompassed 47 acres along the south side of Highway 16 (see Figure 113).

203 Crews completed a 

small prescribed burn in 1997 and burned slash piles.204 In 1999, fire crews from Jewel Cave and 

Wind Cave burned 154 acres south and east of the visitor center, an area bounded by the main park 

road, Highway 16, and the service road to the sewage lagoons.205 Objectives for the 1999 fire were to 

reduce hazardous fuels around monument structures to protect them from wildland fire, reduce fuel 

loads to reduce likelihood of catastrophic fire, reintroduce fire into the ecosystem, and preserve multiclass stands of ponderosa pine.206

These objectives proved prescient. Within a year, one of the worst fires in Black Hills history passed 

through the monument but spared its buildings, thanks in part to these prescribed burns (see 

Chapter 7). 

Figure 113. A 

prescribed fire at 

Jewel Cave 

National 

Monument, 1990.

Source: NPS, 

Jewel Cave NM.

202 Interagency Agreement for Fire Management Between the BLM, BIA, NPS, FWS of the DOI and the Forest 

Service of the USDA, February 1997, files provided by Katie Atkins, Folder A44 Memorandums of Agreement, Jewel 

Cave NM CF. 

203 “Jewel Cave Completes Successful Prescribed Burn,” news release, December 11, 1990, Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, 

Folder K3415 Press Releases, Jewel Cave NM CF.

204 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1997, 7.

205 “Prescribed Fires Planned at Jewel Cave National Monument,” news release, March 21, 1999, Cabinet 1, Drawer 

3, Folder K3415 Press Releases, Jewel Cave NM CF.

206 Kelly Mathis and Andy Thorstenson, Northern Great Plains Fire Monitoring Team, Jewel Cave National 

Monument, Lithograph Canyon Prescribed Fire Monitoring Report, September 27, 1999, 1, Cabinet 2, Drawer 2, Folder 

Y14 Burning Index, Jewel Cave NM CF.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 271

Surface Resources 

Jewel Cave staff partnered with the Forest Service and private landowners to control the 

invasive species leafy spurge, which damaged ranchlands. Originally from the Caucasus Mountains in 

central Eurasia, leafy spurge was first found at Jewel Cave in 1991 by a Forest Service employee. To 

control the plant, Cannon opted to use biological control agents (insects) instead of herbicides to 

avoid “potential groundwater contamination” in areas overlying cave resources.207 Biological control 

of leafy spurge using the black dot spurge flea beetle (Aphthona nigriscutis) began in 1995, with insects 

from an insectary in Wyoming. The South Dakota Department of Agriculture provided the insects 

to the NPS at no cost.208 After the first year, Casey asked for permission to release an additional 

5,000 beetles.209

In the Pass Creek Area, Cannon initiated, and Curtain carried out, a program encouraging 

private owners of property over cave resources to use the beetle in place of herbicides. The Forest 

Service and the Custer County Weed Inspector cooperated with the NPS on this initiative, pursuant 

to a national MOU between the Forest Service and the NPS (MOU-88-37) for cooperation in “pest 

management and pesticide use, and other issues that may cross jurisdictional lines or impact the 

overall ecosystem.”210 The NPS partnered with the Forest Service, Custer County, and the state of 

South Dakota to release beetles in the Pass Creek area and establish an insectary on Forest Service 

land in the Pass Creek area.211 Curtain developed an informational pamphlet about the program in 

1998 and mailed it to 75 Pass Creek landowners.212

Forest Service partners helped Jewel Cave collect baseline data regarding birds. District Ranger 

Frank Cross conducted a migratory bird survey by the sewer lagoons to help Jewel Cave develop a 

bird list. Cross counted 167 birds spanning 21 different species.213 In spring 1996, Black Hills 

National Forest Biological Technician Duane Weber conducted a breeding bird survey within the 

monument. Jewel Cave paid the Forest Service for Weber’s time and materials. To conduct the 

service, Weber used a point-count method in which he set up a census route and ran it four times. 

Cannon hoped to repeat the count in future years and suggested using Wind Cave staff, if Weber 

207 Kathleen M. Burzynski, “The Biological Control of Leafy Spurge at Jewel Cave National Monument,” July 30, 

1995, 2–4, Cabinet 3, Drawer 1, Folder Natural Surface Vegetation, Jewel Cave NM CF.

208 Burzynski, “The Biological Control of Leafy Spurge at Jewel Cave National Monument,” July 30, 1995, 13.

209 Tom Casey for Kate Cannon to Rocky Mountain Regional Director, memorandum, February 23, 1995, Cabinet 

3, Drawer 1, Folder Natural Surface Vegetation, Jewel Cave NM CF. 

210 District Ranger Burns L. Davison, to Kate Cannon, December 11, 1996, Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, Folder N1617 

Plant Life Management Leafy Spurge (Insectary), Jewel Cave NM CF. 

211 Management Assistant to Files, October 16, 1996, Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, Folder N1617 Plant Life Management 

Leafy Spurge (Insectary), Jewel Cave NM CF; Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1997, 

6–7; Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1998, 6. 

212 Marie Curtain to Mike Wiles, June 1, 1998, Cabinet 3, Drawer 2, Folder N26 Reports, Jewel Cave NM CF.

213 District Ranger Frank J. Cross to Superintendent Kate Cannon, June 2, 1993, Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, Folder 

N1419 Birds, Jewel Cave NM CF. 
272 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

was not available.214 The count was conducted in 1997 and 1998 using the same method employed 

by Weber, although it is not clear by whom.215

Cultural Resource Management 

In addition to natural resource studies, Cannon prioritized baseline studies of cultural resources 

at Jewel Cave, since almost none had been done before. The NPS did not know whether any tribes 

had specific connections to Jewel Cave, as Cannon explained in a 1990 letter: 

as far as we can determine, is not specifically sacred to the Lakota or other Plains Tribes but is sacred 

as part of the Paha Sapa (Black Hills). We have not yet found any cultural sites in the Monument 

specific to Plains Indians’ use.216

This uncertainty made cultural resource compliance and interpretation of cultural resources difficult 

for staff. Cannon repeatedly requested funds for studies to address the issue.217 

The park’s 1999 RMP included recommendations for cultural resource management. It outlined 

all archeological resources and studies undertaken, which included two studies by Glenna 

Sheveland.218 It also noted existing historic resources (the historic cabin topped the list) and cultural 

landscapes, and it identified the following cultural resource management needs: a cultural landscape 

report for the historic area, an assessment of ethnographic resources at the monument, and 

continued cataloging and addressing deficiencies of the museum collection.219

Archeological Studies 

In 1992, Glenna Sheveland completed a report that detailed previous archeological surveys and 

findings at Jewel Cave and within a one-mile radius of the monument. Sheveland, in a volunteer 

capacity, performed a pedestrian survey of the entire monument and conducted a file search at the 

State of South Dakota Archeological Research Center. She found that between 1979 and 1992, there 

had been 16 surveys done on or within one mile of the monument.220 Almost all of the surveys were 

outside of the monument on Forest Service land, probably as a precursor to timber sales, prescribed 

burns, or activities that triggered cultural and natural resource compliance. Sheveland’s summary of 

214 Kate Cannon to Files, memorandum, September 9, 1996, Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, Folder N1419 Breeding Bird 

Survey, Jewel Cave NM CF.

215 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1997, 7; Superintendent’s Annual Report, 

Jewel Cave National Monument, 1998, 6.

216 Kate Cannon to H. Paul Friesma, Professor, Center for Urban Affairs and Policy Research, Northwestern 

University, December 13, 1990, Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, Folder N4617 Demography, Jewel Cave NM CF.

217 Outline of Planning Requirements, Jewel Cave National Monument, May 30, 1990, Cabinet 1, Drawer 2, Folder 

D18 Outline for Planning Requirements, Jewel Cave NM CF.

218 Jay D. Vogt to Peggy O’Dell, March 31, 1998, Cabinet 3, Drawer 1, Folder H32 National Register of Historic 

Places and State Plans, Jewel Cave NM CF. 

219 Resource Management Plan, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1999, 15–16, Jewel Cave NM DF. 

220 Sheveland, “An Intensive Cultural Resource Survey of Jewel Cave National Monument,” January 10, 1993, 3–5.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 273

previous archeological surveys gave Jewel Cave managers accurate, well-documented data on 

archeological sites in one easy-to-access report, which facilitated better cultural resource compliance 

and management in future years. Sheveland updated the report in 1998.221

Historic Ranger Cabin 

As part of the GMP process, Barbara Bevin Long completed a Historic Resource Study (HRS) 

for Jewel Cave. The HRS served as a guide for future archeological and architectural surveys and 

provided a base of information to use for future nominations to the National Register of Historic 

Places.222 Long’s report explained the historical development of Jewel Cave, dividing it into distinct 

eras that could be used for interpretive planning.223 Long identified two historic contexts for Jewel 

Cave and developed a description, significance, registration requirements, and associated properties 

for each: 

1. “Recreation and Tourism in the Black Hills and at Jewel Cave, 1890–1942.” Associated 

resources included the razed log hotel that the Michauds built near Prairie Dog Spring and 

the historic cave entrance. 

2. “Development and Administration of Jewel Cave National Monument, 1908–1942.” 

Associated resources included the cave itself, the historic cave entrance, retaining walls, early 

signs, and the CCC cabin.224

Long recommended archeological surveying and testing for prehistoric, historical, and explorationera archeological sites, and further research into transportation routes, mining sites, homestead 

claims, and CCC facilities. She also advised, “The second intended phase of the project, survey and 

nomination of historic properties, should be completed.”225

The HRS provided an impetus for preserving, rehabilitating, and interpreting the CCC ranger 

cabin. Chief Ranger Tom Casey outlined his plans for the cabin, in the context of revitalizing the 

historic area of Jewel Cave: 

My vision is to develop the historic area of the park into a destination location rather than the place 

one goes to to take the historic tour after having purchased their ticket at the visitor center. Therefore, 

the visitors experience begins once they approach and subsequently enter the area. The entrance sign 

and gate, picnic tables, etc. should be replicas of the originals. Landscaping would be representative 

and possibly so would roadway composition. When visitors approach and enter the cabin, they will be 

greeted by a ranger in period uniform. The cabin will appear as it did in the early 40’s with period 

furnishings adhering to the original layout. Visitors taking the tour will continue their historic 

221 Sheveland, “An Intensive Cultural Resource Survey of Jewel Cave National Monument,” January 10, 1993, 10; 

Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

222 Barbara Bevin Long, “Jewel Cave National Monument Historic Resource Study: Historic Contexts and National 

Register Guidelines,” prepared for DOI, NPS, Rocky Mountain Regional Office, 1992, Introduction, eTIC.

223 Long, “Jewel Cave National Monument Historic Resource Study,” 1992, 6/36.

224 Long, “Jewel Cave National Monument Historic Resource Study,” 1992, 8/47–8/52.

225 Long, “Jewel Cave National Monument Historic Resource Study,” 1992, 10/55–10/56.
274 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

experience by being greeted and led by a ranger in period costume through the tour route in the 

traditional manner of carrying a candle bucket dating back to the early 1900’s.

The cabin while being used as an office/contact center will also function as a living exhibit where 

visitors can tour and enjoy the facility. Compromises to the integrity of its function may include 

pictorial displays of CCC camps, early ranger families, and historic photos and a small NHA book 

sales display.

Surface interpretive opportunities will eventually be developed such as: walks to the CCC camp and 

historic hotel, talks on the original use of the cave and early explorers, and installation of wayside 

exhibits.226

As a first step in realizing this vision, he contacted Rocky Mountain Regional Historical Architect 

Richard Cronenberger about completing a historic structure report for the cabin with regional 

interpretive funding, in tandem with a visitor use study the Rocky Mountain Regional Office was 

already planning to conduct for Jewel Cave.227

Cronenberger and Historical Architect Nancy MacMillan completed a preliminary historic 

structure report in 1995. They assessed the building and developed design specifications for 

contracting out the rehabilitation and historical restoration work.228 The Rocky Mountain Regional 

Office funded the report and the restoration using fee demo funds (from park use fees).229 After 

Jewel Cave was transferred to the Midwest Region, the Midwest Regional Office found weaknesses 

in the report that needed to be corrected before rehabilitation could continue. In 1996, Historical 

Architect Laura Johnson of the Midwest Systems Support Office began compiling information to 

update the report, but she left the regional office before finishing the project. In the meantime, the 

regional office procured funding to rehabilitate the cabin, which made completing the report more 

urgent.230

In November 1999, Midwest Region Historical Architect Alan O’Bright completed the updated 

historic structure report for the cabin, with help from O’Dell, Dilts, Wiles, Rosga, Midwest regional 

staff, and engineering and design contractors. The updated report used written and oral accounts to 

assess historic room functions, appearance, and building materials. It also addressed compliance 

with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and recommended removing non-historic 

226 Tom Casey to InterMountain Field Area Regional Historical Architect, memorandum, May 28, 1995, Cabinet 3, 

Drawer 1, Folder H4219 Historic Structure Report (Ranger Cabin), Jewel Cave NM CF. Note that candle lanterns were 

not used historically at Jewel Cave: the practice was adopted from the example of Wind Cave’s tours. Wiles, comments 

on draft, April 7, 2020. 

227 Richard J. Cronenberger to Jewel Cave Superintendent, memorandum, May 18, 1995, Cabinet 3, Drawer 1, 

Folder H4219 Historic Structure Report (Ranger Cabin), Jewel Cave NM CF.

228 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1996, 2; Superintendent’s Annual Report, 

Jewel Cave National Monument, 1997, 6.

229 Recreation Fee Demonstration Program, Regional Priority List of Projects for Funding from “20% Funds,” 

Midwest Region, September 15, 1997, Cabinet 3, Drawer 1, Folder H4219 Historic Structure Report (Ranger Cabin), 

Jewel Cave NM CF.

230 Alan E. O’Bright, “Rugged Charm: Ranger Cabin (HS-1) Historic Structure Report, Jewel Cave National 

Monument, Custer, South Dakota,” 1999, 3–4, Cabinet 3, Drawer 1, Folder H4219 Historic Structure Report (Ranger 

Cabin), Jewel Cave NM CF.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 275

restrooms and adding a fire suppression system.231 The rehabilitation and restoration of the cabin 

began that year, and most of the work was completed within two years (see Figure 114).232

Figure 114. 

Historic 

rehabilitation 

and restoration 

of the ranger 

cabin began in 

1999.

Source: NPS, 

Jewel Cave NM.

Museum Collection 

As of 1990, some of the monument’s museum collection was stored at Jewel Cave and the rest 

was stored at Wind Cave. The situation was not ideal, as Cannon explained: 

At the present time the Monument does not have proper storage units for its archival materials and 

historically important cave survey maps. Archival materials that are needed for research are stored at 

Wind Cave National Park and the Monument’s cave survey maps are stored in damaged cabinets 

surplused by the Black Hills National Forest several years ago.233

In 1992, Matt Wilson, a curator from the Rocky Mountain Regional Office, and Layne Consultants, 

Inc., visited the monument to assess storage of the museum collection storage. They concluded that 

the collection needed fire protection and dedicated space, and they recommended remodeling the 

basement of Building 14 (one of the housing units) “to create a curatorial office/researcher 

231 Alan E. O’Bright, “Rugged Charm: Ranger Cabin (HS-1) Historic Structure Report, Jewel Cave National 

Monument, Custer, South Dakota,” 1999, 3–4, Cabinet 3, Drawer 1, Folder H4219 Historic Structure Report (Ranger 

Cabin), Jewel Cave NM CF.

232 Al O’Bright, “Work Plan: Ranger Cabin (HS-1), Jewel Cave National Monument,” February 17, 1999, Cabinet 3, 

Drawer 1, Folder H4219 Historic Structure Report (Ranger Cabin), Jewel Cave NM CF; Jewel Cave Superintendent to 

all employee, memorandum, July 6, 2001, Cabinet 3, Drawer 1, Folder Cabin – Misc. reports, Jewel Cave NM CF.

233 Kate Cannon to Associate Rocky Mountain Regional Director for Planning and Resource Preservation, 

memorandum, October 14, 1990, Cabinet 2, Drawer 4, Folder D62 Museum and Exhibits, Jewel Cave NM CF.
276 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

workspace, museum collection storage area, and restroom.”234 Over the next several years, Cannon 

implemented their recommendations.235

With the new dedicated space for the museum collection, Jewel Cave staff was able to catalog, 

accession, and re-accession several items. In 1995, Donna Bentley catalogued the mammal

specimens that Ramotnik and Bogan had collected on their field survey of mammals in Jewel 

Cave.236 Two years later, Marie Curtain re-accessioned 26 bat specimens collected at Jewel Cave by 

John Anderson that had been stored at the Sternberg Museum of Natural History at Fort Hays State 

University in Hays, Kansas. She was able to bring the bat specimens back to Jewel Cave because the 

updated storage facility now met museum collection standards, such as being windowless, insulated, 

fireproofed, secured, and used solely for museum object storage. Curtain noted, 

We value our collection and believe that it should be stored at or near Jewel Cave National 

Monument. Scientific endeavors regarding the Jewel Cave ecosystem will, in most instances, be 

conducted at [Jewel Cave]. If the collection is stored here, a complete research history, with associated 

specimens, is then available.237

By the end of 1997, Curtain had catalogued 1,854 items in the museum collection, bought four 

additional storage cabinets, and received a list of specimens from Jewel Cave that were housed at the 

University of California, Berkeley, museum collection.238 When the monument replaced the historic 

entrance gate, the original gate was accessioned into the museum collection.239

Despite these improvements, Jewel Cave’s collection was too large to fit in the new space and 

the monument could not maintain the collection to museum-quality standards. The NPS had been 

moving to a system of sharing museum storage, with larger parks housing collections of smaller 

nearby parks, rather than developing state-of-the-art curatorial facilities at each location. In 

December 1998, Jewel Cave signed an MOA with Mount Rushmore, by which Mount Rushmore 

would store Jewel Cave’s museum collection. At the time, the collection contained 

over 2500 objects from a variety of disciplines, including: archeology, paleontology, 

dendrochronology, mammalogy, entomology and geology, as well as historic items, photographs and 

archival documents. Many of the natural history items are voucher specimens which support both 

published and unpublished research; these items are sensitive, and require and deserve storage as 

mandated by Federal laws and regulations, as well as National Park Service Standards.240

234 Matthew Wilson, November 6, 1992, Trip Report of June 16, 1992, Cabinet 2, Drawer 4, Folder D62 Museum 

and Exhibits, Jewel Cave NM CF; Steven P. Layne, National Park Service: Jewel Cave National Monument, undated [ca. 

1992], Cabinet 2, Drawer 4, Folder D62 Museum and Exhibits, Jewel Cave NM CF.

235 Kate Cannon to Regional Curator, memorandum, January 27, 1993, Cabinet 2, Drawer 4, Folder D62 Museum 

and Exhibits, Jewel Cave NM CF.

236 U.S. Biological Survey Collections Manager Cindy Ramotnik to Donna Bentley, March 3, 1995, Files 1781a–

1781b, Jewel Cave NM MF. 

237 Marie M. Curtain to Ann Hitchcock, April 9, 1997, Cabinet 2, Drawer 4, Folder D62 Museum and Exhibits, 

Jewel Cave NM CF. 

238 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1997, 6.

239 Resource Management Plan, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1999, 15–16, Jewel Cave NM DF. 

240 Memorandum of Agreement between Mount Rushmore National Memorial and Jewel Cave National 

Monument, December 1998, 1, Cabinet 2, Drawer 2, Folder A54 Inspections, Surveys, Appraisals, Jewel Cave NM CF.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 277

Under the five-year agreement, Jewel Cave would designate one permanent staff member (Wiles) to 

be the liaison for the Jewel Cave collections stored at Mount Rushmore. Jewel Cave was supposed 

to pay Mount Rushmore $1,800 annually for the curatorial services provided (equivalent to two 

weeks of the curator’s time), but Curator Bruce Weisman waived the fee. Jewel Cave was responsible 

for purchasing cabinets and storage containers, and Jewel Cave staff continued to accession and 

catalog items for the collection.241

Before transferring the collection, Jewel Cave staff prepared a complete inventory and provided 

the Mount Rushmore curator with a hard copy.242 As part of this effort, the staff catalogued an 

additional 714 items in the collection.243 Chief of Resource Management Wiles and Mount 

Rushmore Curator Bruce Weisman finalized the MOA, and in 1999, Curtain, Wiles, and Weisman 

physically moved the collection to its new home at Mount Rushmore.244

Interpretation 

The interpretive division continued to be staffed primarily with seasonal employees. Visitation 

declined overall in the 1990s, but high demand and low staffing levels still made it impossible for 

interpretive staff to provide enough cave tours. Around 25 percent of those who wanted to go on 

tours were turned away.245 This “substantial unmet need for tours” drove interpretive planning and 

the initiative to build the second elevator, as discussed above.246 Cannon requested additional 

seasonal interpreters. She recommended hiring interpreters not at the GS-3 and GS-4 level, as was 

currently done, but at the GS-5 level.247 Cannon and Casey continued to ask for additional seasonal 

interpreters and collaborated with the Forest Service on a joint interpretive training program.248 By 

1998, seasonal staff had expanded to include two lead seasonal interpreters (GS-5), which allowed 

for an increase in interpretive programming.249

241 Memorandum of Agreement between Mount Rushmore National Memorial and Jewel Cave National 

Monument, December 1998, 1; Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

242 Memorandum of Agreement between Mount Rushmore National Memorial and Jewel Cave National 

Monument, December 1998, 2–3.

243 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1998, 6.

244 Wiles, interview. 

245 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1993, 4; [no title], January 10, 1992, Cabinet 1, 

Drawer 4, [loose in drawer], Jewel Cave NM CF.

246 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1990, 3.

247 [no title], January 10, 1992.

248 FY 1993 Budget Call Seasonal Interpretive Initiative, Jewel Cave, undated [ca. 1993], Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, Folder 

K1817 Interpretive Planning, Jewel Cave NM CF; Challenge Cost-Share Agreement between Jewel Cave National 

Monument and Black Hills National Forest, June 1993, Cabinet 2, Drawer 2, Folder A54 Inspections, Surveys, 

Appraisals, Jewel Cave NM CF.

249 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1997, 5; Superintendent’s Annual Report, 

Jewel Cave National Monument, 1998, 4.
278 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Cannon and Casey also recommended hiring a permanent full-time interpreter, since the chief of 

interpretation and resource management was in charge of all interpretive programming, as well as 

the growing resource management needs of the monument.250 Karen Rosga was hired by Tom Casey 

as the monument’s lead interpreter in 1996, and she became chief of interpretation in 1997. This 

helped the interpretive programming at Jewel Cave have greater oversight and direction.251 Two 

years later, the monument added another full-time, permanent interpreter under Rosga.252

In 1997, Rosga and Cannon reduced the tour limit size on the Scenic Tour from 40 to 30, where 

it had been in the early 1980s. Because visitation had declined somewhat, it was easier to decrease 

the tour size without forcing people to wait longer for the next tour.253 Even with the second 

elevator installed and the smaller tour group size, staff continued to transport tour groups down via 

two elevator trips on the same elevator. This was due to a lack of staff available to run two elevators 

simultaneously and a policy of not allowing visitors to ride the elevator without monument staff 

present.254 Rosga and Cannon also decreased the size limit on the Spelunking Tour from 10 to 5 

people, based on Wiles’ recommendation. Cannon explained, 

In keeping with the monument’s policy and the generally accepted conduct in the caving community 

where caving (exploration, mapping) trips are limited to no more than six individuals, allowing up to 

eleven people (10 plus a guide) on a Spelunking Tour was sending a poor message to the public.

Other factors driving the change included concerns about monitoring tour-goers so they did not 

damage fragile speleothems, dealing with people who moved at different paces, improving tour 

quality, and safety.255 The price of the spelunking tour increased from $15 to $18 in 1998.256 Tickets 

for the Scenic Tour and Historic Candlelight Tour had risen from $4 to $5 in 1995 and later 

increased to $8.257

Interpretive staff and volunteers also offered “Target Tours,” 30-minute talks at the platform in 

the Target Room for those who could not or did not want to take the more strenuous Scenic Tour. 

After a brief period of charging for these tours, Cannon decided to offer them for free again, since 

many participants expressed that they expected more of a tour of the cave and had been 

disappointed when they remained in one room the whole time.258

250 [no title], January 10, 1992.

251 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1996, 3.

252 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1997, 5; Superintendent’s Annual Report, 

Jewel Cave National Monument, 1998, 4.

253 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1997, 3–4.

254 Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

255 Jewel Cave National Monument, 1997 Supt’s Annual Report, Interpretation, 1997, files provided by Katie 

Atkins, Folder Annual Rpts Park Interp, Jewel Cave NM CF.

256 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1998, 3.

257 NPS, “Fee Schedule Resumes at Jewel Cave,” news release, undated [ca. December 1991], Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, 

Folder K3415 Press Releases, Jewel Cave NM CF; Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 

1998, 3; Linda L. Stoll, Superintendent’s Annual Narrative Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 2000, transmitted 

February 26, 2001, 4, files provided by Katie Atkins, Folder 2000 Superintendents Report, Jewel Cave NM CF.

258 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1997, 3–4.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 279

Jewel Cave staff began offering costumed interpretation at the historic area in the 1990s, in the 

manner of tours given at Wind Cave. Interpretive rangers staffing the historic ranger cabin and 

giving candlelight tours through the historic entrance to the cave wore reproductions of circa 1939 

NPS uniforms. Cannon and Rosga considered the program successful and purchased nine more 

historic replica uniforms in 1997. They also worked with Dilts to construct and install a 

reproduction of the monument’s historic entrance sign at the historic entrance. The replica sign 

caused some confusion for visitors, who thought that the sign denoted the monument’s main 

entrance. At the request of monument staff, SDDOT added road signs that mitigated the 

confusion.259 The program at the historic area successfully supported itself in the 1990s, bringing in 

as much money as it cost to run it (see Figure 115).260

Figure 115. 

Ranger 

Michelle 

Gleicher gives 

a Historic 

Candlelight 

Tour in July 

1991.

Source: NPS, 

Jewel Cave 

NM.

As of 1991, the monument lacked an interpretive plan. The most recent interpretive prospectus 

had been completed in 1966, before the construction of the visitor center. As part of the GMP 

process, planners updated Jewel Cave’s interpretive prospectus.261 It identified the monument’s 

primary natural resources as mountain systems and caves/springs. Its primary cultural resources 

were “none,” and secondary resources were “westward expansion” and “the mining frontier.”262 The 

prospectus noted the status of the interpretive program at Jewel Cave, its effects on resource 

259 Superintendent’s Annual Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1997, 4.

260 Jewel Cave National Monument, 1997 Supt’s Annual Report, Interpretation, 1997; Superintendent’s Annual 

Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 1998, 4.

261 McDougall, Task Directive, General Management Plan and Development Concept Plan, Package 110, Wind 

Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument South Dakota, August 1990, 13.

262 NPS, Rocky Mountain Region, “Interpretive Prospectus, Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota,” 1992, 

7 (of pdf), Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, Folder K1817 Interp Planning 1988– , 1991, Jewel Cave NM CF.
280 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

management, and aims for the program.263 It noted that the lack of funding Jewel Cave had 

experienced in the past was unlikely to change: 

Given current and future economic realities and the backlog of work System wide, Jewel Cave will 

probably not receive adequate Federal funding or staff to fully implement this plan. Creative solutions 

and priorities need to be developed so that this plan can be implemented in phases. Alternate sources 

of funding or methods of accomp1ishing management objectives will include:

- Cooperative Agreements

- Cooperating Association Programs and Donations

- Gift Catalogues

- Grants

- Donations, both funds and services

- Friends Organization264

The prospectus recommended reassessing traffic flow in the visitor center, redesigning the 

bookstore, installing a travelers information station on the visitor entry road, installing a wayside at 

Mount Rushmore describing Jewel Cave, and modifying the ramp from the parking lot to the visitor 

center to meet ADA standards.265 For the rest of the decade, interpretive planning consisted mostly 

of an annual interpretive plan that updated yearly staffing needs to meet cave tour demands.266

Conclusion 

During the 1990s, Jewel Cave made significant progress in its management of cultural and 

natural resources. The monument went from having a combined chief of resource management and 

interpretation to having separate resource management and interpretation divisions with their own 

division chiefs. The separation enabled monument staff to expand and improve programming in 

both areas. Superintendent Kate Cannon spearheaded this change, spurred construction of a second 

elevator, promoted research to establish baseline data for the monument, and triggered a land 

exchange to protect the cave outside of monument boundaries. Establishment of the BHAG and 

the NEKOTA groups improved the monument’s access to administrative services. Moving the 

museum collection to Mount Rushmore addressed the problem of inadequate storage space. Finally, 

the NPS prioritized prescribed fires and mechanical thinning of Jewel Cave’s forests, a management 

shift that would prove remarkably important in summer 2000. 

263 NPS, Rocky Mountain Region, “Interpretive Prospectus, Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota,” 1992, 

10–12.

264 “Interpretive Prospectus, Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota,” 1992, 29.

265 “Interpretive Prospectus, Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota,” 1992, 21–22.

266 Connie Rudd to Chief of Interpretation in the Rocky Mountain Region, memorandum, February 6, 1995, 

Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, Folder K1817 Interpretive Planning 1988–, Jewel Cave NM CF.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 281

Chapter 7: Jewel Cave in the New 

Millennium (2000–present)

Jewel Cave National Monument started the new millennium in a period of crisis. In August 

2000, the Jasper Fire ravaged the monument and only narrowly avoided the park’s aboveground 

structures. The still-small resource management staff faced a variety of post-fire problems: erosion, 

flooding, an explosion of invasive weeds, and collateral effects on cave resources. Staff rose to the 

challenge of reinterpreting and protecting a monument with a very different aboveground landscape. 

Several years later, Jewel Cave staff completed the first ever Cave and Karst Management Plan for 

the monument, which guided exploration, safety, and resource protection. Interpretive staff 

expanded tour and programmatic offerings in and outside of the cave, and the Black Hills Parks and 

Forest Association continued to support monument operations. The cave became a hub of scientific 

study, and cavers’ continued discoveries brought Jewel Cave past the 200-mile mark, with no end in 

sight. 

Jasper Fire and Aftermath

During the 1990s, the National Park Service (NPS) as a whole, and Jewel Cave specifically, 

shifted away from total fire suppression and toward a policy of hazardous fuels reduction, in order 

to prevent catastrophic fires.1 The Jewel Cave Fire Use Module, Jewel Cave staff, Wind Cave staff, 

and the Forest Service had completed several prescribed burns at Jewel Cave in order to reduce 

hazardous fuels near the monument’s built infrastructure (see Chapter 6).2 Those prescribed burns 

proved essential for protecting the monument’s built infrastructure when fire ravaged the area in 

2000.3

On August 24, 2000, a 47-year-old woman named Janice Stevenson stopped on the side of 

Highway 16, two miles west of Jewel Cave, not far from the entrance to Jasper Cave. She lit a 

cigarette and then dropped the match on the side of the road. That match started one of the largest 

fires in Black Hills history.4It doubled in size every hour on the first day it burned, spreading at a 

1 1999 Jewel Cave Fire Use Module, [1999], NPS, Cabinet 2, Drawer 2, Folder Y14 Jewel Cave Fire Module, Jewel 

Cave National Monument Central Files, Custer, SD (hereafter Jewel Cave NM CF).

2 “Prescribed Fires Planned at Jewel Cave National Monument,” news release, March 21, 1999, Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, 

Folder K3415 Press Releases, Jewel Cave NM CF; Kelly Mathis and Andy Thorstenson, Northern Great Plains Fire 

Monitoring Team, Jewel Cave National Monument, Lithograph Canyon Prescribed Fire Monitoring Report, September 

27, 1999, 1, Cabinet 2, Drawer 2, Folder Y14 Burning Index, Jewel Cave NM CF.

3 David Given, interview by Jackie Gonzales, April 9, 2019, Port Hadlock, WA. 

4

Jim Holland, “Jasper Arsonist gets 25 Years,” Rapid City Journal, August 23, 2001; Joe Kafka, “Black Hills arsonist’s 

sentence upheld,” Rapid City Journal, October 2, 2002; Mike Wiles, interview by Jackie Gonzales, June 26 and 27, 2019, 

Custer, SD. 
282 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

rate of over seven acres per minute. By the end of the first day, it had consumed 3,655 acres (see 

Figure 116).5 

Figure 116. The 

Jasper Fire 

burned 3,655 

acres in its first 

day, 2000.

Source: NPS, 

Jewel Cave NM.

The Forest Service took the lead on fighting the fire, since most of it was within the Black Hills 

National Forest. They called it the “Jasper Fire” because it started near the highway turn-off on the 

road that goes to Jasper Cave. The new Wind Cave National Park Superintendent, Linda Stoll, was 

unable to commit Wind Cave’s fire crew to fight the Jasper Fire, because fires were burning at Wind 

Cave at the same time.6 On the second day of the fire, the Forest Service reported,

Over 250 firefighters from across the Black Hills and the surrounding area battled the fire through the 

night. Due to the extended hot, dry weather and heavy concentrations of ground fuels, fire behavior 

has been extreme. The weather provided little relief during the night and a wind shift around midnight 

caused the fire to jump Hell Canyon and cross to the south of Highway 16. 

Firefighting efforts are being hampered by the steep terrain and limited access in the area of the fire. 

Fire engines are in place to provide structure protection for the buildings in Jewel Cave.7

At Jewel Cave, staff evacuated everyone around 4:00 pm on the first day of the fire. The fire burned 

through monument lands over the next two days (see Figure 117). Forest Service firefighting crews 

foamed buildings, established a fire line around Jewel Cave buildings, and back-burned, while 

monument staff moved files and other critically important items into the cave to protect them.

8

5 “Jasper Fire Rapid Assessment,” Black Hills National Forest, September 2000, 5, Cabinet 2, Drawer 2, Folder Y14 

Jasper Fire August 2000, Jewel Cave NM CF.

6 Linda Stoll, interview by Jackie Gonzales, July 22, 2019, The Villages, FL. 

7 USFS, NPS, South Dakota Department of Agriculture, “Jasper Fire,” news release, August 25, 2000, Cabinet 2, 

Drawer 2, Folder Y14 Jasper Fire, August 2000, Jewel Cave NM CF.

8 Chief of Interpretation to Superintendent, “Input for FY00 Supt’s Annual Narrative Report,” January 21, 2001, 

files provided by Katie Atkins, Folder Annual Rpts Park Interp, Jewel Cave NM CF.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 283

The Forest Service established a 

voluntary evacuation zone of 300 square 

miles during the Jasper Fire. Schools in 

Custer closed, and Highway 16 was closed 

starting four miles west of Jewel Cave. By 

the second day of the fire, 624 firefighters 

were battling the blaze, along with five 

airtankers and four helicopters.9 On the 

third day, extreme weather conditions 

“caused the fire to grow by 48,555 acres, 

or 76 square miles, in the space of only a 

few hours” (more than half the total of the 

entire fire). On subsequent days, the 

weather improved and “fire behavior 

moderated,” but the fire continued to 

grow slowly.10 By September 1, firefighters 

had established a perimeter around the fire 

and the Forest Service lifted evacuation 

orders outside of that area. Within the fire 

area, burning continued and Hot Shot 

crews and hand crews continued to work.11

Forest Service fire crews contained the 

Jasper Fire on September 8, 2000, and 

fully controlled it on September 25. In 

total, the fire burned 83,508 acres, 

including an estimated 224 million board 

feet of timber, 15 miles of range fencing, 

livestock water facilities, wooden 

powerline structures, and 2,738 feet of 

aboveground telephone lines (see Figure 

118).12 Fire suppression cost $8.2 million, and total damage reached $42 million.13 The severity of the 

fire resulted in part from the century of fire-suppression management by the Forest Service, which 

left thick and flammable growth that became vulnerable in a drought. There were no serious injuries 

and almost no property damage (apart from fences). Stevenson was sentenced to 25 years in prison 

on state charges and a concurrent 10 years on federal charges for starting the fire.14

9 USFS, NPS, South Dakota Department of Agriculture, “Jasper Fire,” news release, August 27, 2000.

10 “Jasper Fire Rapid Assessment,” Black Hills National Forest, September 2000, 5.

11 “Jasper Fire Key Information,” Friday September 1, 2000, “Jasper Fire,” Cabinet 2, Drawer 2, Folder Y14 Jasper 

Fire, August 2000, Jewel Cave NM CF.

12 Black Hills National Forest, “Jasper Fire,” Cabinet 2, Drawer 2, Folder Y14 Jasper Fire, August 2000, Jewel Cave 

NM CF.

13 Black Hills National Forest, “Jasper Fire”; Kafka, “Black Hills Arsonist’s Sentence Upheld.”

14 Kafka, “Black Hills arsonist’s sentence upheld.” 

Figure 117. The Jasper Fire burned close to the Jewel Cave 

Visitor Center, pictured here during the fire, 2000.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.
284 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Figure 118. The Jasper Fire in 2000 burned 83,508 acres, making it the largest fire in the recorded 

history of the Black Hills.

Source: Forest Service, NPS.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 285

The fire burned through most of Jewel Cave’s surface area and destroyed the old-growth 

ponderosa pine on and near the monument. However, in terms of structures, it destroyed only two 

outbuildings that had been used for pit toilets, which was not a huge loss, as Larry Dilts recalled. 

“We were hoping to get rid of them anyways,” he said (see Figure 119). The rest of Jewel Cave’s 

structures survived thanks to the heroic efforts of fire fighters, and to the earlier prescribed burns 

that had reduced hazardous fuels at the monument. Despite the severity of the fire, it moved so 

quickly through the monument that the visitor center had reopened for cave tours by September 4. 

Wind Cave Chief Ranger Denny Ziemann, who had firefighting experience, managed the NPS side 

of the fire response in the aftermath of the fire.15

Figure 119. The Jasper Fire burned close to the monument’s residential structures, pictured here in 

background, 2000.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

Critical in the fire response was the Burned Area Emergency Rehabilitation (BAER) team, 

managed by the Forest Service, and the funding that came with it. The BAER team was on the 

ground at Jewel Cave even before the fire stopped burning in order “to assess potential threats to 

natural resources and property that might result from the fire.” Resource Management Division 

Chief Mike Wiles participated in the BAER team as the NPS liaison. The BAER team made 

recommendations for post-fire resource management work, some of which were funded 

immediately through the BAER process. These included repairs to the damaged fence along the 

15 Chief of Interpretation to Superintendent, “Input for FY00 Supt’s Annual Narrative Report,” January 21, 2001; 

Black Hills National Forest, “Jasper Fire”; Larry Dilts, interview by Jackie Gonzales, April 17, 2019, Colby, KS; Wiles, 

interview; Given, interview; Stoll, interview.
286 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

boundary, felling hazardous trees that threatened buildings or traffic on Highway 16, a timber sale 

for remaining trees along the highway, and repair of culverts under the highway. Tasks identified by 

the BAER team that remained unfunded included monitoring and treating the spread of noxious 

weeds due to fire disturbance, assessing and stabilizing archeological sites, and removing debris from 

the Hell Canyon Stream Channel to prevent the Highway 16 culvert from clogging during flash 

flooding.

16

Figure 120. Flash flooding caused major erosion and runoff issues after the Jasper Fire burned much of the 

ponderosa pine forest around Jewel Cave. Here, deeply eroded channels in Lithograph Canyon in 2002.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

The NPS expressed concern about post-fire runoff and its potential to infiltrate the cave. The 

US Geological Survey (USGS) monitored the volume and content of waterflow in Hell Canyon and 

Lithograph Canyon monthly for three years after the fire (see Figure 120). Wiles did not expect the 

runoff to seriously damage the cave, although he anticipated increased dripping and changes to 

water chemistry, including more phosphorous than before, as well as localized flooding inside the 

cave. Wiles and other resource management staff monitored the cave to examine how erosion 

changed the cave environment, and they kept a close eye on surface erosion and exotic plant growth 

in the years following the fire (see Figure 121).17

16 Chief of Resource Management to Jewel Cave Staff, “Memorandum: Jasper Fire and Subsequent Resource 

Management Activities,” December 20, 2000, Cabinet 2, Drawer 2, Folder Y14 Jasper Fire August 2000, Jewel Cave NM 

CF.

17 The flooding inside the cave did not occur because of droughts in the following years. Chief of Resource 

Management to Jewel Cave Staff, “Memorandum: Jasper Fire and Subsequent Resource Management Activities,” 

December 20, 2000; Wiles, interview; Mike Wiles, comments on draft administrative history, April 7, 2020. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 287

Figure 121. The Jasper Fire burned many acres of the monument and resulted in increased erosion and altered

hydrology after the fire. Here, the sewage lagoon is left of center and the visitor center and parking lot are visible to 

the upper left, 2000.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

Following the initial mitigation and environmental rehabilitation efforts, Jewel Cave staff 

incorporated the Jasper Fire into the interpretive mission of the monument. Chief of Interpretation 

Karen Rosga created a temporary exhibit on the Jasper Fire for display inside of the visitor center.18

She also partnered with the Forest Service to fund outdoor interpretive exhibits explaining the fire’s 

effects on the monument.19 Jewel Cave maintenance crews installed these interpretive panels 

(fiberglass embedded in an aluminum frame) onto the deck railing outside of the visitor center in 

2002.20 Situated to provide a view of a the burned area, the panels described the history of the fire, 

18 Chief of Interpretation to Superintendent, “Input for FY01 Supt’s Annual Narrative Report,” February 1, 2002, 

files provided by Katie Atkins, Folder Annual Rpts Park Interp, Jewel Cave NM CF.

19 Fire Waysides Meeting, March 14, 2001, Cabinet 2, Drawer 3, Folder Fire Wayside Project, Jewel Cave NM CF; 

USDA, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Center for Design and Interpretation, Project Plan and Agreement, March 1, 

2001, Cabinet 2, Drawer 3, Folder Fire Wayside Project, Jewel Cave NM CF.

20 Karen Rosga to Ron Eilefson, memorandum, August 15, 2001, Cabinet 2, Drawer 3, Folder Fire Wayside Project, 

Jewel Cave NM CF; Jewel Cave Squad Meeting Notes (hereafter JCSM), July 23, 2002, Jewel Cave National Monument 

Digital Files (hereafter Jewel Cave NM DF); Karen Rosga to Ron Kerbo, January 26, 2002, Cabinet 2, Drawer 3, Folder 

Fire Wayside Project, Jewel Cave NM CF; Chief of Interpretation to Superintendent, April 23, 2003, 4, Cabinet 1, 

Drawer 1, Folder Annual Rpts. Park – interp, Jewel Cave NM CF.
288 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

its effects on natural and man-made resources, and restoration efforts. The NPS and Forest Service 

installed a second exhibit at the Hell Canyon trailhead, which described the behavior of the fire and 

its effects on natural resources in the area.21

After the Jasper Fire, the monument recommitted to using prescribed burning as a management 

technique. In 2004, NPS staff considered the importance of fire as a natural and historical process as 

they wrote a new Fire Management Plan and Environmental Assessment. The plan recognized that 

fire “played a major role in maintaining the natural ponderosa pine ecosystem” and that “one 

hundred years of wildland fire suppression” had created the potential for severe, life-threatening 

wildfires. In considering how the NPS would move forward with fire management at the 

monument, staff wrote, “in spite of this fire [the Jasper Fire], there is still a need to re-establish the 

natural fire regime to the ponderosa pine forest and preserve native plant communities while at the 

same time protecting visitors, facilities, and resources on and adjacent to the Monument.”22

General Administration 

Personnel 

Superintendent Peggy O’Dell left Jewel Cave for a post at the Harpers Ferry Center just before 

the Jasper Fire. Linda Stoll had recently arrived as the new Wind Cave superintendent, and with no 

one to run Jewel Cave, she served as the acting superintendent of the monument during the fire and 

its aftermath. In autumn 2000, Tina Orcutt was detailed as the acting superintendent at Jewel Cave 

for several months.23 During these management changes and the commotion after the fire, Tom 

Casey’s former position of chief of resource management and interpretation lapsed, the interpretive 

supervisory park ranger left, and the administrative officer position lapsed.24 These vacancies 

presented difficulties as staff tried to resume normal operations after the fire. Stoll cautioned that the 

monument’s budget was so low as to be “a serious concern,” and even if “the Monument were to 

have all positions filled during the year, there would not be sufficient funds to operate the park.”

25

In March 2001, Stoll hired Todd Suess as superintendent (GS-12) at Jewel Cave (see Figure 122). 

Suess had been the chief of resource management at Devils Tower National Monument before 

21 USDA, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Center for Design and Interpretation, Project Plan and Agreement, 

March 1, 2001.

22 Todd J. Suess, Superintendent, “Finding of No Significant Impact,” Fire Management Plan, Jewel Cave National 

Monument, December 2004, Cabinet 2, Drawer 2, [loose in drawer], Jewel Cave NM CF. 

23 Linda L. Stoll, Superintendent’s Annual Narrative Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 2000, transmitted 

February 26, 2001, 1, files provided by Katie Atkins, Folder 2000 Superintendents Report, Jewel Cave NM CF. 

24 Jewel Cave NM FY01 Superintendent’s Annual Report, 2001, 1, files provided by Katie Atkins, Folder 2001 

Superintendents Report, Jewel Cave NM CF; Stoll, Superintendent’s Annual Narrative Report, Jewel Cave National 

Monument, 2000.

25 Stoll, Superintendent’s Annual Narrative Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 2000. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 289

coming to Jewel Cave.26 Like previous Jewel Cave superintendents, Suess reported to Stoll rather 

than directly to the Midwest Regional Office. The regional office had bumped most superintendents 

up to GS-13 after a review in the late 1990s, but it kept some superintendencies (like Jewel Cave) at 

GS-12 and continued having them report to other superintendents. This provided a training 

opportunity for promising division chiefs, former Deputy Midwest Regional Director Dave Given 

explained: 

. . . Jewel Cave is quite a success story in that area, because if you look at where some of the former 

superintendents of Jewel Cave are today, one of them became deputy director of the National Park 

Service, Peggy O’Dell. . . . Todd Suess is superintendent of Mojave, a very complicated park in 

California. And Larry Johnson is now GS-15 superintendent of Ozark National Scenic River, another 

one of the most complicated parks in the Midwest Region. They all started out as GS-12 

superintendents at Jewel Cave National Monument. In part, because we still were able to maintain 

some GS-12 superintendencies.

27

From the monument perspective, the turnover of park superintendents resulting from this strategy 

created a lack of continuity of management that sometimes negatively impacted the ability of park 

staff to carry out their missions.28 Several years later, the NPS as a whole trended toward eliminating 

superintendents that reported to other superintendents. As a part of this and a simultaneous regional 

reorganization, the Midwest Regional Office changed the Jewel Cave superintendent position so that 

it now reported directly to the regional office and promoted Suess to a GS-13. This marked the first 

time that the Jewel Cave superintendent was not under the Wind Cave superintendent.29

Figure 122. Todd Suess served as 

superintendent of Jewel Cave National 

Monument from 2001 to 2010.

Source: NPS.

26 Stoll, interview; NPS, “Todd Suess Named to Top Post at Jewel Cave National Monument,” press release, 

January 30, 2001, Cabinet 3, Drawer 3, Folder K1817 Interpretive Planning, Jewel Cave NM CF; Jewel Cave NM FY01 

Superintendent’s Annual Report, 2001, 1.

27 Given, interview. 

28 Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020; Wiles, interview; Paul Menard, interview by Jackie Gonzales, April 9, 

2019, Sequim, WA. 

29 Stoll, interview. 
290 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Under Suess, Karen Rosga continued as the 

chief of interpretation (GS-11) and Mike Wiles 

continued in the role of cave resource specialist, 

with duties that included all natural and cultural 

resource management (Wiles had been promoted 

to chief of resource management by Cannon in

1997, but his official title and corresponding 

grade level were not changed to reflect that 

promotion until 2014) (see Figure 123). Other 

permanent staff included Chief of Maintenance 

Larry Dilts (assisted by a permanent, subject-tofurlough maintenance employee) and Rene 

Ohms in a full-time term biological technician 

position (it later became a full-time permanent 

position).

30 At some point in the early 2000s, 

Larry Dilts retired, and Bob King became chief 

of facilities management.31 Suess also had a fulltime administrative assistant for the 

superintendents’ office, a position filled by 

Miriam Gola and then Beckie Carder.32

In April 2001, Merrith Baughman filled the supervisory park ranger/assistant chief of 

interpretation position (GS-9 with promotion potential to GS-11) and reported to Rosga. Baughman 

oversaw seasonal interpreter hiring and visitor center operations.33 The interpretive division operated 

in summers with sixteen seasonal interpretive staff (GS-4), three part-time or intermittent 

interpretive rangers (GS-4), five fee collectors (GS-3), two park rangers (GS-5) as lead interpreters, 

one information receptionist (GS-3), and two Student Conservation Association (SCA) resource 

assistants. In autumn and early winter, the interpretive division had thirteen seasonal rangers (GS-3 

or GS-4), and in late winter and early spring, eight seasonal rangers (GS-3 or GS-4).34

Additions to the staff necessitated some office changes. In 2000, Menard spearheaded the 

conversion of an existing housing trailer to office space in order to address overcrowding in the 

visitor center offices. All except for interpretive staff moved their offices to the converted trailer, 

which allowed more space for the interpretive division in the visitor center.35 Resource management 

and administrative staff moved around occasionally over the next several years in response to space 

30 JCSM, June 19, 2001, Jewel Cave NM DF; JCSM, July 31, 2001, Jewel Cave NM DF.

31 JCSM, October 3, 2006, Jewel Cave NM DF.

32 Phil Heckman, interview by Jackie Gonzales, June 27, 2019, Custer, SD. 

33 JCSM, March 4, 2003, Jewel Cave NM DF; Jewel Cave NM FY01 Superintendent’s Annual Report, 2001, 4–5; 

Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

34 Jewel Cave NM FY01 Superintendent’s Annual Report, 2001, 5.

35 Stoll, Superintendent’s Annual Narrative Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 2000; Menard, interview; 

Wiles, interview. 

Figure 123. Mike Wiles, chief of resource management at 

Jewel Cave starting in 1997, pictured here in 2013.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 291

needs: administrative staff moved from the visitor center to the administrative building, resource 

management moved from the visitor center service room, and the chief of interpretation and chief 

of maintenance moved briefly to the administration building before moving back to the visitor 

center and maintenance building, respectively.36

Figure 124. Jewel Cave permanent staff in 2007.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

Full-time staff funded from Operation of the National Park System (ONPS) dollars hit a high of 

15.28 full-time equivalent (FTE) in fiscal year 2002, and a low in fiscal year 2007 with 12.71 (see 

Figure 124).37 Due to this decrease and projected additional budget decreases, the NPS required 

units to complete a Core Operations Report (see Appendix G). A Core Operations Report stated 

the “park’s purpose, essential operational functions, and the most efficient organization and 

necessary staffing levels to operate the park at a safe and professional level,” and it identified steps 

for addressing future funding shortfalls.38 Staff identified six core management objectives and park 

priorities in the final Jewel Cave Core Operations Report, released in 2008: 

36 JCSM, August 20, 2002, Jewel Cave NM DF; JCSM, October 1, 2002, Jewel Cave NM DF; Superintendent, Jewel 

Cave NM, to all employees, memorandum, February 13, 2008, Jewel Cave NM DF; Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 

2020. 

37 Jewel Cave National Monument, Core Operations Report, 2008, 17, Jewel Cave NM DF.

38 Jewel Cave National Monument, Core Operations Report, 2008, 5.
292 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

1. Maintain the current level of buildings, infrastructure, and facilities in good condition for a 

high quality visitor experience that provides for a safe and healthy location for visitors and 

staff.

2. Provide high quality visitor orientation and information services which instill environmental 

ethic and high visitor understanding of park resources.

3. Inventory, monitor, preserve and restore natural and cultural resources, where cave 

resources are located within park boundaries, to prevent unacceptable impacts to monument 

resources.

4. Inventory, monitor, preserve and restore natural and cultural resources, where cave 

resources are located outside park boundaries, to prevent unacceptable impacts to 

monument resources.

5. Actively implement a cave research and exploration program to enhance the monument’s 

knowledge of cave resources so that the maximum protection can be placed on cave 

resources.

6. Perform critical legal, administrative and employee support functions and maintain a safe 

environment for visitors and staff.39

The report concluded that Jewel Cave’s budget had “lagged behind the NPS-wide average for base 

budget increases over a period of many years,” and that the park had already lapsed key positions 

and failed to meet multiple core functions of the park because of funding shortfalls. If faced with 

further budget cuts, staff concluded, “several additional positions will have to be lapsed, with a 

resulting significant decline in organizational capacity, effectiveness, facilities and services available 

to the public, employee and visitor safety and morale.”40 Furthermore, cutting seasonal interpretive 

staff would result in less fee revenue from cave tours, which meant lower fee revenue funds to 

supplement low ONPS budgets.

41 The report explained,

A fee revenue decrease will have a domino effect on other programs in the monument. Cost of 

collection will not decrease with a decrease of programming. The same fee collection staff will be 

needed to collect fees for a full day, regardless the number of cave tours offered. A decrease of fee 

revenue will also affect the project that can be funded with FLREA [Federal Lands Recreation 

Enhancement Act] funds. This will affect the ability of the monument to decrease the deferred 

maintenance backlog.42

Therefore, the most important financial needs were to restore administrative staff, restore the 

resource and visitor protection divisions, and maintain visitor services.43

While the NPS anticipated budget cuts from Congress, it prepared for temporary increases 

leading up to the 2016 NPS Centennial, thanks to $3 billion in private-public investments.44 As part 

39 Jewel Cave National Monument, Core Operations Report, 2008, 6–7.

40 Jewel Cave National Monument, Core Operations Report, 2008, 30.

41 Jewel Cave National Monument, Core Operations Report, 2008, 22–24.

42 Jewel Cave National Monument, Core Operations Report, 2008, 29.

43 Jewel Cave National Monument, Core Operations Report, 2008, 29.

44 NPS, “President’s NPS Budget Proposed Record Increases for Park Operations and Centennial Initiative for $3 

billion Public-Private Investment Over 10 Years,” press release, February 5, 2007, Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, [loose in 

drawer], Jewel Cave NM CF. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 293

of the centennial funding, Jewel Cave received a park base increase for seasonal employees, 

comprising three extra maintenance seasonal employees ($33,000) and one protection seasonal 

employee ($11,000).45 Additional seasonal employees added to the already considerable workload 

that hiring seasonal staff had created for administrative staff, the interpretive division chief, and the 

maintenance division chief, especially in the first half of every year.46 The interpretive division 

continued to use Student Temporary Employment Program (STEP) hires for some seasonal 

interpreters.47 While most seasonal employees came on during the summer, the interpretive division 

also had a couple winter seasonal interpreters most years to assist with cave tours in the off-season 

(see Figure 125).48

Figure 125. Jewel Cave interpretive staff in 2010.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

45 Park Base Increases for Seasonals, undated [c. 2007], Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, [loose in drawer], Jewel Cave NM CF.

46 Jewel Cave Management Meeting Notes (hereafter JCMM), April 11, 2012, Jewel Cave NM DF; Jewel Cave 

Leadership Team Meeting (hereafter JCLTM), February 13, 2014, Jewel Cave NM DF.

47 All Staff Meeting Notes, Jewel Cave NM, February 13, 2008, Jewel Cave NM DF. 

48 JCMM, October 5, 2010, Jewel Cave NM DF; JCSM, August 14, 2012, Jewel Cave NM DF.
294 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

In 2010, Suess left his role as superintendent for a new position at Olympic National Park. A 

few acting superintendents served after he left, until the Midwest regional director hired Larry 

Johnson, the first superintendent at Jewel Cave hired by a regional director rather than the Wind 

Cave superintendent.49 Before Suess left, around 2008, he hired a new chief of interpretation, 

Bradley Block, who had previously been at Custer State Park.50 After Chief of Facilities Management 

Don Morrison left, longtime maintenance staff Dave Tashner served as acting chief until Johnson 

hired John Black around 2012.51 And in 2013, Johnson hired the first ever chief ranger dedicated 

solely to visitor protection, David Yim.52

Later in 2013, Johnson was detailed temporarily to Badlands National Park to serve as acting 

superintendent. In his absence, division chiefs and some personnel from other parks served as acting 

superintendents at Jewel Cave.53 Johnson remained at Badlands longer than anticipated, and in 2015, 

the regional director decided that he would not return to Jewel Cave.54 The Midwest regional 

director hired Bonnie Schwartz as the next Jewel Cave superintendent (GS-13) in early 2015. 

Schwartz had previously served as the deputy chief ranger at Yellowstone National Park, where she 

had supervised a large law enforcement operation.55 She hired a new chief of law enforcement in 

early 2016, Nancy Martinz, who held the position until late 2019, when she retired.56 Schwartz left 

Jewel Cave in late 2017, and in August 2018, Midwest Regional Director Cameron Sholly hired 

Michelle Wheatley as the new superintendent (GS-13). Wheatley had previously served as 

superintendent at Florissant Fossil Beds. She was the first superintendent of Jewel Cave to have 

served a superintendent at another park, perhaps a sign that the Midwest Regional Office no longer 

viewed Jewel Cave as a training ground for new superintendents.57

Shared Administrative Services 

In the early 2000s, the Black Hills Administrative Group (BHAG) continued to function as 

shared staff among Jewel Cave, Wind Cave, and Mount Rushmore National Memorial. BHAG staff 

covered budgeting, purchasing, information technology (IT), and other administrative needs. The 

49 Given, interview; Wiles, interview; NPS, “Jewel Cave Bids Farewell the Superintendent Suess,” news release, 

February 5, 2010; JCMM, September 27, 2010, Jewel Cave NM DF.

50 JCMM, September 27, 2010; JCMM, November 16, 2010, Jewel Cave NM DF.

51 JCMM, September 27, 2010; JCMM, October 5, 2010; JCSM, November 22, 2011, Jewel Cave NM DF; JCSM, 

December 10, 2013, Jewel Cave NM DF.

52 JCSM, December 10, 2013.

53 JCLTM, April 15, 2014, Jewel Cave NM DF; JCLTM, May 20, 2014, Jewel Cave NM DF; JCLTM, September 2, 

2014, Jewel Cave NM DF.

54 JCMM, February 3, 2015, Jewel Cave NM DF; JCMM, February 11, 2015, Jewel Cave NM DF. 

55 JCMM, March 17, 2015, Jewel Cave NM DF; JCLTM, March 15, 2016, Jewel Cave NM DF; Wiles, interview; 

“New Superintendent at Jewel Cave National Monument,” Cave Talk: The Official Newsletter of the National Caving 

Association (December 2015): 7. 

56 JCLTM, January 30, 2018, Jewel Cave NM DF.

57 JCLTM, August 21, 2018, Jewel Cave NM DF; Wiles, interview; Chris Huber, “Wheatley selected as Jewel Cave 

superintendent,” Rapid City Journal, May 22, 2018. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 295

NEKOTA group (parks in Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota) also continued, with shared 

human resources (HR), purchasing, and contracting functions. Parks continued to contribute funds 

to both BHAG and NEKOTA based on a formula that considered park budgets, staff, and needs. 

As before, the Jewel Cave administrative assistant/clerk (Gola and then Carder) did not factor into 

the shared budget and staffing calculations. In 2000, 14.49 percent of Jewel Cave’s base operations 

funding went to BHAG and NEKOTA.58

In 2001, Menard left for a position at Olympic National Park, and Phil Heckman replaced him 

as the administrative officer (AO) supervising the BHAG and the NEKOTA group.59 Heckman was 

hired by Wind Cave Superintendent Linda Stoll, and his duty station was at Wind Cave, but he 

divided his time among the three parks. During a typical week, he spent two days at Wind Cave, two 

days at Mount Rushmore, and one day at Jewel Cave. Jill Hart remained the BHAG budget 

specialist, and her duty station moved back to Jewel Cave in the mid-2000s, but she remained 

assigned full-time to budget matters, not general administration for Jewel Cave. BHAG Contracting 

Officer Ron Eilefson and IT Specialist Chuck Weichler (followed by Jayne Weiss) had offices at 

Mount Rushmore. In 2006, Heckman left Wind Cave and Menard returned, this time with a duty 

station at Mount Rushmore.60

Around 2008, the NPS initiated a service-wide expansion of its use of regional groupings for 

administrative support services. Staff from the NPS Washington Office visited Black Hills area parks 

to examine the NEKOTA group, which then became a model for a national shift to sharing support 

functions among parks. Menard assisted the Washington Office in developing a model for these 

groupings.61 

The NPS created two types of groupings: Servicing Human Resources Offices (SHROs), which 

handled HR and personnel matters, and Major Acquisition Buying Offices (MABOs), which handled 

purchasing and acquisition.62 In the Black Hills, the institution of the SHROs and MABOs 

effectively supplanted the BHAG and NEKOTA, both of which dissolved soon after the new 

groupings were established. Jewel Cave leadership debated the most cost-effective way to continue 

administrative services and eventually secured funding for a dedicated AO for the first time since 

Hart’s brief stint in that position before the BHAG. Suess hired Katie Keil (later Atkins) into the 

position.63

58 Stoll, interview; Menard, interview; Stoll, Superintendent’s Annual Narrative Report, Jewel Cave National 

Monument, 2000. 

59 JCSM, July 31, 2001; JCSM, August 21, 2001, Jewel Cave NM DF; Menard, interview; Heckman, interview. 

60 Heckman, interview; Jill Hart, interview by Jackie Gonzales, June 27, 2019, Custer, SD; Menard, interview; JCSM, 

September 4, 2001, Jewel Cave NM DF; JCSM, September 11, 2001, Jewel Cave NM DF; Stoll, Superintendent’s Annual 

Narrative Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 2000; All Staff Meeting Notes, Jewel Cave NM, February 13, 2008.

61 Menard, interview; Hart, interview; Given, interview; Wiles, interview. 

62 NPS, “New Superintendent Handbook,” October 2008, 24–25, 

https://www.nps.gov/training/nsa/supt_handbook_102008.pdf; DOI, Office of Human Resources, accessed January 

14, 2020, https://www.doi.gov/employees/employmentlaw/human-resources. 

63 JCMM, September 27, 2010; JCMM, October 5, 2010.
296 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Weiss’s IT functions were not covered by the new SHROs and MABOs, but since IT support 

was still needed at Jewel Cave, Wind Cave, and Mount Rushmore, the three units decided to 

continue sharing an IT employee and invited Badlands National Park into the arrangement.64 Weiss 

assisted Jewel Cave staff with phones, computers, servers, internet, credit card wiring, cell service, 

security systems, and more.65 She remained the IT person for the four parks until 2014, after which 

point Bruce Baird filled the position.66 Black Hills area superintendents continued to look for 

opportunities to share resources even after the dissolution of the BHAG and NEKOTA group, 

such as when they considered hiring a shared assistant housing coordinator in 2014.67

Volunteer Program 

Jewel Cave increasingly relied on 

Volunteers In Parks (VIP) to fill 

unfunded needs central to the 

monument’s mission (see Figure 126). 

As part of the professionalization, as it 

were, of the volunteer program, Chief 

of Interpretation Karen Rosga 

(followed by Bradley Block) assumed 

the role of VIP program coordinator.68

Block led the initiative to craft the first 

formal position descriptions for 

volunteer roles. Previously, potential 

volunteers learned of opportunities by 

word of mouth, and job descriptions 

consisted of brief narratives on 

volunteer work agreements.69 Working 

with other division chiefs, Block made 

annual lists of potential VIP positions 

and projects, submitted funding 

requests for those projects as part of 

64 JCMM, October 9, 2012, Jewel Cave NM DF. 

65 JCSM, May 8, 2012, Jewel Cave NM DF.

66 JCLTM, August 12, 2014, Jewel Cave NM DF; JCLTM, March 15, 2016; JCLTM, August 29, 2016, Jewel Cave 

NM DF.

67 JCLTM, April 15, 2014.

68 Bradley Block, Volunteers In Parks Annual Activity and Expense Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 

October 25, 2010, Cabinet 2, Drawer 4, Folder P94 VIP Emp Program Files, Jewel Cave NM CF; JCMM, December 7, 

2010, Jewel Cave NM DF.

69 Block, Volunteers In Parks Annual Activity and Expense Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, October 25, 

2010.

Figure 126. Volunteers In Parks (VIPs) assist with interpretation, 

resource management, exploration, administration, and 

maintenance. Here, a VIP brushes lint from the Scenic Tour trail, ca. 

2004.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 297

the VIP budget, and oversaw prioritization of that budget.70 Positions included visitor center host, 

maintenance worker, resource management worker, photographer, and publications designer. He 

then posted these openings on the federal volunteer website, volunteer.gov.71

Two residential volunteers joined Jewel Cave in 2010, John Brooks and Karen Brooks. The 

Brooks lived on monument grounds and volunteered nearly full-time. John developed a VIP manual 

for the monument and assisted with fee collection, while Karen served as a visitor center host, 

assisted with fee collection, and organized the monument’s central files.72 In 2013, Patrick Curry and 

Diana Curry lived on-site as VIPs and served as visitor center hosts for the summer season. Their 

duties included helping at the front desk, giving discovery and scenic tours, taking photos, and 

assisting with fee collection. The Currys did not return in 2014, but Block and other Jewel Cave 

leadership had been pleased with how the on-site hosts had worked and sought ways to secure 

similar VIP support in future years.73

Planning and Evaluations

In 2010, a team of specialists from the Midwest Regional Office and other parks in the region 

completed an evaluation of operations at Jewel Cave. The Operations Evaluation team came to the 

monument from October 25 to 29, 2010, and interviewed division chiefs, met with staff, toured the 

monument, and reviewed monument files. Their conclusions prompted several changes in 

management at Jewel Cave, which are discussed elsewhere in this chapter. Regarding general 

planning, the Operations Evaluation team noted that strategic plans and annual work plans “usually 

are adjusted to fit what happened in the current year to meet mandatory reporting requirements,” 

rather than these documents leading actions. “Park staff is hungry for a plan,” the report concluded, 

and it noted, “The entire staff at the park has strong buy in to the park and are all willing to work 

together.” In lieu of a General Management Plan (GMP), for which the NPS lacked funding servicewide at the time, the report recommended several division-specific plans and better adherence to 

strategic planning and documentation protocols.74

Other general administrative recommendations included better accession and organization of 

central files, updated Standard Operations Procedures (SOPs) for administrative tasks, utilizing 

financial and property documentation management systems, training administrative staff, and 

developing a written uniform policy.75 The report praised Jewel Cave for the good condition of 

public and non-public facilities, excellent fire protection standards and efforts, information 

70 JCSM, March 20, 2012, Jewel Cave NM DF; JCSM, April 15, 2014, Jewel Cave NM DF.

71 Bradley Block to Larry Johnson, Annual Report – Interpretive Division, September 30, 2012, 7, Cabinet 1, 

Drawer 4, [loose in drawer], Jewel Cave NM CF.

72 Block, Volunteers In Parks Annual Activity and Expense Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, October 25, 

2010; JCMM, September 27, 2010; JCMM, October 5, 2010; JCMM, November 16, 2010.

73 Block to Johnson, Annual Report – Interpretive Division, September 30, 2012, 8; JCLTM, July 18, 2017, Jewel 

Cave NM DF.

74 Jewel Cave National Monument, Operations Evaluation Report, October 25–29, 2010, 3, 39. 

75 Jewel Cave National Monument, Operations Evaluation Report, October 25–29, 2010, 28–34, 51.
298 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

technology support, its radio plan, efforts to include Americans with Disability Act (ADA) standards 

in projects (but recommended designating an “Accessibility Coordinator”), and the lack of Equal 

Employment Opportunity (EEO) issues. It also noted that monument staff were successful at 

partnering with outside organizations and incorporating sustainability concerns into projects.76

In 2011, staff completed a Modified Environmental Management System plan (MEMS), to 

comply with Executive Orders (EOs) 13423 (“Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy, and 

Transportation Management”) and 13514 (“Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and 

Economic Performance”).77 The MEMS spelled out Jewel Cave’s strategies for promoting 

sustainable environmental practices.78 One outcome of MEMS planning was a “dramatic increase in 

the scope of the employee recycling program.” Among other things, the program included

separating aluminum and selling it to recyclers and then using the revenue to “create a self-sustaining 

program for the purchase of new recycling bins, signs, etc.,” and it encouraged staff to bring 

recyclables from home.79

The monument’s “Green Team,” a committee of several staff members, held a regional Climate 

Friendly Parks Workshop in 2012, attended by staff from Badlands, Mount Rushmore, Minuteman 

Missile National Historic Site, and Scotts Bluff National Monument.80 Jewel Cave’s Green Team 

completed the monument’s Climate Friendly Parks Plan in 2013, in conjunction with updating the 

MEMS. These documents complied with EOs 13423 and 13514, the NPS “Green Park Plan” 

directive, the NPS and Midwest Regional Office “Climate Change Response Strategy,” the Midwest 

Regional Office “Green Environmental Management System (GEMS), and the NPS-wide “Climate 

Friendly Parks Program.”

81

Other planning activity addressed topics such as emergencies and safety. In 2012, Larry Johnson 

drafted a “Continuity of Operations Plan” for the monument, which was intended to provide clear 

guidance for staff in the event of a fire or another disaster.82 The same year, Johnson reestablished a 

Park Safety Committee. That committee doubled as the Accident Review Committee.83 Staff 

prepared a Superintendent’s Compendium, a unit-specific regulatory document that the Midwest 

Regional Office had identified as a need at Jewel Cave as early as 2003. The monument apparently 

76 Jewel Cave National Monument, Operations Evaluation Report, October 25–29, 2010, 4–6, 9–10, 23–25, 31–32. 

77 NPS, Midwest Regional Office, Jewel Cave National Monument Modified Environmental Management System 

Plan – MEMS, May 10, 2011, Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, Folder [no title], Jewel Cave NM CF; Executive Order 13423 of 

January 24, 2007, “Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy, and Transportation Management,” 72 Fed. Reg. 3919; 

Executive Order 13514 of October 5, 2009, “Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic 

Performance,” 74 Fed. Reg. 52117. 

78 NPS, Midwest Regional Office, Jewel Cave National Monument Modified Environmental Management System 

Plan – MEMS, May 10, 2011, 2.

79 NPS, Midwest Regional Office, Jewel Cave National Monument Modified Environmental Management System 

Plan – MEMS, May 10, 2011, 11.

80 JCSM, March 20, 2012. 

81 DOI, NPS, Jewel Cave National Monument, Modified Environmental Management System (MEMS) / Climate 

Friendly Parks (CFP) Plan FY 2013, January 15, 2013, 2.

82 Block to Johnson, Annual Report – Interpretive Division, September 30, 2012, 3.

83 Block to Johnson, Annual Report – Interpretive Division, September 30, 2012, 3.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 299

had a compendium at one point, but it had not been updated for many years.84 Yim updated the 

compendium, and Martinz and Schwartz finalized it in 2016. The Superintendent’s Compendium is a 

living document that staff update as new issues and regulations arise.85

In 2014, Midwest Regional Office staff began working with Jewel Cave staff on a Foundation 

Document. This was part of a service-wide shift away from detailed general management plans, 

which the NPS perennially lacked funding to complete. Instead, a Foundation Document identified 

a unit’s central themes, purposes, and legislative mandates. Jewel Cave staff participated in a 

Foundation Document workshop in September 2014, and the Midwest Regional Office completed 

the first draft of the document in February 2015. Cave lakes were discovered in 2015, and the park 

was able to add information about them to the document before it was finalized.86 Block served as 

the liaison between the regional office and Jewel Cave and collected comments on drafts of the 

document.87

The Midwest Regional Office completed the final Foundation Document in February 2016 (see 

Figure 127).88 It distilled Jewel Cave’s many facets down to a brief statement of purpose:

The purpose of Jewel Cave National Monument is to preserve, protect, and interpret one of the last 

great frontiers by managing and exploring an expansive cave system and the overlying surface for 

continued scientific and personal interest, and for inspiring public discovery. 

The purpose statement served as a touchstone for four statements of significance, which would 

guide management of the monument: 

• Jewel Cave represents a pristine and relatively unchanged underground environment featuring 

subterranean lakes, unusual speleothems, and abundant calcite spar.

• The cave’s extensive length, three-dimensional complexity, prominent barometric wind, and 

single natural entrance define its unique nature.

• Scientific research has shown that most of the cave is yet to be discovered, creating opportunities 

for exploration and new scientific knowledge.

• Jewel Cave National Monument provides important surface and subsurface habitat for wildlife 

and nine species of bats, including one of the largest known hibernacula for the Townsend’s bigeared bat and the threatened Northern long-eared bat.89

Those statements, in turn, provided the foundation for the monument’s fundamental resources and 

values and its interpretive themes.90

84 Jewel Cave National Monument Law Enforcement Needs Assessment, July 8, 2003, 8, Cabinet 1, Drawer 1, 

Folder [loose in drawer], Jewel Cave NM CF.

85 JCLTM, August 12, 2014; JCLTM, March 25, 2014, Jewel Cave NM DF; JCLTM, May 17, 2016, Jewel Cave NM 

DF; JCLTM, June 7, 2016, Jewel Cave NM DF.

86 JCLTM, September 2, 2014; JCLTM, February 11, 2015, Jewel Cave NM DF; JCMM, February 11, 2015; Wiles, 

comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

87 JCMM, February 24, 2015, Jewel Cave NM DF; JCMM, October 7, 2015, Jewel Cave NM DF. 

88 JCLTM, March 15, 2016.

89 DOI, NPS, Foundation Document Overview, Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota, undated [2016], 2.

90 DOI, NPS, Foundation Document Overview, Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota, undated [2016], 3.
300 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Figure 127. The Midwest Regional Office completed the Foundation Document for Jewel Cave National Monument in 

February 2016.

Source: NPS.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 301

Black Hills Parks and Forest Association 

The Black Hills Parks and Forest Association 

(BHPFA) continued to manage the bookstore in 

the Jewel Cave visitor center. In addition, the 

BHPFA operated sales outlets at 11 other locations 

at Wind Cave, Black Hills National Forest, Buffalo 

Gap National Grassland, and Custer State Park.91

Steve Baldwin was the executive director of the 

BHPFA for several years (see Figure 128), followed 

by Patty Ressler, who remained director as of 

2020.92 At Jewel Cave, the BHPFA sold geology 

booklets, posters, lapel pins, postcards, patches, and 

(starting in 2005) sweatshirts, since many visitors on 

hot summer days were not dressed for a chilly cave 

tour.93

The BHPFA worked with the NPS through 

five-year cooperating agreements. One was signed 

in 1999, with a provision for autorenewal after five 

years. In 2004, Midwest Regional Director Ernest 

Quintana notified Baldwin that NPS Director’s 

Order 32 for Cooperating Associations might 

necessitate a new standard agreement. Tom Richter, the NPS Midwest Regional cooperating 

association coordinator at the time, drew up the revised document.94 The BHPFA continued to 

operate under five-year agreements with an option to autorenew. In 2015, the Midwest Regional 

Office renewed the agreement without concerns.95

A portion of the BHPFA’s proceeds went to Jewel Cave to fund the interpretation program, 

Student Conservation Association (SCA) interns, cave management interns, conference attendance 

by interpretive staff, membership in the local chambers of commerce, general supplies, and printing 

of the Junior Ranger booklet and other interpretation bulletins.

96 For several years, the interpretive 

91 Steve Baldwin, Annual Narrative Report, Black Hills Parks & Forests Association, February 15, 2005, files 

provided by Katie Atkins, Folder A42 Coop Associations, Jewel Cave NM CF.

92 Baldwin, Annual Narrative Report, Black Hills Parks & Forests Association, February 15, 2005; Regional Director 

Cameron H. Sholly to BHPFA Executive Director Patty Ressler, September 23, 2015, Cabinet 1, Drawer 4, [loose in 

drawer], Jewel Cave NM CF.

93 Baldwin, Annual Narrative Report, Black Hills Parks & Forests Association, February 15, 2005.

94 Ernest Quintana to Steve Baldwin, November 1, 2004, files provided by Katie Atkins, Folder A42 Coop 

Associations, Jewel Cave NM CF.

95 Sholly to Ressler, September 23, 2015.

96 Chief of Interpretation to Superintendent, April 23, 2003, 4, and Chief of Interpretation to Superintendent, 

January 21, 2001, 4, both in Cabinet 1, Drawer 1, Folder Annual Rpts. Park – interp, Jewel Cave NM CF; Jewel Cave 

NM FY01 Superintendent’s Annual Report, 2001, 6; JCSM, October 30, 2001, Jewel Cave NM DF; Chief of 

Interpretation to Superintendent, February 13, 2004, 5, Cabinet 1, Drawer 1, Folder Annual Rpts. Park – interp, Jewel 

Figure 128. Steve Baldwin, who had previously caved 

in Jewel Cave, was executive director of the Black 

Hills Parks and Forests Association for many years. 

Pictured here in 2013.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.
302 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

division used BHPFA-donated funds to place an ad in the Southern Black Hills Tourism Magazine.

97

The superintendent or the chief of interpretation attended BHPFA meetings and kept the 

organization informed of the monument’s needs.98 The 2010 Operations Evaluation Report 

recommended that the NPS develop a “Scope of Sales” in partnership with the BHPFA, and that 

the association be involved in any future discussion of redesigning the visitor center and its 

bookstore area.99

Figure 129. Black 

Hills Parks and 

Forests Association 

bookstore in the 

Jewel Cave visitor 

center, 2018.

Source: NPS, Jewel 

Cave NM.

For special occasions, such as the monument’s 100th anniversary in 2008 and the 200-mile 

reunion in 2019, the BHPFA helped plan events and worked with other community partners.100 It 

hosted a book signing when local historian Judy Love published Images of America: Jewel Cave National 

Monument in partnership with Arcadia Publishing and BHPFA.

101 When Jewel Cave expanded the 

visitor center to provide more space for the bookstore and to restore the main entrance to its 

original location, Chief of Facilities Management Black and Chief of Interpretation Block were in 

touch with Ressler regarding construction documents and design of the bookstore. The BHPFA 

contributed some funds to the bookstore construction (see Figure 129).102

Cave NM CF; Steve Baldwin, Annual Narrative Report, Black Hills Parks & Forests Association, May 3, 2007, files 

provided by Katie Atkins, Folder A42 Coop Associations, Jewel Cave NM CF.

97 Block to Johnson, Annual Report – Interpretive Division, September 30, 2012, 4.

98 JCMM, November 16, 2010; JCMM, September 16, 2014, Jewel Cave NM DF.

99 Jewel Cave National Monument, Operations Evaluation Report, October 25–29, 2010, 18–19.

100 Steve Baldwin, Annual Narrative Report, Black Hills Parks & Forests Association, March 30, 2008, files provided 

by Katie Atkins, Folder A42 Coop Associations, Jewel Cave NM CF.

101 “Jewel Cave Plans Book Signing Event on Memorial Day Weekend,” news release, May 13, 2010, Cabinet 1, 

Drawer 3, Folder K3415 Press Releases, Jewel Cave NM CF. 

102 JCLTM, February 13, 2014; JCLTM, March 25, 2014; JCLTM; February 3, 2015, Jewel Cave NM DF. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 303

Partnerships 

Partnerships with local civic groups remained paramount, as they had been since the Michauds 

managed the cave. Jewel Cave leadership attended Custer Chamber of Commerce quarterly meetings 

and stayed connected with the Custer Rotary Club and the Newcastle Chamber of Commerce.103 In 

2009, the Custer Chamber of Commerce honored Suess as “Government Employee of the Year.”104

Other local partners included tourist promotional organizations and publications, such as the South 

Dakota Tourism Department, the Rapid City Convention and Visitor’s Bureau, Crazy Horse 

Memorial, Rapid City Visitors Guide, Black Hills Discovered, and South Dakota Magazine. Jewel Cave 

continued to partner with the Black Hills and Badlands Association (formerly the Black Hills, 

Badlands, and Lakes Association), and interpretive staff partnered with school districts on several 

programs.105 In the early 2000s, the Jewel Cave Employee Association raised money from an annual 

Christmas silent auction, donated funds to the Custer Christmas for Kids program, and built a float 

for the Custer Christmas Parade.106

Starting in 2012, Larry Johnson worked with Custer Regional Hospital on a “Park Prescription 

Program,” in response to a call to action by the Midwest Regional Office. The NPS had initiated this 

program nationally as a way for parks to partner with physicians to encourage outdoor recreation 

and healthy lifestyles. It described the program as follows:

The NPS works with local healthcare professionals to identify trails and recreational avidities that are 

suitable to prescribe to patients. Each patient may be prescribed a different activity or trail depending 

on their individual need and ability. Patients act as Volunteers in Parks (VIPs) and are often provided 

a uniform.107

Johnson told the hospital that Jewel Cave wanted to start such a program 

to provide opportunities for Regional Health patients to use their National Park for exercise while 

also performing valuable service to their community. . . . 

We are excited about the potential of this program to help Custer Regional Hospital’s health care 

providers prescribe exercise for their patients while helping the National Park Service meet our goal 

of helping citizens recognize parks as a place to improve their health and well-being.108

The program was no longer in place as of 2020.109

103 JCSM, February 26, 2008, Jewel Cave NM DF; Jewel Cave National Monument, Long Range Interpretive Plan, 

Action Items – FY2001, Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, Folder K1817 Interpretive Planning, Jewel Cave NM CF; Stoll, interview. 

104 NPS, “Jewel Cave Bids Farewell the Superintendent Suess,” news release, February 5, 2010. 

105 JCSM, November 19, 2002, Jewel Cave NM DF; JCSM, April 1, 2008, Jewel Cave NM DF; JCSM, August 30, 

2011, Jewel Cave NM DF; JCSM, May 8, 2012; JCSM, September 25, 2014, Jewel Cave NM DF; Block to Johnson, 

Annual Report – Interpretive Division, September 30, 2012, 4.

106 JCSM, July 10, 2001, Jewel Cave NM DF; JCSM, February 26, 2002, Jewel Cave NM DF; JCSM, November 5, 

2002, Jewel Cave NM DF; JCSM, November 19, 2002; JCSM, December 17, 2002, Jewel Cave NM DF; JCSM, October 

5, 2010, Jewel Cave NM DF; JCSM, December 7, 2010, Jewel Cave NM DF. 

107 NPS, Jewel Cave National Monument, “Park Prescription Program,” undated [ca. 2012], 2, Cabinet 3, Drawer 3, 

Folder [no file title], Jewel Cave NM CF.

108 Larry Johnson to Veronica Schmidt, July 17, 2012, Cabinet 3, Drawer 3, Folder [no file title], Jewel Cave NM CF.

109 Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 
304 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Perhaps the most active 

partner of Jewel Cave since 

2000 has been the caving 

community, locally and 

nationally. Many of Jewel 

Cave’s resource management 

employees, and some 

interpreters, have explored 

Jewel Cave and other caves in 

their free time. Some were 

already cavers when they came 

to Jewel Cave, and others 

started caving after working at 

the monument. The Paha 

Sapa Grotto, the local chapter 

of the National Speleological 

Society (NSS), continued to 

partner with Jewel Cave, Wind 

Cave, and other caves in the 

Black Hills. Individual 

members of the grotto 

explored Jewel Cave, while 

Jewel Cave staff continued to 

manage cave exploration. Employees who were cavers often joined the grotto.110 The grotto 

participated in the annual cave restoration camp, adopted the portion of Highway 16 running 

through Jewel Cave’s boundaries in 2007 (a program in which the adopter promises to help clean 

litter from the highway), and partnered with the Forest Service on cave resource protection. The 

grotto is the primary partner supporting exploration (see Figure 130). Primary supporters of cave 

resource protection and management include the Forest Service, the USGS, and The Nature 

Conservancy.111

Jewel Cave staff used networks within the caving community to connect with cave management 

professionals and volunteers at other NPS-managed caves, as well as other caves across the country. 

For instance, when Wiles was developing procedures for monitoring cave vital signs, he spoke with 

Dennis Dave from Timpanogos Cave, and when he developed procedures related to white nose 

syndrome, he sought advice from Rick Toomey at Mammoth Cave National Park. Wiles worked 

closely with Rod Horrocks, the cave specialist at Wind Cave, on a range of cave resource 

management issues, and Wind Cave and Jewel Cave held joint search and rescue trainings (see 

Figure 131).112

110 Rene Ohms, interview by Jackie Gonzales, June 28, 2019, Custer, SD; Marc Ohms, interview by Jackie Gonzales, 

June 30, 2019, Custer, SD; Wiles, interview. 

111 Paha Sapa Grotto, “About Us,” accessed January 17, 2020, https://www.pahasapagrotto.org/about-us.html; 

JCLTM, August 29, 2016; Wiles, interview; Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

112 JCMM, October 5, 2010; Wiles, interview; Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

Figure 130. Volunteer cavers donate thousands of hours to exploring, surveying, 

and mapping the cave. Here, Chris Pelczarski and Adam Weaver. Photo by Ben 

Smith, 2018. 

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 305

To facilitate communication between 

cave resource managers, the NPS developed 

a role of “National Cave and Karst 

Coordinator,” which was filled, in order, by 

Ron Kerbo, Dale Pate, and Joel Despain. 

Gretchen Schenk, the cave specialist at 

Great Basin National Monument and a 

former seasonal employee at Jewel Cave, 

informally coordinated with cave specialists 

when the national coordinator position 

lapsed for several years. To keep up-to-date 

on cave management, Wiles, Ohms, and 

Dan Austin (a volunteer caver since 1998 

and former seasonal interpretive employee 

who was hired as a physical science 

technician in 2009) attended annual NSS 

conventions, spoke at National Cave and 

Karst Management Symposiums, and 

participated in (and helped to develop, in 

Wiles’ case) the National Cave and Karst 

Research Institute (NCKRI).113

For some time, Jewel Cave managers 

have wanted to establish a friends group for 

the monument, but the monument lacked 

long-term support from a superintendent 

for such an organization. Friends groups are 

non-profit organizations affiliated with a park whose purpose is to support the park, often through 

raising funds or completing projects that the NPS lacks time or money to complete. The BHPFA 

donated funds to the park, but it served multiple units and functioned differently than a dedicated 

friends group would. The 2008 Core Operations Report included a goal to “begin the development 

of a park’s non-profit fundraising group.”

114 The 2010 Operations Evaluation Report weighed in 

further: 

The park Staff has discussed the potential of supporting the development and establishment of a 

“Friends Group” for the Monument. The MWR AD for Partnerships and [the] Partnership 

Coordinator support the concept, with the caveat that Superintendent and staff believe that it is 

appropriate, feasible, and sustainable. MWR Partnership staff will provide support and guidance as 

requested, including facilitating an onsite meeting with park staff and interested prospective partners 

to gain traction and determine “next steps.”115

113 JCMM, August 30, 2011, Jewel Cave NM DF; JCLTM, August 29, 2016; Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 

2020; Wiles, interview. 

114 Jewel Cave National Monument, Core Operations Report, 2008, 28.

115 Jewel Cave National Monument, Operations Evaluation Report, October 25–29, 2010, 37.

Figure 131. Jewel Cave search and rescue training, 2004.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.
306 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Wiles hoped that a friends group would purchase private lands overlying the cave, addressing a key 

resource protection issue more easily than federal agencies can.116 Although discussion of a friends 

group has continued over the years, the monument did not yet have one as of early 2020.117

Concessions 

In the early 2000s, Jewel Cave continued contracting through the South Dakota Department of 

Human Services (SDDHS) for concessions. The contract, held by Larry Renz for several years, 

covered vending machines serving snacks and drinks in the lobby of the restroom facility.118 When 

Renz’s contract expired on June 3, 2010, the SDDHS informed the Midwest Regional Office that 

they would not seek to renew it. The Midwest Regional Office and park managers agreed that a 

Commercial Use Authorization (CUA) would be more appropriate than a concession contract, and 

the park smoothly transitioned to a CUA for vending machine services at that point.119 In 2014, 

Jewel Cave entered into an additional CUA with the BHPFA that was “focused on the sale of nonperishable food items and convenience items within the existing park store.”120 A separate vending 

company held the CUA for vending machines in a new stand-alone shelter at the base of the parking 

lot near the ticket kiosk, and the BHPFA expanded the availability of snacks available for purchase 

in the bookstore.121

Law Enforcement 

Jewel Cave had no dedicated law enforcement staff as of 2000. In light of the monument’s 

already stressed budget, Suess prioritized sharing law enforcement capabilities with local agencies, 

Wind Cave, and Mount Rushmore, rather than hiring dedicated staff.122 In 2003, Wind Cave Chief 

Ranger Rick Mossman and Midwest Regional Chief Ranger Bill Blake completed a Law 

Enforcement Needs Assessment (LENA) for Jewel Cave, pursuant to Director’s Order/Reference 

Manual 9, National Park Service Law Enforcement Policies.

123 They cited as major issues the lack of 

intrusion alarms in the historic cave entrance or historic cabin and the lack of fire suppression 

116 Wiles, interview. 

117 JCMM, March 17, 2015. 

118 Stoll, Superintendent’s Annual Narrative Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 2000; Chief of Interpretation 

to Superintendent, January 21, 2001, 3; Chief of Interpretation to Superintendent, February 1, 2002, 4, Cabinet 1, 

Drawer 1, Folder Annual Rpts. Park – interp, Jewel Cave NM CF; Chief of Interpretation to Superintendent, February 

13, 2004, 5.

119 Jewel Cave National Monument, Operations Evaluation Report, October 25–29, 2010, 6–7.

120 JCLTM, March 25, 2014. 

121 JCMM, March 28, 2017, Jewel Cave NM DF; Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

122 Wiles, interview. 

123 Jewel Cave National Monument Law Enforcement Needs Assessment, July 8, 2003, 2, Cabinet 1, Drawer 1, 

[loose in drawer], Jewel Cave NM CF.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 307

system in the cabin.124 The report referred to the 1997 Visitor Management-Resource Protection 

Assessment Program (VRAP) analysis, which had put Jewel Cave’s law enforcement needs at 3.17 

FTE. The VRAP recommended that the staff include one full-time chief ranger (GS-7), one fulltime field ranger (GS-7/9), one 75 percent-time field ranger (GS-7/9) and one full-time, subject-tofurlough field ranger with shared costs with Wind Cave (GS-7/9). Suess pointed out that making the 

positions permanent or subject-to-furlough rather than seasonal would provide more continuity for 

the monument.125

In the absence of funds to implement the 2003 LENA, Jewel Cave continued to meet its law 

enforcement needs through cooperative agreements. In 2005, the NPS signed a Memorandum of 

Understanding (MOU) with the Custer County Emergency Services Office (CCESO) for Jewel Cave 

and Wind Cave law enforcement. The purpose was to “initiate a cooperative program relating to 

Dispatch service to the National Park Service,” which would be provided by CCESO. The NPS paid 

CCESO $2,000 per year for 24/7/365 service through the agreement, to be updated annually.126 The 

following year, the NPS signed a cooperative agreement with the Custer County Sheriff’s Office to 

cooperate on law enforcement with all Black Hills area parks.127 The Forest Service also cooperated 

with Black Hills area parks on law enforcement, as detailed in a 2009 MOU.128

Wind Cave and Jewel Cave maintained a Law Enforcement Operations Agreement, which the 

two units reviewed annually. As of early 2010, the agreement stated that Jewel Cave planned 

eventually to hire a full-time law enforcement ranger, but until that happened, Wind Cave would 

store Jewel Cave firearms, complete law enforcement reports, assist with orientation of new law 

enforcement personnel, conduct any necessary investigations at Jewel Cave, and respond to 

immediate emergencies at Jewel Cave (as it had in the past). Once Jewel Cave hired permanent law 

enforcement staff, Wind Cave staff would respond to emergencies at Jewel Cave as needed, provide 

one CPR/first aid class each spring until Jewel Cave had qualified instructors, notify Jewel Cave law 

enforcement staff of Wind Cave firearms training so they could participate, and allow Jewel Cave 

law enforcement staff to use the Wind Cave firearms range. As part of the agreement, Jewel Cave 

would contribute $1,000 annually from 2010 to 2014 “to pay its share of the Custer County dispatch 

agreement.”129

124 Jewel Cave National Monument Law Enforcement Needs Assessment, July 8, 2003, 8.

125 Jewel Cave National Monument Law Enforcement Needs Assessment, July 8, 2003, 9–10.

126 Cooperative Agreement Between the United States Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Wind 

Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument, and Custer County Emergency Services Office, 2005, Cabinet 

1, Drawer 1, Folder 2.A.1 Custer County Agreements, Jewel Cave NM CF. 

127 Memorandum of Understanding Between the National Park Service, Wind Cave National Park, Jewel Cave 

National Monument, Mount Rushmore National Memorial, and Custer County Sheriff’s Department, 2006, Cabinet 1, 

Drawer 1, Folder 2.A.1 Custer County Agreements, Jewel Cave NM CF. 

128 Superintendent, Jewel Cave NM, to all employees, memorandum, February 13, 2008; Memorandum of 

Understanding Between the United States Forest Service, Black Hills National Forest, et al., and the National Park 

Service, Wind Cave National Park, et al., 2009, Cabinet 1, Drawer 1, Folder 2.A.1 2009 NPS/USFS LE MOU, Jewel 

Cave NM CF.

129 Vidal Davila to Todd Suess, memorandum, January 11, 2010, Cabinet 1, Drawer 1, Folder 2.A.1 2010 JECA 

WICA LE Coverage Agreement, Jewel Cave NM CF.
308 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

In September 2010, Suess hired Casey Osback into a seasonal law enforcement position (GS-9), 

the first law enforcement presence at the cave since Tom Casey left in 1998, and the first employee 

dedicated solely to law enforcement.130 Osback completed a Jurisdictional Inventory for the 

monument and wrote annual law enforcement reports.131 Several months after Osback arrived, the 

Operations Evaluation Report declared, “the [LE] program was permitted to atrophy by prior 

administrations and only in the past three months has a protection ranger been hired.” The report 

recommended continuing to hire seasonal law enforcement rangers and seeking additional 

partnership opportunities with other Black Hills area NPS units. Most law enforcement SOPs were 

“out of date or non-existent” and the monument needed a physical security plan, a law enforcement 

needs assessment program, and an updated Emergency 

Operations Program.132

To address these deficiencies, Larry Johnson hired David 

Yim as the chief law enforcement ranger for Jewel Cave in 2011. 

Yim was the first full-time employee dedicated solely to law 

enforcement in the monument’s history.133 He had previously 

served at Big Bend National Park and was a crucial addition to 

the Jewel Cave staff.134 Yim assisted in developing cave rescue 

SOPs and evaluating risks on the Wild Caving Tour route. He 

updated radio repeater equipment and the security system in the 

historic ranger cabin, and he continued to partner with 

cooperating law enforcement units.135

Around 2016, Yim left for another assignment and Nancy 

Martinz was hired as the chief law enforcement ranger at Jewel 

Cave (see Figure 132). Martinz had previously been at Mount 

Rushmore and had good relationships with NPS and Forest 

Service officials in the Black Hills area. Martinz and her seasonal 

law enforcement staff handled traffic stops, security systems, 

radio issues, vandalism responses, and ticketing individuals off130 JCMM, September 27, 2010; Jewel Cave National Monument Jurisdictional Inventory, 2010, Cabinet 1, Drawer 

1, Folder 2.A.1 2010 JECA Jurisdictional Inventory, Jewel Cave NM CF. 

131 Jewel Cave National Monument Jurisdictional Inventory, 2010; Lawrence E. Johnson to Midwest Regional 

Director, memorandum, January 7, 2011, Cabinet 1, Drawer 1, Folder 2.D Annual LE Reports, Jewel Cave NM CF.

132 Jewel Cave National Monument, Operations Evaluation Report, October 25–29, 2010, 10–13, 22.

133 JCSM, August 30, 2011; JCSM, November 22, 2011.

134 Lawrence E. Johnson to J. J. Martin, memorandum, November 17, 2011, Cabinet 1, Drawer 1, Folder 2.D 2011 

David Yim, Jewel Cave NM CF.

135 JCLTM, October 5, 2010; JCMM, February 2, 2011; JCMM, March 20, 2012; JCLTM, May 8, 2012; JCLTM, 

January 7, 2014, JCLTM, February 13, 2014; JCLTM, February 24, 2015; JCMM, March 12, 2015, Jewel Cave NM DF; 

Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

Figure 132. Nancy Martinz became 

chief of law enforcement at Jewel 

Cave in 2016.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 309

trail in the cave.136 The dedicated law enforcement presence that came with having a chief ranger has 

helped Jewel Cave protect its natural and cultural resources and better partner with outside law 

enforcement.

Facilities Management 

A chief of maintenance and facilities management (filled by four different people from 2000 to 

2010), assisted by a full-time, subject-to-furlough maintenance mechanic, was responsible for 

maintaining Jewel Cave’s built infrastructure. Several seasonal maintenance staff assisted most years. 

Volunteers and Youth Conservation Corps (YCC) crews occasionally assisted with maintenance 

tasks, but not every year. Maintenance staff cooperated with Wind Cave and Mount Rushmore for 

training, as they had in the past, and Wind Cave sometimes loaned maintenance employees or 

equipment to Jewel Cave to help with large projects.137 The 2010 Operations Evaluation Report 

noted the maintenance team did an excellent job of maintaining facilities at Jewel Cave, but it 

concluded that the facilities manager and maintenance staff needed to do a better job with reporting 

functions, including the NPS scoping tool for facilities projects, FMSS and PMIS, and 

environmental and safety monitoring.138

Parking Lot and Roads 

For several years after the Jasper Fire, maintenance crews put significant effort into mitigating 

damage to roads, trails, and buildings caused by the erosion of newly barren hillsides. In 2001, after 

the Lithograph Canyon road washed out completely, crews filled it “to minimal standards” and 

worked with the Forest Service to rebuild the road. Resource management staff worked with 

maintenance teams to ensure that the roads had low water crossings instead of culverts, which could 

plug up and cause overflowing water to erode deep holes on the downstream side.139 Crews repaired 

damage to the Canyons Trail caused by flash flooding and reopened it to visitors in 2001.140 They 

“milled and overlaid” the visitor center parking lot and removed the lower end of the housing 

parking lot.141 As part of the parking lot repairs, the monument received funding to rebuild the ticket 

136 JCLTM, April 12, 2016, Jewel Cave NM DF; JCLTM, January 17, 2017, Jewel Cave NM DF; JCLTM, February 

28, 2017, Jewel Cave NM DF; Wiles, interview; Stoll, interview.

137 JCMM, October 9, 2012; Bradley Block to Phyllis Cremonini, FY16 Youth Programs Accomplishments Report, 

September 23, 2016, 5, Drawer 1, Cabinet 2, [loose in drawer], Jewel Cave NM CF; JCMM, September 21, 2010, Jewel 

Cave NM DF; JCSM, January 21, 2003, Jewel Cave NM DF.

138 Jewel Cave National Monument, Operations Evaluation Report, October 25–29, 2010, 3, 8, 51–54.

139 Stoll, Superintendent’s Annual Narrative Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 2000; Jewel Cave NM FY01 

Superintendent’s Annual Report, 2001, 6.

140 JCSM, October 16, 2001, Jewel Cave NM DF.

141 Stoll, Superintendent’s Annual Narrative Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 2000.
310 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

kiosk, install electrical service to it, and expand the carpenter workshop area in the maintenance 

building.142

Studies by consulting engineers in 2010 and 2011 found that runoff from the visitor center 

parking lot introduced pollutants into the cave, and they recommended redesigning the lot to 

mitigate this contamination.143 The NPS Denver Service Center (DSC) contracted out the parking 

lot design to Martin and Martin, who published the following concept in 2012:

The site will be graded to capture stormwater runoff and convey it to the underground detention vault 

located at the southwest comer of the site, via inlets and storm piping. The detention vault will have a 

perforated plate to ensure stormwater is released at an acceptable rate during the minor (first flush) 

storm events. During the minor storm event the captured stormwater will exit the storage 

compartment of the vault through a perforated plate that will allow the total volume of stormwater to 

discharge within a 24 hour time period. Once the stormwater flows through the perforated plate, it 

will flow to the treatment unit (Smart Sponge system by AbTech Technologies) within the vault and 

then through a discharge storm pipe. A restrictor plate will control flows from larger storm events. 

Runoff will be conveyed to the south, towards Lithograph Canyon to an energy dissipation box. The 

stormwater entering the energy dissipation box will be routed through a level spreader where the 

storm water will be discharged in a manner that will mitigate erosion along the existing embankment. 

For the 100-year storm event, the captured stormwater will overtop the initial perforated plate and the 

treatment sponges. The restrictor plate will be sized to ensure the discharge of the 100-year storm 

event will not exceed the 100-year predeveloped offsite flow rate.144

In July 2012, Zonge International conducted seismic investigations around the parking lot to “locate 

hard rock lenses in the upper 10 feet,” and Yeh and Associates completed construction documents 

in August.145 Plans included new retaining walls and a 26 by 82 by 13-foot detention vault beneath 

the parking lot to catch run-off, which would then flow through oil/water separators before draining 

back into the ground. New structures built as part of the reconstruction included a new ticket kiosk 

(an octagonal design, mirroring the visitor center) and both stairs and an accessible ramp from the 

parking lot to the lower level of the visitor center plaza.146

Construction on the new parking lot began in 2014 and including repaving of the service road 

near the parking lot and expanding the lot. The parking lot now covered some of the former picnic 

area that had been built up with material excavated from the elevator shaft in 1968, but space was 

142 Jewel Cave NM FY01 Superintendent’s Annual Report, 2001, 6; JCSM, January 2, 2002, Jewel Cave NM DF.

143 Bill Willis and Joe Rausch, Jewel Cave National Monument, Repair Drainage System to Eliminate Parking Lot 

Pollution Entering Jewel Cave, Pre-Design Report, December 24, 2010, 1, National Park Service Electronic Technical 

Center (hereafter eTIC); Yeh and Associates, Inc., Geotechnical Engineering Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 

Visitor Center Parking Lot, August 31, 2012, 1, eTIC; JCSM, March 15, 2011, Jewel Cave NM DF; JCSM, April 11, 

2012.

144 Martin/Martin, Inc., for NPS, “Drainage Study for Jewel Cave National Monument Parking Lot a National Park 

Service Project,” March 23, 2012, 5–6, eTIC.

145 Yeh and Associates, Inc., Geotechnical Engineering Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, Visitor Center 

Parking Lot, August 31, 2012, 2, 5, eTIC. 

146 Yeh and Associates, Inc., Geotechnical Engineering Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, Visitor Center 

Parking Lot, August 31, 2012, 1, eTIC; Contract Price Schedule, PMIS JECA 087492, “Repair Drainage System to 

Eliminate Parking Lot Pollution Entering Jewel Cave,” undated [ca. 2012], eTIC; JCLTM, September 2, 2014.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 311

left for a few picnic tables.147 After a pause during the winter, the project was mostly completed by 

summer 2015, when the company walked away from the project. Unfortunately, problems arose 

with the new facilities. The ticket kiosk ceiling collapsed during heavy rain in July 2016, and the 

detention pond and filters did not function as expected. Water flowed into the high drains and then 

gushed out of the lower drains back onto the parking lot, spilling down the stairs and toward the 

theater, where it caused flooding and erosion. To address these issues, maintenance crews made 

modifications to the parking lot drainage system over subsequent years. As modified, the parking lot 

was not able to accommodate a filtering mechanism, which had been the impetus behind the 

redesign. Total parking capacity remained at 150 vehicles (see Figure 133).148

Figure 133. Reconstruction of the parking lot, 2018.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

Highway 16 

In the wake of the Jasper Fire, monument staff remained especially concerned about erosion and 

runoff. The state of South Dakota Department of Transportation (SDDOT) initiated repairs to 

Highway 16 after post-fire flash flooding caused major damage.149 SDDOT continued to consider 

147 JCLTM, August 12, 2014; Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

148 “Construction Continues on Jewel Cave Parking Lot,” Caving News, January 20, 2015; Leadership Team Meeting 

Notes, July 5, 2016, Jewel Cave NM DF; Wiles, interview; Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

149 Todd J. Suess to Don Krauss, October 18, 2001, Cabinet 2, Drawer 4, Folder L2431 Road Construction, Jewel 

Cave NM CF. 
312 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

building a bridge in Hell Canyon, but it again could not secure enough federal highway funding for 

the project which, by that point, would have cost an estimated $30 million.150 In lieu of the bridge, 

Suess reported, SDDOT “identified a need to place some attention on the current stretch of 

highway 16 going through the monument” to address erosion, “failing road shoulders,” and safety 

concerns.151

Plans to reconstruct parts of Highway 16 picked back up around 2012 and made their way 

through review processes.152 Wiles communicated regularly with SDDOT and the Midwest Regional 

Office to track how the plans would affect natural and cultural resources at the monument.153 The 

final plan did not include a bridge, and SDDOT promised to protect the former Michaud Hotel site. 

SDDOT explained the need for the change: 

This four-mile reconstruction and shoulder-widening project aimed to make some curves and some 

steep grades through rugged Black Hills topography less curvy and less steep— therefore safer for 

drivers of all vehicle types, including bicyclists.154

The regrading would flatten several curves “to address safety concerns” in two areas, one on either 

side of the monument (see Figure 134).155 This necessitated some cutting into the slope at many 

locations in Hell Canyon.156

In response to NPS feedback and hydrological studies, the highway improvements included 

three detention ponds and filters that captured contaminants in runoff before it could reach the 

cave. The detention ponds and catch basin filtration systems were located at three drainage areas. 

One of the ponds, at Prairie Dog Spring, was just outside the park boundary, so an agreement was 

written to allow NPS to maintain the filter. The NPS planned to use the same filters at the Jewel 

Cave parking lot, and the NPS offered to take responsibility for changing the filters under the 

highway. SDDOT opened the new highway in 2015 and held a ribbon cutting on October 8, which 

Jewel Cave leaders attended.157

150 Jason Ferguson, “Bridge may not happen,” Custer Chronicle, May 5, 2003, Cabinet 1, Drawer 2, Folder K3415 

Press Releases, Jewel Cave NM CF.

151 JCSM, July 16, 2002, Jewel Cave NM DF. 

152 JCMM, August 30, 2011.

153 JCLTM, March 25, 2014; JCLTM, May 20, 2014. 

154 South Dakota Department of Transportation (SDDOT), Annual Report, 2014, 

https://dot.sd.gov/media/documents/2014AnnualReport.pdf. 

155 SDDOT, Environmental Assessment and Section 4(f) Evaluation, Project NH 0016(72)11, PCN 022E, Custer 

County, SD, July 2013, https://dot.sd.gov/media/documents/July_2013EASection4fEvaluation.pdf, 7. 

156 Alberta Settle to Lynn Kolund, November 15, 2010, Scope Review, in SDDOT, Environmental Assessment and 

Section 4(f) Evaluation, Project NH 0016(72)11, PCN 022E, Custer County, SD, July 2013, 

https://dot.sd.gov/media/documents/July_2013EASection4fEvaluation.pdf.

157 SDDOT, Environmental Assessment and Section 4(f) Evaluation, Project NH 0016(72)11, PCN 022E, Custer 

County, SD, July 2013, 21; JCSM, August 14, 2012, JCLTM, September 16, 2014; JCLTM, October 7, 2015, Jewel Cave 

NM DF; Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 313

Figure 134. South Dakota realigned Highway 16 to eliminate dangerous curves. Photo of construction 

work in 2014.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

Historic Area 

In the historic area, staff completed extensive remodeling of the Civilian Conservation Corps 

(CCC) cabin in 2001.158 Inside the cave’s historic entrance, maintenance crews replaced rotting 

wooden staircases along the Dungeon Route in 2001 and 2002.159 The oldest stairs dated to 1964; 

therefore, no Section 106 compliance was necessary to remove them. The replacement wood was 

treated to protect it in high humidity, and the stairs were “similar in design and capacity to the 

original.” Crews completed the project in the summer to avoid disturbing hibernating bats and 

reopened the area to the public in June 2001.160

Elevator 

At the visitor center, Thyssen-Krupp Elevator (TKE) continued to hold the service contract for 

the elevators and performed maintenance such as rope and electrical repairs.161 Jewel Cave leadership 

justified noncompetitive procurement of the elevator service contract due to the elevators having 

been “designed and constructed specifically for this location,” where many components were unique 

to the elevators. Jewel Cave staff explained, 

158 Stoll, Superintendent’s Annual Narrative Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 2000; Jewel Cave NM FY01 

Superintendent’s Annual Report, 2001, 6.

159 Stoll, Superintendent’s Annual Narrative Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 2000; Jewel Cave NM FY01 

Superintendent’s Annual Report, 2001, 6.

160 Peggy O’Dell to Central Files, memorandum, April 3, 2000, Cabinet 3, Drawer 1, Folder 2004 send to NARA 

2034 Restoration Cave/Historic Area Stairs 1988–2004 Subsurface, Jewel Cave NM CF; JCSM, June 19, 2001. 

161 JCSM, February 19, 2002, Jewel Cave NM DF.
314 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

It is very difficult to design and maintain cave elevators due to the cave’s environmental conditions. 

The humidity in the cave is constantly at 99% and the temperature 47 degrees. To ensure visitor 

safety, it is imperative that the cave elevators remain functional, and this requires that elevator 

mechanics have extensive knowledge of equipment operation in these special environmental 

conditions. . . . TKE has maintained a support agreement with MCE [Motion Control Engineering, 

the company that manufactured the controls] and has an effective and efficient working relationship 

with the elevator design engineers. The TKE mechanic is competent with our rescue procedures and 

with cave resources protection issues. He has demonstrated that he has the knowledge and experience 

of what it take[s] to properly maintain the elevators in the harsh cave environment.162

The NPS followed these recommendations and continued to retain TKE due to its mechanics’ 

specialized knowledge about the Jewel Cave elevators. 

The 2010 Operations Evaluation Report included serious criticism of the elevators and the 

underground lighting system. It concluded that Jewel Cave needed external professional assistance 

to determine the causes of elevator malfunctions and to ensure that safe evacuation of the cave 

could occur in the event of a power outage. The report’s authors wrote, 

The elevators are currently not being operated as designed, installed, or according to the operational 

protocols. Inspection tags indicated the last elevator certifications shown to the team were conducted 

in July 1997 and September 1999. The elevator control circuits are persistently malfunctioning, 

requiring a manual reset procedure to be performed by a member of the park staff. The park 

maintained records that clearly indicated since May 2010 the elevator[’]s control circuits failures had a 

400 per cent increase with numerous days requiring multiple reset[s]. The park’s contracted elevator 

service has been unable to identify the primary sources of system failure. The reset task is being 

performed by untrained and unauthorized park personnel in a mechanical room that has recognized 

mechanical and electrical hazards. In addition, both elevators are currently operating with a backup 

emergency braking devise disabled. These safety systems were removed without written 

documentation from the manufacturer or the park’s elevator service company. 

Both elevators are powered by the same emergency generator (currently not in the FMSS database). 

An interruption of commercial and emergency power supply would render both elevators inoperable. 

The elevator passenger cars have the potential of being stranded at any point of the vertical path of 

travel. This situation is further exacerbated by the fact that there is no approved means of manually 

lowering the disabled car to an appropriate elevation for safe extrication except by the service 

technician who would have to respond from Rapid City, over an hour’s drive away.

No full load test had ever been done on either elevator “to determine the actual power requirement 

for a fully loaded condition,” so there was no certainty that the emergency circuit generator would 

be able to sufficiently power the elevator or the emergency lighting in the cave. Furthermore, the 

audit team found “inoperable” lighting devices for emergency egress from the cave. The evaluation 

recommended that, after figuring out what was wrong with the elevators, park staff should simulate 

a power outage to ensure that emergency generators and lighting were functioning and adequate.163

The safety concerns surrounding the elevators were so great that Johnson ordered their closure 

while the Operations Evaluation team was still performing its inspection of Jewel Cave.164 Within 

162 Justification for Noncompetitive Procurement, November 4, 2009, Cabinet 1, Drawer 2, Folder D20/Elevator 

2010, Jewel Cave NM CF.

163 Jewel Cave National Monument, Operations Evaluation Report, October 25–29, 2010, 20–21.

164 Ron Cockrell, Midwest Regional Historian, NPS, to Emily Greenwald, April 7, 2020.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 315

weeks of the evaluation, the generator repair company visited to inspect the generators, an 

independent elevator expert visited to offer suggestions regarding backup brake issues, and TKE ran 

new cables for the elevator controls, fixed and waterproofed position indicators, and waterproofed 

door interlock switches.165 

In 2012, Tashner worked with Wind Cave and the regional MABO to “look into the possibility 

of doing a joint elevator contract,” since neither Jewel Cave nor Wind Cave had found TKE’s 

services satisfactory.166 Elevator maintenance continued to be a costly problem for the cave, and 

issues with the elevators often necessitated resets or temporary closures, including an extended 

shutdown in 2019 at both Jewel Cave and Wind Cave.167 The Wind Cave electrician assisted staff 

with elevator issues occasionally, such as in 2017, when he installed electric meters to better monitor 

electric use of elevators. Chief of Maintenance Black hoped these meters would enable Jewel Cave 

to charge the electricity used for the elevator to non-base funds.168

Scenic Tour Infrastructure 

Jewel Cave maintenance crews performed most of the routine maintenance along the Scenic 

Tour route. Staff reassessed rockfall in the Target Room, which in the 1960s had been a problem 

and necessitated the building of a wooden roof structure to cover visitors as they emerged from the 

elevator landing (see Figure 135). In a 2007 report, the NPS concluded that the Target Room had 

become a “more stable environment” than it was in the 1960s, and that the “potential geohazard has 

been reduced” by sealing artificial openings into the room. Furthermore, the report called the 

wooden structure built to protect visitors a “geohazard,” and elaborated, 

At this time the wooden structure has been in the cave for about 40 years and is showing signs of 

decay. Molds and fungus are readily seen on the posts, beams, and roof of this structure. A noticeable 

odor is emitted from the rotting process. This structure is affecting the natural environment of Jewel 

Cave.

The roof structure is affecting the cave environment and the visitor experience. It is the parks mission 

to protect and preserve the resources and provide for an enjoyable visitor experience. The roof 

structure is impairing our ability to do both of these core missions and should be removed and not 

replaced. In order to mitigate any potential geohazard, the trail corridor should be narrowed to a 

width recommended by accessibility standards. This area has never been designated as a gathering 

spot and therefore cave guides should move through this area to the landing further in the Target 

Room.

169

Soon after completing the report, the NPS removed the wooden structure.

170

165 JCMM, November 2, 2010, Jewel Cave NM DF; JCMM, March 1, 2011, Jewel Cave NM DF; JCMM, August 16, 

2011, Jewel Cave NM DF.

166 JCMM, April 11, 2012. 

167 “Jewel Cave Updates Display models, roads, and online presence,” Custer Chronicle, April 25, 2012, Cabinet 1, 

Drawer 3, Folder [no title], Jewel Cave NM CF; JCSM, May 8, 2012; Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

168 JCMM, January 31, 2017, Jewel Cave NM DF; JCMM, February 28, 2017, Jewel Cave NM DF.

169 Jewel Cave National Monument Superintendent to Central Files, memorandum, January 23, 2007, Cabinet 3, 

Drawer 4, Folder Roof Structure Removal, Jewel Cave NM CF.

170 Wiles, interview; NPS, Jewel Cave National Monument, “Geologic Resources Inventory Report,” March 2009, 

10, eTIC. 
316 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Figure 135. The NPS removed the 

wooden structure in the Target 

Room that had been installed in the 

late 1960s to protect people from 

rockfall. Here, the structure before it 

was removed, ca. 2004.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

Every year, crews replaced approximately one-fifth to one-fourth of the aluminum tread along 

the Scenic Tour route (see Figure 136).171 This consumed considerable time and resources, and both 

the maintenance and resource management divisions wanted to find a better way to manage the tour 

route structures.172 Starting in 2008, Wiles worked with contractor HDR to assess the cost of 

upgrading Scenic Tour structures.173 From the resource management perspective, Wiles and his staff 

hoped to come up with a new tour route structure that took into consideration the need for lint 

collection.174 Two serious accidents involving children falling through handrails occurred in 2013 

and 2014, which further highlighted the need for redesigned structures. The maintenance staff 

performed some emergency mitigation with chain link fencing, while management pursued a longterm solution. In 2014, John Black estimated costs for full replacement of structures to be around $5 

million.175

Figure 136. Every year, maintenance crews replaced between one-fifth and one-fourth of the 

aluminum steps along the Scenic Tour. Here, after replacement in 2007.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

171 PMIS Project Detail Sheet, Project Number 130835, printed December 18, 2009, Cabinet 3, Drawer 3, Folder 

#1308356 1569-2T02-MCG REPLACE ALUMINUM, Jewel Cave NM CF; JCSM, January 21, 2003; Dilts, interview. 

172 PMIS Project Detail Sheet, Project Number 130835, printed December 18, 2009.

173 All Staff Meeting Notes, Jewel Cave NM, February 13, 2008. 

174 JCSM, October 18, 2011, Jewel Cave NM DF. 

175 JCLTM, September 25, 2014, Jewel Cave NM DF; Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 317

In 2015, Wiles and Tom Farrell attended a meeting with congressional staffers to explain the 

need to replace Scenic Tour structures.176 After that meeting, project funding came through, and 

technical planning began in 2016 in partnership with outside experts, the Midwest Regional Office, 

and the DSC.177 A contractor completed a structural assessment of existing tour infrastructure in 

May 2017 and found that “the grating has an average life span of eight to ten years in the humid 

cave environment.” Maintenance had replaced existing grating at up to 20 percent per year for the 

last 35 years, which had reduced a “clanking noise” that had existed as a result of the material. 

Furthermore, the aluminum structures had corroded in areas where they touched the concrete.178

In 2018, MAC Construction of Rapid City, which had installed Jewel Cave’s air lock doors, 

“won the contract to improve the safety of Jewel Cave National Monument’s half-mile-long Scenic 

Tour route by refurbishing and replacing metal stair treads, guardrails and handrails, installing 

concrete walkways and upgrading the electrical lighting.” An NPS news release explained the extent 

of the repairs and methods used to protect fragile cave resources:

The construction project will replace or refurbish 1,550 square feet of metal platform grating, 720 

metal stair treads, 2,750 linear feet of metal guardrails and handrails, and 820 square feet of metal 

bridge structures. New construction will include the installation of approximately 2,300 linear feet of 

concrete curbing . . . plus upgrades to the cave’s electrical system and lighting.

Many precautions will be taken to prevent damage to the sensitive cave environment. Blankets will be 

used to protect cave surfaces, and dust will be captured by filters that attach to tools and by plastic 

enclosures built atop some work spaces. The concrete will be mixed outside — in a heated, temporary 

shelter when it’s especially cold — before being brought into the cave. Any power tools or powered 

equipment used in the cave will be electronic, to avoid damaging the cave with exhaust fumes or other 

fuel-related contaminants.179 

While the NPS originally hoped to replace all aluminum structures with stainless steel, a lack of 

funding led the monument to retain the original aluminum structural components and only replace 

the handrails, stair treads, and decking with stainless steel.180 The Scenic Tour route reopened on 

April 20, 2019, after the first phase of construction, with the expectation that the tour would again 

close in autumn 2019 for the second phase of construction to take place over winter 2019–2020.181

Visitor Center 

Aboveground, monument leadership planned to renovate the visitor center and expand the 

bookstore area, with financial assistance from the BHPFA.182 Design development began in 

176 JCMM, February 3, 2015, Jewel Cave NM DF. 

177 JCMM, October 7, 2015; JCLTM, March 15, 2016; JCLTM, March 29, 2016, Jewel Cave NM DF.

178 Jewel Cave National Monument, Build Safety Compliant Cave Tour Structures, Structural Assessment Report, 

PMUIS No. JECA 219033, May 22, 2017, 2–22, eTIC.

179 Seth Tupper, “Local company chosen for $5 million project in Jewel Cave,” Rapid City Journal, October 1, 2018. 

180 Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

181 NPS, “Jewel Cave Reopens on Saturday, April 20, 2019,” news release, April 12, 2019, 

https://www.nps.gov/jeca/learn/news/jewel-cave-reopens-on-saturday-april-20-2019.htm.

182 Superintendent, Jewel Cave NM, to all employees, memorandum, February 13, 2008; JCSM, November 22, 2011. 
318 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

November 2011, and Midwest Regional Office architects completed preliminary drawings in early 

2012 (see Figure 137).183 The plans enclosed the patio and deck areas to add about 1,650 square feet 

to the visitor center, at an estimated cost of around $300,000. Split Rock Studios completed the 

work in 2013. The projects include many immersive interactive displays. In 2015, regional architects 

folded into this project the possibility of converting the former vacuum toilet outbuilding into a 

theater to accommodate viewings of the upcoming park film.184 In 2015, the NPS awarded Pederson 

Excavating of Spearfish a contract for visitor center reconstruction, but it did not include full theater 

redesign.185The visitor center addition with the bookstore in it was completed around 2017. 

Following a separate contracting and construction process, the theater was completed in 2019.186

Figure 137. Split Rock Studios completed a blueprint for visitor center renovations in 2011.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

183 Split Rock Studios, Jewel Cave National Monument, Design Development I, November 10, 2011. 

184 JCSM, January 24, 2012, JCMM, February 11, 2015; JCMM, March 12, 2015; Jewel Cave NM DF; Wiles, 

comments on draft, April 7, 2020; Wiles, interview.

185 Nathan Ellenbecker, “Jewel Cave expanding visitor center, bookstore for educational opportunities,” Rapid City 

Journal, June 15, 2015; JCMM, October 7, 2015. 

186 JCLTM, July 20, 2017, Jewel Cave NM DF; NPS, “Jewel Cave Hosts Ribbon Cutting Event,” news release, 

September 27, 2019, https://www.nps.gov/jeca/learn/news/jewel-cave-hosts-ribbon-cutting-event.htm. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 319

Housing 

The NPS and Forest Service signed an updated interagency agreement in October 2002 for 

housing collaboration, which detailed maintenance and upkeep responsibilities for the joint NPSForest Service 10-unit apartment building in Custer (see Figure 138).187 The Forest Service would 

provide grounds maintenance, conduct snow removal, and maintain underground utilities not 

maintained by the city. The NPS would pay utility bills and set rental rates. The split of the beds 

remained nine for the NPS and five for the Forest Service, and the Forest Service would reimburse 

the NPS when unpaid employees occupied park housing.188

Figure 138. Jewel Cave partnered with the Forest Service to build a 10-unit apartment building on 

Forest Service land in Custer, pictured here in 2005.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

Other housing management consisted mostly of routine maintenance to the housing units in the 

Jewel Cave headquarters area, moving seasonal employees in and out of employee housing, and 

completing planning documents. Maintenance crews upgraded interiors, stained decks, and installed 

new siding on park housing.189 In 2006, King completed a housing management plan and a standard 

operating procedures document for seasonal and permanent housing, and a contractor completed an 

updated Housing Management Plan in October 2011 (at the recommendation of the 2010 

187 Forest Supervisor John C. Twiss to Todd Suess, December 6, 2002, Cabinet 1, Drawer 2, Folder A54 

Inspections, Surveys, Appraisals, Jewel Cave NM CF.

188 Amendment No. 1, Project Agreement for Maintenance of the 10 Unit Apartment Building Located on United 

States Forest Service Land in Custer, SD, Forest Service Interagency Agreement No. 02-IA-11020300-047, Park Service 

Interagency Agreement No. F1505030001, Cabinet 1, Drawer 2, Folder A54 Inspections, Surveys, Appraisals, Jewel 

Cave NM CF.

189 Stoll, Superintendent’s Annual Narrative Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 2000.
320 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Operations Evaluation Report).190 Once Katie Keil (Atkins) came on as administrative officer, she 

managed housing, which had a heavy administrative workload when seasonal employees arrived and 

departed.191

Sewage

In response to the sewage lagoon overflow issues that had plagued Jewel Cave in the 1990s, 

maintenance crews installed new liners in the lagoon in 2005 and continued maintenance on the 

vacuum toilets that had been installed to mitigate overflow (see Figure 139).192 In subsequent years, 

rainfall amounts decreased, and the lack of water flow became an issue: there was not enough flow 

to keep the sewage lagoon wet and meet health department standards.193 The dry weather persisted,

and maintenance crews eventually removed the vacuum toilets.194 This addressed the flow issue, but 

problems with the sewer lagoon persisted, and maintenance crews relined the lagoon due to leaks 

and sludge build-up.195 Don Morrison and his maintenance team worked hard to address these 

issues, and in 2014, they won an “Operations and Maintenance Award” from the South Dakota 

Department of Environment and Natural Resources for their achievements maintaining and 

monitoring the wastewater system at Jewel Cave.196

Figure 139. Maintenance 

crews relined the sewage 

lagoon in 2005.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave 

NM.

190 JCSM, February 27, 2007, Jewel Cave NM DF; JCSM, October 18, 2011; Jewel Cave National Monument, 

Operations Evaluation Report, October 25–29, 2010, 9.

191 JCMM, February 2, 2011.

192 JCSM, October 11, 2005, Jewel Cave NM DF; JCSM, November 29, 2005, Jewel Cave NM DF; Wiles, interview. 

193 Superintendent, Jewel Cave NM, to all employees, memorandum, February 13, 2008; Wiles, interview. 

194 Wiles, interview. 

195 JCMM, September 21, 2010; JCMM, July 26, 2011, Jewel Cave NM DF; JCMM, October 18, 2011, Jewel Cave 

NM DF; JCMM January 24, 2012, Jewel Cave NM DF. 

196 Albert Spangler, P.E., to Don Morrison, March 31, 2014. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 321

Water 

Most updates to the water system related to waterlines. There had been many leaks in waterlines 

over the years, some visible from inside of the cave.197 In 2001, maintenance crews or contractors 

installed a new waterline between the reservoir and the historic area, cleaned both the 100,000- and 

3,000-gallon reservoirs, and repaired a water main break.198 Throughout this period, maintenance 

leads ensured the Jewel Cave water system met safe drinking water requirements in accordance with 

federal and state regulations.199 And in 2019, the monument underwent a major waterline 

construction project, replacing almost the entire system of waterlines throughout the monument. 

This construction necessitated the temporary closure of the Canyons Trail and part of the Roof 

Trail.200

Utilities 

Digital utilities were mostly serviced by the IT staff shared among Wind Cave, Jewel Cave, and 

Mount Rushmore (Jayne Weiss and then Bruce Baird). In 2000, Weiss installed fiberoptic cables for 

internet service, re-established computer connections, replaced damaged hardware, and then wired 

the ticket kiosk in the parking lot the following year.201 New phone lines went in in 2001, in response 

to complaints from the public about busy signals.202 In 2012, the park installed “courtesy phones” in 

the apartment laundry room and outside the visitor center for safety reasons (such as 911 calls), 

since there was no cell service within the park.203 Inside the cave, Weiss worked with Black to 

replace the cave phones with phones used in mines that were better designed for high humidity. The 

phones cost around $1,200 each, but they began to fail by 2020.204

Natural Resource Management

For the first several years after the Jasper Fire, resource management staff focused on exotic 

plant management, erosion control, and monitoring the effects of changed surface hydrology on the 

cave environment (see Figure 140).205 The monument received a temporary increase to base funding 

197 Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

198 Stoll, Superintendent’s Annual Narrative Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 2000; JCSM, July 10, 2001.

199 Mark S. Mayer, Administrator, Drinking Water Program, to David Tashner, April 20, 2012, Cabinet 1, Drawer 4, 

[loose in drawer], Jewel Cave NM CF.

200 “Jewel Cave National Monument Temporarily Closes Surface Trails,” National Parks Traveler, May 31, 2019. 

201 Stoll, Superintendent’s Annual Narrative Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 2000; JCSM, August 21, 2001.

202 JCSM, August 21, 2001. 

203 JCSM, March 20, 2012. 

204 JCSM, May 8, 2012; Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

205 Jewel Cave National Monument, FY2002 Natural Resource Challenge Report, Cabinet 3, Drawer 4, Folder N16 

Mgmt of Natural Resources & Areas, Jewel Cave NM CF; Wiles, interview. 
322 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

to support a term biological technician under Wiles in the early 2000s, which Rene Ohms filled for 

several years, but the division as a whole remained understaffed.206

Figure 140. Underground resource management has focused on monitoring and studying cave resources. Here, 

photomonitoring in 2018.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

In 2011, Saint Mary’s University of Minnesota completed a Natural Resource Condition 

Assessment under a task agreement with the NPS.

207 Study authors developed a framework that 

included Jewel Cave’s natural resource components, ways to measure them, stressors or threats, and 

reference conditions. Wiles updated the Natural Resources Condition Assessment in 2015, and in 

2019, the monument completed a resource stewardship strategy.208 All of these plans informed both 

below- and aboveground natural resource management. 

206 Wiles, interview; Rene Ohms, interview; Jewel Cave National Monument, FY2002 Natural Resource Challenge 

Report. 

207 DOI, NPS, Jewel Cave National Monument, Natural Resource Condition Assessment, December 2011.

208 JCMM, October 7, 2015; Superintendent Michelle Wheatly, remarks, Jewel Cave 200-mile Reunion, June 29, 

2019, Custer, SD.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 323

Cave Exploration and Mapping Pre-Cave and Karst Management Plan 

Cavers found additional miles of passageways in the early 2000s, expanding the southeastern 

edge of the known cave (see Figures 141 and 142). By 2005, they had surveyed and mapped 

approximately 130 miles, about 70 of which had been found after Herb and Jan retired.209

Continuing the process of digitizing survey data, Wiles and Ohms converted the trip report database 

into Microsoft Access.210 For geological mapping, they received some outside help, such as when 

Brian Fagnan, a graduate student at the South Dakota School of Mines and Technology, undertook 

a karst mapping project “to correlate surface and subsurface geology.” His results were 

inconclusive.211 From around 2005 to 2008, most exploration trips were “mop-up” surveys to fill in 

gaps in previous surveys and check leads noted on earlier trips.212 Several seasonal employees spent 

off-duty, volunteer hours assisting with mapping during those years, including Dan Austin, and the 

monument received some external USGS funding for mapping efforts.213 Austin digitized the cave 

map in the early 2010s.

214

Figure 141. Dan Austin 

making his way 

through Dingo Pass, 

2018.

Source: NPS, Jewel 

Cave NM.

209 Mike Wiles, “Jewel Cave Exploration from 1979 to 2005,” talk, Jewel Cave 200-mile Reunion, June 29, 2019, 

Custer, SD.

210 JCSM, June 19, 2001; JCSM, April 30, 2002, Jewel Cave NM DF. 

211 Jewel Cave NM FY01 Superintendent’s Annual Report, 2001, 8; Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

212 Dan Austin, “Jewel Cave Exploration from 2005 to Present and the Southwest Splinter Breakthrough,” talk, 

Jewel Cave 200-mile Reunion, June 29, 2019, Custer, SD.

213 All Staff Meeting Notes, Jewel Cave NM, February 13, 2008; JCSM, September 26, 2006, Jewel Cave NM DF. 

214 JCSM, October 18, 2011; Dan Austin, “Technical Advancements in Cave Survey and Cartography,” talk, Jewel 

Cave 200-mile Reunion, June 28, 2019, Custer, SD.
324 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

As volunteer cavers surveyed and resource 

management staff mapped the ever-larger Jewel Cave, 

they accumulated more and more data about the exact 

location of the cave. At Wiles’ urging, Superintendent 

Todd Suess drafted a Policy on the Distribution of Cave

Data to control access to information about the cave’s 

location. He reminded staff that Jewel Cave fell under 

the protections of the Federal Cave Resource Protection 

Act (FCRPA), which exempts cave location data from 

Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. Congress 

had established the exemption out of concern that cave 

location data could encourage and assist “people 

constructing artificial entrances to gain access to cave 

systems via private land,” as had happened in other parts 

of the United States. Suess identified four levels of cave 

data access: 

1. General Public: Their “requests for cave maps or 

location data require superintendent’s approval 

and they can be denied if superintendent wants.”

2. Visiting Public: They can see the wall map, the 

1992 sales map, and the Powerpoint presentation 

in the display room. “Brochures and other 

publications may contain subsets of maps, 

approved by the superintendent on a case-bycase basis. No other information may be 

disseminated.”

3. Explorers: They are permitted to see some information, but monument staff may not 

distribute digital survey data. Subsets of raw, hard copy data can be given to help with 

locating survey errors and to prepare for exploration trips, and “Volunteer Agreements will 

specify that this information may not be reproduced or distributed in any way.”

4. Researchers: They “may be given subsets of the survey data that meet a justifiable need in a 

park-approved project, provided that the cave specialist and superintendent determine that 

this will cause no significant risk of misusing the data in ways that could cause impact to the 

cave system. Each researcher will sign an Agreement to 1) not copy or distribute any cave 

location information (or any intermediate forms of the data) without the approval of the 

superintendent, 2) to keep all data (digital or hardcopy) secure at all times, and 3) to 

completely destroy remaining data once the research is concluded.”215

These guidelines remained in place until the monument completed a Cave and Karst Management 

Plan (CKMP) in 2007. 

215 Superintendent to Division Chiefs, draft memorandum, January 9, 2004, Cabinet 3, Drawer 2, Folder N3023, 

Jewel Cave NM CF.

Figure 142. Volunteers have explored and 

surveyed over 200 miles of Jewel Cave’s 

passageways. Here, on an exploration trip in 

2017.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 325

Cave and Karst Management Plan Environmental Assessment (EA)

In the 1980s, Wind Cave Superintendent Ernest Ortega completed a CKMP at Wind Cave and 

suggested Jewel Cave do the same, but no funding came through. No further movement toward a 

CKMP occurred until the early 2000s, when Wiles and Ohms began reviewing other caves’ 

management plans and regulations in order to inform their own (see Figure 143). Wiles and Ohms 

also worked closely with Wind Cave staff, who were in the process of rewriting their CKMP around 

the same time.216 In 2002, Wiles held a public scoping meeting at the NSS convention, a joint 

NPS/Forest Service scoping meeting at the monument, and open houses in Rapid City, Custer, and 

Newcastle. 217

Figure 143. Rene Ohms and Mike Wiles, pictured here on a cave exploration trip in 2004, worked on the Jewel Cave 

Cave and Karst Management Plan in the early 2000s, in partnership with Wind Cave staff.

Source: Jewel Cave NM.

The NPS completed Jewel Cave’s CKMP in 2007. They explained, 

This plan has been written to establish and formalize specific direction and appropriate policies for 

science-based management of the cave and karst resources of Jewel Cave National Monument and 

adjacent mineral withdrawals. The purpose of the plan is to provide a consistent framework for 

addressing Jewel Cave’s increasingly complex cave and karst issues in accordance with all legal 

authorities and in the spirit of its enabling legislation. The objectives of this plan are to:

1. Provide for appropriate science-based management of surface and subsurface resources within the 

Monument and in the adjacent mineral withdrawal areas.

2. Select key indicators of cave impacts based on detectable changes. 

3. Establish appropriate surface/subsurface activities, access policies, and acceptable levels of use and 

impact.218

216 JCSM, December 18, 2001, Jewel Cave NM DF; Stoll, interview.

217 “Jewel Cave is seeking input on Cave Management Plan,” news release, April 9, 2002, Cabinet 3, Drawer 3, 

Folder K3415 Press Releases, Jewel Cave NM CF; JCSM, March 20, 2002, Jewel Cave NM DF. 

218 Michael Wiles and Rene Ohms, “Jewel Cave National Monument Cave and Karst Management Plan,” 2007, 1–2, 

Jewel Cave NM DF. 
326 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

The CKMP identified “desired future conditions” that would allow the monument to maintain a 

cave resource with a “high level of integrity” and to provide “a high quality experience for all 

users.”

219 The plan laid out policies for the care of cultural and natural cave and karst resources, both 

above- and belowground; established “mitigation, monitoring, and restoration measures” for cave 

resources; and described which sections of the park were affected by the plan.220

The CKMP consolidated standard operating procedures for cave resource management into one 

document. It organized policies by division, so future chiefs of administration, interpretation, or 

maintenance could easily access the policies governing the use of the cave and its resources. For 

instance, maintenance staff now had procedures for replacing and cleaning features along tour 

routes, designated work paths to minimize tracking of manganese and other sediment, specifications 

for clothing and changing lights, lists of permissible materials, and standard operating procedures for 

any actions affecting surface hydrology. The CKMP recommended a formal maintenance training 

program to keep staff abreast of the policies.

221

The CKMP established rules for cave access, for both the public and cavers. It identified what 

qualifications a person needed to lead tours and set protocol for off-trail exploration, including age 

limits, a waiver, equipment lists, human waste removal requirements, group size, and experience 

requirements for different levels of trip difficulty. It also finalized the Policy for Distribution of 

Cave Data, described in Suess’s 2004 memorandum.

222

The CKMP established a trip leader training program and set a minimum level of time caving in 

Jewel Cave to become a trip leader. It explained, 

The purpose of a [trip leader] training program is to help explorers see things through the eyes of the 

cave managers. Volunteer explorers serve as an extended staff to the park’s resource management 

division and need to be just as capable and accountable as is required of any paid staff member. In 

order to ensure safety for cavers, protection of cave resources, and quality of exploration and 

research, all cave access is done with well-trained trip leaders who have an understanding of 

management needs and the ability to lead other cavers effectively during normal and emergency 

circumstances. Trip leaders are VIP’s (Volunteers In Parks) and are treated as park employees to the 

extent allowed by the NPS VIP program. Exceptions to VIP status exist for paid staff performing 

duties within the scope of their position description.223

Trip leaders would be responsible for preparing the team, filling out trip reports, complying with 

policies, securing surface watch, and cleaning park-owned caving gear. Trip leaders trained to lead 

either taped routes, non-taped routes, or both. They had to maintain their certification, and their trip 

219 Wiles and Ohms, “Jewel Cave National Monument Cave and Karst Management Plan,” 2007, 2.

220 Wiles and Ohms, “Jewel Cave National Monument Cave and Karst Management Plan,” 2007, 16–30, 48–49, 

Appendices D and E; Finding of No Significant Impact, Jewel Cave National Monument, Cave and Karst Management 

Plan, October 2007, Cabinet 3, Drawer 2, Folder 2007, Jewel Cave NM CF. 

221 Wiles and Ohms, “Jewel Cave National Monument Cave and Karst Management Plan,” 2007, 7–9; JCSM, June 

19, 2001; JCSM, February 5, 2002, Jewel Cave NM DF.

222 Wiles and Ohms, “Jewel Cave National Monument Cave and Karst Management Plan,” 2007, 9–13, 17, 33–35, 

45–46, 50–69.

223 Wiles and Ohms, “Jewel Cave National Monument Cave and Karst Management Plan,” 2007, 12–13, 45–46, 

Appendix C.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 327

leader status could be revoked. The plan established guidelines for trip reports and included a 

glossary of terms and guidelines for standard drawings of cave features and levels. Wiles, Ohms, and 

Andy Armstrong developed the trip leader training program and held trainings for eligible cavers

(see Figure 144).

224

Figure 144. Rene Ohms, 

pictured here in the cave 

near the Curio Shop in 

2005, worked with Mike 

Wiles and Andy 

Armstrong to develop the 

trip leader training 

program for Jewel Cave.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave 

NM.

The CKMP included an updated Cave Search and Rescue Plan and a cave rescue pre-plan, which 

outlined how to carry out a rescue with minimal damage to cave resources (see Figure 145). The 

cave management staff at Jewel Cave modeled the plan after one at Carlsbad Caverns National Park 

for Lechuguilla Cave. Jewel Cave’s rescue plan identified specific obstacles to rescuing an injured 

caver from each section of the cave and described the exact route and equipment needed for a 

rescue in that section. It also included a searchable database of cave features, with information on 

techniques and equipment needed to navigate specific obstacles. Based on the plan, Jewel Cave staff 

established a program to train cavers in rescue techniques. This process, Wiles and Ohms hoped, 

would address the issue that, at the time, “fewer than a dozen cavers ha[d] taken any cave rescue 

training” in the entire state of South Dakota.225

224 JCSM, March 25, 2008, Jewel Cave NM DF; Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020; Rene Ohms, interview. 

225 Wiles and Ohms, “Jewel Cave National Monument Cave and Karst Management Plan,” 2007, 12–13, 17, 33–35, 

39–44, 50–69, Appendix B; Rene Ohms, interview; PMIS 120789, “Develop Cave Rescue Operation Procedures,” last 

updated January 15, 2008, Cabinet 3, Drawer 3, Folder #10789 1569-Rt26-NNS CAVE RESCUE PLAN, Jewel Cave 

NM CF; JCLTM, May 17, 2016.
328 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Figure 145. Marc Ohms, 

Blase Lasala, and Mike 

Wiles on a cave rescue preplanning trip to the VACC 

(Victory After Continuous 

Contortions) in 2015.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave 

NM.

Cave Exploration and Rescue Post-CKMP

The 2010 Operations Evaluation Report was critical of Jewel Cave continuing to classify 

exploration as a volunteer activity. The evaluation team recommended that the monument 

“[e]stablish cave exploration as an official on-duty activity.” Further, it advised that NPS personnel 

in the resource management division were not allowed to volunteer as explorers: “This is a 

prohibited activity . . . because NPS employees cannot volunteer in the same work that they perform 

as paid employees.” It also found issues with the lack of volunteer agreements for cave explorers 

and the fact that volunteer cavers “seem to have 24-hour access to NPS secured areas in the visitor 

center.” The Operations Evaluation Report recommended, under the current system of classifying 

these individuals as volunteers, the following changes be made: 

• Volunteer agreements and position description need to exist for each volunteer individual or 

volunteer group. For proper coverage under the Workers Compensation Program, it is 

essential that the volunteer agreements include a complete description of volunteer working 

conditions including a job hazard analysis. All individual volunteer cave explorers or volunteer 

group cave explorers must have a current volunteer agreement and position description.

• Performance appraisals are negotiable, depending upon the volunteer. There should be some 

opportunity or mechanism for feedback to the volunteer.

• The volunteer agreement with the cavers needs to include a personal gear clause if they use 

their own equipment. 

• Work with the resource manager to incorporate the correct language for the position 

descriptions for the volunteer cave explorers.

• The volunteer cave explorers should not have access to any NPS secured location without at 

least a background investigation. The park should develop an SOP that places limits on the 

current practice of 24-hour cave access to volunteer cave explorers.226

226 Jewel Cave National Monument, Operations Evaluation Report, October 25–29, 2010, 16–17.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 329

Many of these recommendations were incorporated in the cave exploration program, but it 

remained a volunteer-led program and resource management staff continued to explore on their 

own time. To address this, Jewel Cave management removed exploration from resource 

management job descriptions, which clearly delineated exploration as a volunteer-only activity that 

did not overlap with official duties. Wiles explained, “working as cave managers, we do go in the 

cave. We do process data and draw maps. But for actual cave exploration, we clock out and do that 

on our own time.”227

In 2011, an exploring group emerged 

from the cave after its scheduled time, 

leading Superintendent Larry Johnson to 

shut down Jewel Cave to exploration for 

part of 2012 out of concern for the safety 

of cavers. The caving community wanted to 

reopen the cave to exploration, and Jan 

Conn wrote to Johnson objecting to the 

closure.228 In order to ensure the safety of 

cavers, Johnson shifted future caving 

expedition planning to the “GAR” model, a 

risk assessment model based on classifying 

actions as green (low risk), amber (mid-level 

risk), and red (high risk).229 Cavers answered 

several questions as part of their trip

requests, and the resource management team and the superintendent would then classify the 

exploration trip in one of the three levels based on how long and far into the cave the team went. 

Johnson also required there always be an on-call “hasty team” of three cavers who were experienced 

and trained in Jewel Cave rescue.230 With this procedure in place, Johnson lifted the closure.231

As exploration continued in the far reaches of the cave, cavers established new camps to allow 

for longer trips. In 2016, making use of the well hole the Conns had drilled near Hell’s Half Acre, 

resource management staff lowered gear into the cave and established West Camp. Later that year, 

they established “Deep Camp” near Hourglass Lake (see Figure 146).

232 Since then, Hell Canyon 

Camp has been added, located four hours of caving beyond Deep Camp.233 Exploration expanded 

the known extent of the cave from around 180 miles in May 2016 to 200 miles in December 2018. 

227 Wiles, interview. 

228 Jan Conn to Larry Johnson, May 12, 2012, Cabinet 1, Drawer 4, [loose in drawer], Jewel Cave NM CF; Larry 

Johnson to Jan Conn, May 15, 2012, Cabinet 1, Drawer 4, [loose in drawer], Jewel Cave NM CF.

229 JCSM, January 24, 2012; JCSM, March 20, 2012; JCSM, May 8, 2012. 

230 Rene Ohms, interview; Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

231 Cockrell to Greenwald, April 7, 2020.

232 Austin, “Jewel Cave Exploration from 2005 to Present and the Southwest Splinter Breakthrough”; JCMM, 

September 27, 2016, Jewel Cave NM DF.

233 Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

Figure 146. Deep Camp near Hourglass Lake is one of several 

camps that allows cavers to extend the distance of exploration

trips. Photo by Jonathan Venner, 2016.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.
330 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

In June 2019, cavers and former NPS staff held a “200-mile reunion” to celebrate this milestone for 

Jewel Cave, now the third-longest cave in the world (see Chapter 8).

Resource Management Projects and Research 

Wiles, Ohms, Austin, and seasonal resource management staff conducted regular water quality 

and microclimate monitoring, documented and removed mold, reported graffiti, monitored bats, 

picked up trash, and maintained trail tape and rope within the cave.234 Wiles, Ohms, and Austin all 

published work in the Journal of Cave and Karst Studies and elsewhere, and they attended NSS 

meetings. They and other staff spent also significant hours as volunteers exploring and surveying 

new sections of cave. On these trips, they often completed tasks that facilitated resource protection 

and research, such as radiolocation work, installing radon detectors, photographing the cave, and 

taking water samples (see Figures 147 and 148).235

Figure 147. In 2002, Father Paul Wightman returned to Jewel 

Cave to assist with radiolocation work, as he had in 1964 and 

1977.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

Figure 148. James McClean looking at aragonite frostwork in 

Rambling Loft. In the background is rope used to mark 

known routes and mitigate damage to cave resources. 2014.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

Resource management staff continued to address algae, lint, and airflow issues. They continued 

the tradition of holding an annual cave restoration camp, during which participants spent a weekend 

in the cave performing tasks like treating algae, removing lint from the scenic tour route, and 

removing wax from the historic tour route.236 Apart from the restoration camp, resource 

management staff developed and implemented new methods to address lint, algae, and wax in the 

234 All Staff Meeting Notes, Jewel Cave NM, February 13, 2008; JCSM, July 3, 2001, Jewel Cave NM DF; JCSM, 

December 18, 2001; JCSM, August 21, 2001; JCSM, August 20, 2002; JCSM, October 22, 2002, Jewel Cave NM DF. 

235 JCSM, July 17, 2001, Jewel Cave NM DF; JCSM, September 4, 2001.

236 Stoll, Superintendent’s Annual Narrative Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 2000; “Jewel Cave is seeking 

input on Cave Management Plan,” news release, April 9, 2002, Cabinet 3, Drawer 3, Folder K3415 Press Releases, Jewel 

Cave NM CF; JCLTM, August 19, 2014, Jewel Cave NM DF; JCLTM, September 21, 2010, Jewel Cave NM DF.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 331

cave, including updates to the lint-catching tarps under the Scenic Tour Route structures (see Figure 

149).237

Figure 149. Dan Austin installs a lint collection tarp underneath a bridge on the Scenic 

Tour route, 2016.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

In 2009, the NPS completed a Geologic Resources Inventory Report, a standard NPS report to 

be used for “disseminating high priority, current natural resource management information with 

managerial application.”238 The report documented baseline information for geological resources and 

“provide[d] sound geologic information for use in park decision making.” It identified the following 

geological issues at Jewel Cave: airflow, human impact on cave resources like lint and algae, 

contamination of cave hydrology from surface sources, land use and surface development (especially 

outside of monument boundaries), mining, radon, and geological hazards like rockfall and landslides, 

both in the cave and along Highway 16.239

Jewel Cave staff supported ongoing bat monitoring and research, as they had in the past. Most 

years, staff conducted a mid-winter hibernating bat count. Numbers remained relatively stable. In 

2002, they estimated 1,168 bats, while counts from 2005 to 2011 ranged from a low of 1,164 to a 

high of 1,555.240 In 2000, a contractor replaced the gate at the historic entrance with a “stainless 

237 JCSM, June 19, 2001; JCSM, January 15, 2002, Jewel Cave NM DF; JCSM, February 26, 2008; JCSM, January 24, 

2012; JCSM, August 14, 2012. 

238 NPS, Jewel Cave National Monument, “Geologic Resources Inventory Report,” March 2009, eTIC. 

239 NPS, Jewel Cave National Monument, “Geologic Resources Inventory Report,” March 2009, 2.

240 “batcounts.xls,” spreadsheet, undated [ca. 2011]; Rene Ohms to Jewel Cave Central Files, memorandum, January 

14, 2002; Rene Ohms to Central Files, memorandum, January 5, 2004; Rene Ohms to Central Files, memorandum, 

January 11, 2005; Rene Ohms to Central Files, memorandum, January 11, 2006; Rene Ohms to Central Files, 

memorandum, February 6, 2007; Rene Ohms to Central Files, memorandum, January 8, 2008; Rene Ohms to Central 
332 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

steel, bat friendly version to protect cave resources, as well as bats.”241 An alarm switch, tied into the 

cabin alarm system, was also installed as part of the upgrades.242

In 2011, the Center for Biological Diversity asked all cave parks to close caves to the public in 

order to slow the spread of white nose syndrome, a fungus that was infecting bats and devasting bat 

populations in the eastern United States.243 Jewel Cave did not close, but Wiles and Block drafted a 

white nose syndrome policy and received $1,000 from NPS veterinarian funding to implement a 

plan to screen visitors and decontaminate the scenic tour route.244

In 2014, with the threat of white nose syndrome increasing nationwide but no sign of it at Jewel 

Cave, the monument received $91,000 for projects research on bat habitat related to preventing 

spread of the fungus.245 Maintenance crews installed infrared bat video cameras to monitor the bat 

population.246 In 2018, white nose syndrome was discovered in Jewel Cave bats for the first time. 

The monument received an addition grant that year for $23,600 to mitigate the spread of the fungus 

using hydrogen peroxide.247

Resource management staff have helped outside specialists conduct research at Jewel Cave. For 

example, Dr. Andreas Pflitsch of Germany’s Ruhr-Universität Bochum has conducted air flow 

studies at Jewel Cave from 2002 through 2020. His research has built on the initial barometric 

studies that Herb Conn conducted in the 1960s. Pflitsch and his students have measured air flow 

and analyzed patterns, and their data and conclusions have aided the NPS in its management of the 

cave.248

Forest Service Cooperation 

In 2005, the NPS, Forest Service, and Bureau of Land Management (BLM) (which controls 

mineral rights on all federal lands) initiated a mineral withdrawal for 4,696 acres of Forest Service 

land adjacent to Jewel Cave National Monument and above the known cave.249 The Forest Service 

combined the proposed withdrawal with one in Wyoming, because the two were similar enough that 

Files, memorandum, January 23, 2009; Rene Ohms to Central Files, memorandum, January 20, 2011, all in Jewel Cave 

NM DF.

241 Stoll, Superintendent’s Annual Narrative Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 2000.

242 Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

243 JCMM, February 2, 2011.

244 JCSM, August 16, 2011, Jewel Cave NM DF; JCSM, May 8, 2012.

245 JCLTM, February 14, 2012, Jewel Cave NM DF; JCLTM, April 15, 2014; JCLTM, August 12, 2014.

246 JCSM, February 21, 2012; JCSM, March 25, 2014; JCSM, August 14, 2012; JCSM, June 14, 2016; JCSM, 

September 20, 2016, all in Jewel Cave NM DF. 

247 JCLTM, March 20, 2018, Jewel Cave NM DF; Michelle Verant, “Saving Bats from white-nose syndrome,” talk, 

Jewel Cave 200-mile Reunion, June 28, 2019, Custer, SD.

248 Todd Suess to Andreas Pflischt, March 7, 2002, Cabinet 3, Drawer 2, Folder N3023 Microclimate Study of Jewel 

Cave (Wiles), Jewel Cave NM CF; JCSM, September 26, 2006, Jewel Cave NM DF; Andreas Pflisch, “Cave Climatology 

Research in Jewel Cave from 2002 to 2019,” talk, 200-mile reunion, June 29, 2019, Custer, SD. 

249 70 Fed. Reg. 14636 (March 23, 2005). 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 333

the Forest Service could streamline the processes.250 In 2008, after comments and environmental 

review, the Forest Service withdrew from mineral entry 4,595.78 acres above the cave for 20 years in 

order “to preserve unique cave resources adjacent to Jewel Cave National Monument.” The size of 

the withdrawal was just under the 5,000-acre limit, above which a withdrawal would require an act of 

Congress. The withdrawal did not affect any leases, licenses, or permits unrelated to mining.251

In 2010, the 1990 mineral withdrawal on Forest Service land above Jewel Cave expired. The 

Forest Service filed an application with the BLM to extend the 1990 withdrawal (Public Land Order 

[PLO] No. 6782), which covered 2,387.22 acres, for an additional 20 years.252 Over the next several 

years, Wiles and Johnson worked with the BLM and the Forest Service to complete the renewal, but 

it stalled due to communication issues between the agencies.253 On August 28, 2015, the renewal was 

finalized as PLO 7838, withdrawing the same 2,387.22 acres of Forest Service land above the known 

area of Jewel Cave from mineral entry for a term of 20 years.254

In 2011, the monument entered into an interagency agreement with the Forest Service that 

provided for coordination on natural resource management issues broadly, including all 

aboveground resources, cave resources, and fire management. The Forest Service agreed to seek 

NPS input when conducting any of the following actions on lands adjacent to Jewel Cave: National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) analysis, timber sales, prescribed fire, geologic surveys for forest 

planning, land exchanges or adjustments, and mineral management projects. The NPS agreed to 

seek Forest Service input for surface management activity, annually provide the Forest Service with 

an updated map showing location of all discovered cave systems under forest lands, permit cave 

travel, provide the Forest Service reports on bat populations, survey and map cave passages, mitigate 

exploration effects on resources, and collect cave water for chemical analysis.255

The agencies hold annual meetings to share information and address issues, and the agreement 

extends to areas of cave not yet discovered.256 For sections of the known cave under private land, 

250 Wiles, interview; 70 Fed. Reg. 14636 (March 23, 2005).

251 73 Fed. Reg. 21151 (April 18, 2008); Wiles, interview; BLM, Table of Public Land Orders, July 2007–July 2008, 

https://www.blm.gov/sites/blm.gov/files/uploads/programs_lands-and-realty_land-tenure_withdrawals_public-landorders_7679-7715.pdf.

252 75 Fed. Reg. 442 (January 5, 2010); 75 Fed. Reg. 51110 (August 18, 2010).

253 JCMM, January 18, 2011, Jewel Cave NM DF; Larry Johnson to Black Hills National Forest Supervisor Craig 

Bobzien, 2012, Cabinet 1, Drawer 4, [loose in drawer], Jewel Cave NM CF. 

254 80 Fed. Reg. 52335 (August 28, 2015); BLM, Table of Public Land Orders, Feb. 2014–April 2016, 

https://www.blm.gov/sites/blm.gov/files/uploads/programs_lands-and-realty_land-tenure_withdrawals_public-landorders_7823-7852.pdf.

255 Interagency Agreement Between DOI, NPS, Jewel Cave National Monument and the Forest Service, Black Hills 

National Forest Hell Canyon Ranger District, February 9, 2011, 1–2, files provided by Katie Atkins, Folder A44 

Memorandums of Agreement, Jewel Cave NM CF. 

256 JCSM, April 11, 2012; Wiles, interview.
334 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Wiles has been in contact with Corissa Busse at The Nature Conservancy (TNC) about the 

possibility of additional land exchanges or conservation easements.257

Exotic Plant Management 

In 2001, the NPS established regional inventory and monitoring networks to monitor “vital 

signs” of natural resources. Jewel Cave fell within the area of the Northern Great Plains Inventory & 

Monitoring Network (NGPN). The existence of the NGPN changed the way Jewel Cave managed 

its aboveground natural resources, enabling it to maintain data on vegetative resources even though 

it has no staff dedicated to the aboveground environment.258 In 2002, the monument received 

funding in partnership with the NGPN to hire seasonal staff that would help manage exotic and 

invasive plants, populations of which had exploded after the Jasper Fire.259

Figure 150. NGPN crews released beetles to control leafy spurge, 2008.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM. 

257 JCMM, October 7, 2015; Bob Paulson and Corissa Busse, interview by Jackie Gonzales, June 26, 2019, Rapid 

City, SD. 

258 DOI, NPS, Plant Community Composition and Structure Monitoring Protocol for the Northern Great Plains 

I&M Network, February 2012, 1; Wiles, interview. 

259 Jewel Cave National Monument, FY2002 Natural Resource Challenge Report, 2002; Wiles, comments on draft, 

April 7, 2020. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 335

In 2003, the NGPN initiated an exotic plant management control program at 13 parks.260 It 

completed the environmental review process for the program in 2005 and implemented it at Jewel 

Cave in 2008. The program used mechanical treatments (and later herbicides) to target Canada 

thistle, leafy spurge, houndstongue, common mullein, bull thistle, muck thistle, black henbane, and 

field bindweed.261 The NGPN exotic plant management team conducted exotic plant sampling, 

research, and removal at Jewel Cave and shared monitoring data with Jewel Cave resource 

management staff (see Figure 150).262 The 2010 Operations Evaluation Report commended Jewel 

Cave on its work with the NGPN and encouraged expansion of the cave’s aboveground 

management capabilities, including possibly establishing a resource management position with an 

aboveground focus.263

Fire Management 

In the years following the Jasper Fire, Jewel Cave updated its Wildand Fire Management plan. 

Staff finalized it in 2004 after public, tribal, partner, and interagency input and environmental and 

cultural resource review processes.264 The final plan allowed for the use of prescribed fire to manage 

fuel loads and designated the entire monument as one Fire Management Unit (FMU), with five 

distinct units for prescribed burns (see Figure 151).265 It also identified fire research needs, which 

included monitoring water quality and stream flow at the monument (Lithograph Canyon stream 

flows were higher after the Jasper Fire), assessing runoff and erosion differences in relation to burn 

severity, determining how the Jasper Fire changed the quantity and/or quality of water entering the 

cave, comparing responses of native and non-native vegetation, and determining how fire intensity 

affected ponderosa pine regeneration.266

260 Todd Suess to Central Files, memorandum, May 15, 2007, Cabinet 3, Drawer 1, Folder 2007 Send to NARA 

2035 (sticky note: “Natural Surface Vegetation”), Jewel Cave NM CF.

261 DOI, NPS, Northern Great Plains Exotic Plant Management Finding of No Significant Impact, September 2005, 

2–5, Jewel Cave NM DF; Suess to Central Files, memorandum, May 15, 2007; Todd Suess to Central Files, April 15, 

2008, Cabinet 3, Drawer 2, Folder 2007, Jewel Cave NM CF.

262 DOI, NPS, Jewel Cave National Monument Plant Community Composition and Structure Monitoring, 2011 

Annual Report, February 2012, vii, eTIC; JCLTM, July 20, 2017, Jewel Cave NM DF.

263 Jewel Cave National Monument, Operations Evaluation Report, October 25–29, 2010, 44–48.

264 Todd Suess to Interested Party, December 20, 2001, Cabinet 2, Drawer 2, Folder Y14 Wildland Fire 

Management, Jewel Cave NM CF; “Jewel Cave to Hold Fire Planning Meeting,” news release, December 20, 2001, 

Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, Folder K3415 Press Releases, Jewel Cave NM CF; Finding of No Significant Impact, Fire 

Management Plan, Jewel Cave National Monument, December 2004, 3–6, eTIC; Superintendent Todd J. Suess to 

Chairman Ben Speak Thunder, August 13, 2004, Cabinet 2, Drawer 2, [loose in drawer], Jewel Cave NM CF; Stoll, 

interview. 

265 DOI, NPS, Fire Management Plan for Jewel Cave National Monument, December 22, 2004, 7–8, 36, Jewel Cave 

NM DF; Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

266 DOI, NPS, Fire Management Plan for Jewel Cave National Monument, December 22, 2004, 35.
336 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Figure 151. The Fire Use Module at Jewel Cave, 2002.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

In 2008, Jewel Cave signed an MOU for Wildland Fire Management with six other NPS units in 

the northern Great Plains. The agreement defined responsibilities of staff from all units, which 

included assistance on prescribed fires, fire prevention and suppression, reports, mobilization of 

NPS personnel as needed, fire-related training, and communication and coordination between NPS 

units and other agencies for wildland fire management.267 The agreement explained, 

While it needs to be very clear that the fire staff serves all seven parks, they will be located at Wind 

Cave National Park, with the exception of the Black Hills Fire Use Module, which is located at Jewel 

Cave National Monument. The two parks will provide office facilities to the extent practical.268

Jewel Cave’s fire use module worked with crews at these other parks and the Forest Service when 

the monument held prescribed fires in 2008, 2010, and 2014.

269

267 Memorandum of Understanding for Wildland Fire Management, Agreement Number G1561080804, January 1, 

2008, 1–2, files provided by Katie Atkins, Folder A44 Memorandums of Agreement, Jewel Cave NM CF.

268 Memorandum of Understanding for Wildland Fire Management, Agreement Number G1561080804, January 1, 

2008, 5.

269 “Jewel Cave Conducts Prescription Fire to Clean-Up Jasper Debris,” news release, October 10, 2008, Cabinet 1, 

Drawer 3, Folder K3415 Press Releases, Jewel Cave NM CF; “Jewel Cave National Monument Plans Prescribed Fire,” 

news release, September 10, 2010, Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, Folder K3415 Press Releases, Jewel Cave NM CF; Canyons 

Prescribed Burn Plan, Jewel Cave National Monument, Hell Canyon Ranger District, Black Hills National Forest, 

approved September 2014, Jewel Cave NM DF. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 337

In 2011, the NGPN Fire Ecology Program completed a Forest Structure and Fuel Loads study. 

It surveyed 60 forested plots and measured historic fires, fire potential, vegetative cover, and exotic 

plant presence.270 The NGPN assisted Jewel Cave with a review of the monument’s Fire 

Management Plan (FMP) in 2012, as required under policy changes described in 2009 Guidance for 

Implementation of Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy. The FMP was found to “be sound,” so there 

were no changes in objectives.271

Cultural Resource Management 

Chief of Resource Management Mike Wiles completed cultural resource management tasks in 

partnership with contractors and NPS specialists from other sites. In 2006, Quinn Evans|Architects 

completed a Cultural Landscape Report (CLR) for Jewel Cave, and Woolpert, LLC, completed an 

associated Environmental Assessment.272 The CLR documented and described historic landscapes 

and structures within the park over time, with the intent of guiding future management.273 It defined 

a new historic district in the park encompassing the area created by the overlap of the old and new 

park boundaries, which included the historic entrance to the cave and the historic ranger cabin. The 

report found the historic district eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. 

Contributing features included the ranger cabin, the trail to the cave, the stone stairway, metal 

railing, and retaining wall along that trail, the cave entrance area, views to and from the cave 

entrance, the historic area entrance road, archeological sites in Hell Canyon, the Hell Canyon Road, 

a CCC-built manhole and cistern, remnants of a trail west of the ranger cabin, a portion of Highway 

16 near the historic entrance, the former campground site, other signs and trails, the visitor center 

parking lot at the historic area, other historic area roads, and the stainless steel gate at the cave 

entrance.274

Also in 2006, Gail Evans-Hatch and Michael Evans-Hatch of Evans-Hatch and Associates 

completed a Historic Resource Study (HRS) for Jewel Cave.275 Unlike an administrative history, an 

HRS describes the history that is significant to the park’s legislative purpose and interpretive themes, 

270 DOI, NPS, Forest Structure and Fuel Loads at Jewel Cave National Monument, 2011 Status Report, June 2012, 

vi. 

271 2012 Fire Management Plan Review and Update for Jewel Cave National Monument, February 29, 2012, Cabinet 

1, Drawer 4, [loose in drawer], Jewel Cave NM CF; JCLTM, February 20, 2018, Jewel Cave NM DF; Wiles, interview. 

272 Quinn Evans Architects, Cultural Landscape Report and Environmental Assessment: Jewel Cave Historic Area, Jewel Cave 

National Monument, March 2005.

273 “Cultural Landscape Report Public Scoping Meetings,” news release, June 9, 2003, Cabinet 1, Drawer 2, Folder 

K3415 Press Releases, Jewel Cave NM CF.

274 Quinn Evans Architects, Cultural Landscape Report and Environmental Assessment: Jewel Cave Historic Area, Jewel Cave 

National Monument, March 2005, 155–179.

275 Michael Evans-Hatch to Midwest Region Historian Don Stevens, February 21, 2004, Cabinet 3, Drawer 1, 

Folder H14 Area and Service History, Cultural Park Hist. Research Documents, Jewel Cave NM CF.
338 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

essentially an extended historic context.276 The interpretive staff at Jewel Cave use the HRS as a 

reference when interpreting the history of the monument. 

In 2002 and 2003, Midwest Archeological Center (MWAC) Archeologist Bruce Jones brought a 

team to Jewel Cave to complete archeological testing and evaluation of multiple sites in the 

monument. Jones’ findings added significantly to the knowledge of archeological resources at Jewel 

Cave. As a result of his investigations, Jones determined that 5 of the park’s 14 sites were eligible for 

nomination to the National Register, and that one additional site was eligible as a contributing 

feature to an existing nomination. Jones recommended additional study at one site.

277

 

The superintendent served as the de facto Section 106 coordinator until 1997, when Cannon 

assigned that responsibility to Wiles. Wiles completed most of the cultural resource compliance 

required under Section 106 and Section 110 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). 

Over the following years, there was little support for professionalization of that role. The 2010 

Operations Evaluation Report found that Wiles serving in the role was problematic, since neither he

nor anyone on staff met the secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for a 

cultural resource management specialist. The report concluded, “The park has done a poor job at 

performing its Section 106 responsibilities for compliance with the National Historic Preservation 

Act.” It recommended that the Section 106 coordinator and the superintendent be trained in Section 

106, that the park improve documentation on cultural resource compliance, that all prescribed fires 

cease until better compliance with the NHPA occurred, and that the park develop formal 

agreements with the South Dakota State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) and with tribes to 

better address cultural resource management issues in the future. Another important 

recommendation was that the monument hire a cultural resource management specialist at .5 FTE: 

The incumbent will meet the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards, serve as 

Park Section 106 Coordinator, and be a vocal advocate for incorporating CRM policies and practices 

into daily park operations. Most importantly, the CRM Specialist can ensure all PMIS project 

statements remain current and competitive.

No cultural resource staff was hired following the recommendation. However, Wiles has since 

attended training and has built stronger relationships with cultural resource staff at the regional 

office, the South Dakota SHPO, and tribal representatives.278

In the absence of dedicated cultural resource staff, Wiles and the superintendent continued to 

work with the South Dakota SHPO and tribes with ancestral homelands in the Black Hills.279 Issues 

identified in the 2010 Operations Evaluation Report continued. During the paleoflood study in 

2012, Jewel Cave failed to conduct required cultural resource compliance before disturbing sites with 

276 Gail Evans-Hatch and Michael Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages: Jewel Cave National Monument Historic Resource Study

(Omaha: NPS Midwest Regional Office, 2006), 5–6. 

277 Bruce Jones, NPS, MWAC, Archeological Investigations at Jewel Cave National Monument Custer County, South Dakota 

2000–2003, Technical Report 94a, 2006. 

278 Jewel Cave National Monument, Operations Evaluation Report, October 25–29, 2010, 42–44.

279 Wiles, interview; JCMM, February 21, 2017, and JCLTM, August 29, 2016, in Jewel Cave NM DF. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 339

potential archeological resources.280 Johnson sent out after-the-fact letters to 21 tribal organizations 

that might have comments on the project, using a list provided by Mike Evans at the South Dakota 

SHPO.281 Johnson invited them to a meet with Jewel Cave staff to forge a better partnership for 

future projects, but no one responded.282 The monument later planned a broader meeting with 

tribes. Several tribal representatives expressed interest, but only Wanda Wells from the Crow Creek 

Sioux Tribe attended.283

Museum Collection 

After the museum collection moved to Mount Rushmore (see Chapter 6), Wiles, who has 

overseen the park’s museum collection since 1997, finished a museum inventory in partnership with 

Bruce Weisman, the curator at Mount Rushmore, and Zane Martin, who succeeded him.284 In 2004, 

MWAC sent Jewel Cave cataloged archeological collections and sent monument staff a 3.5-inch disk 

of 525 catalog records, including 285 new ones.

285 In 2011, Martin, working with Wiles and MWAC, 

completed a Scope of Collections statement. The statement explained the extent and value of Jewel 

Cave’s collections: 

The park’s museum collection includes both natural history and cultural collections. The park’s 

natural history collection includes: a mammal collection; the herbarium, which includes various 

species of vascular plants that occur in the park; one paleontological collection from an excavation 

just inside the original cave entrance; geological specimens from Jewel Cave and its natural 

formations; samples from a fire scar study, and associated project documentation and reports. Other 

natural history collections within the museum collection include reptiles and insects. At present, these 

collections are relatively small, and little research pertaining to these disciplines has been conducted in 

the park to date. The cultural collection includes: historical slides, negatives and photographs from 

throughout the history of the park, objects of historic significance to Jewel Cave and the surrounding 

infrastructure, personal journals and papers, oral histories, park regulations, newspapers, flyers, 

pamphlets, and administrative, scientific and resource management records.286

The collection continued to be managed “under the procedures and standards of the Mount 

Rushmore Collection Management Plan, and a written Agreement between Jewel Cave and Mount 

Rushmore for managing the Jewel Cave collection.”287 As part of the agreement, Martin assessed the 

280 Lawrence E. Johnson to Paige Olson, March 30, 2012, Cabinet 1, Drawer 4, [loose in drawer], Jewel Cave NM 

CF.

281 Michael E. Wiles to Paige Hoskinson-Olson, SD SHPO, July 26, 2012, Cabinet 1, Drawer 4, [loose in drawer], 

Jewel Cave NM CF.

282 Lawrence E. Johnson to Paige Olson, May 15, 2012, Cabinet 1, Drawer 4, [loose in drawer], Jewel Cave NM CF; 

Lawrence E. Johnson to Lana Gravatt, Historic Preservation Officer, Yankton Sioux Tribal Bus. & Claims Comm., July 

25, 2012, Cabinet 1, Drawer 4, [loose in drawer], Jewel Cave NM CF.

283 Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

284 JCSM, October 1, 2002; Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

285 MWAC Manager Mark Lynott to Jewel Cave Superintendent, memorandum, June 7, 2004, Cabinet 3, Drawer 1, 

Folder Museum Storage & Exhibit Space, Jewel Cave NM CF.

286 DOI, NPS, Jewel Cave NM, August 2011 Scope of Collection Statement, 4. 

287 DOI, NPS, Jewel Cave NM, August 2011 Scope of Collection Statement, 20.
340 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

status of the collection, and concluded that it met 83.05 percent of NPS collection standards. 

Deficiencies included lack of humidity control and light control.

288

In 2014, Martin and Jewel Cave staff began updating the Scope of Collections statement and the 

agreement between Mount Rushmore and Jewel Cave. By then, Mount Rushmore also housed the 

Devils Tower National Monument collection, and both Jewel Cave and Devils Tower contributed 

funding to Mount Rushmore for the space and staff it provided for their collections. Wiles, Block, 

and other Jewel Cave staff met to discuss Jewel Cave’s collection and provide feedback to Martin.289

The updated statement was similar to the 2011 statement, with the addition of “Civilian 

Conservation Corps collections” to the scope.290

Interpretation and Education 

Cave tours remained the most common way in which people interacted with Jewel Cave. The 

monument used fees from cave tours to improve interpretation, and interpretive staff expanded 

youth programming and outreach. Chief of Interpretation Bradley Block and other interpretive staff 

worked with the BHPFA on junior ranger programming and other interpretive initiatives (see Figure 

152). They also partnered with outside organizations to conduct off-site programming. In 2012, as a 

result of the hard work of the interpretive staff, Jewel Cave received a “Great Service Star” from the 

South Dakota Department of Tourism.291

Figure 152. Bradley 

Block, chief of 

interpretation starting 

in 2008, pictured here 

2008.

Source: NPS, Jewel 

Cave NM.

288 NPS Checklist for Preservation and Protection of Museum Collections, Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, Folder [no file 

title], Jewel Cave NM CF.

289 JCLTM, May 27, 2014, Jewel Cave NM DF; JCLTM, August 12, 2014; JCLTM, September 16, 2014.

290 DOI, NPS, Jewel Cave National Monument–South Dakota, 2015 Scope of Collections Statement, 5, Jewel Cave 

NM DF. 

291 JCMM, October 9, 2012. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 341

The 2010 Operations Evaluation Report recommended that Jewel Cave complete its LongRange Interpretive Plan. The plan had been started by Rosga in the late 1990s and remained “stalled 

at 90% completion” as of 2010, in part due to disagreements over the monument’s central 

interpretive themes. The evaluation team urged staff to move forward: 

The park should not allow disagreement over the interpretive themes in the draft plan to provide an 

additional excuse to stall the plan’s completion. The park might include one or two themes to cover 

surface resources and cultural resources, but not at the expense of interpretive themes covering the 

park’s primary natural resource, the cave.

292

The report recommended a stronger focus on aboveground resources and cultural resources, 

particularly American Indian presence. The team determined the interpretive division was “understaffed” and recommended the park “conduct a position management review to determine the needs 

of interpretation.” It also concluded that the park needed to develop an education plan in 

partnership with local schools, teachers, and other educational organizations.293

Tours and Visitor Services 

Jewel Cave relied heavily on seasonal interpretive staff to provide cave tours to tens of 

thousands of people who visited the monument (see Figures 153 and 154). (See Appendix E for 

visitation numbers.) Most seasonal staff worked in the summer. As of 2002, the seasonal staff 

included twelve interpretive park rangers (GS-4), six interpretive park rangers (GS-5), two lead 

interpretive park rangers (GS-3), four fee collectors (GS-3), and one information receptionist (GS3). This was in addition to the assistant chief of interpretation, who was hired as a GS-9 and, during 

the summer for a couple of summer seasons, was upgraded to a GS-11. For several years, the 

monument had a “cabin” position (a GS-3 fee collector staffing the cabin), but it replaced the 

position in 2002 with “a cadre of GS-0025-05 Park Rangers assigned to conduct Historic 

Candlelight Tours, informal historic area programs, and Spelunking Tours [now called the Wild 

Caving Tour].”294

The 2008 Core Operations report found that the interpretive division had insufficient staff to 

carry out the core functions of providing environmental education programs, local community 

programs, and sufficient on-site interpretive programming.295 The division improved in these areas 

over the following years, relying largely on seasonal staffing. In 2010, Block created a “mentorship 

style of teamwork” for the many seasonal staff and volunteers, in which a high-level seasonal 

employee was matched up with a small team of lower-level seasonal employees. Seasonal staff could 

express concerns to their mentors rather than directly to the division chief, although any pressing 

issues were communicated to the chief, which “create[d] a more cohesive team of front line 

interpreters.”296

292 Jewel Cave National Monument, Operations Evaluation Report, October 25–29, 2010, 17–18. 

293 Jewel Cave National Monument, Operations Evaluation Report, October 25–29, 2010, 14–18.

294 Chief of Interpretation to Superintendent, April 23, 2003, 3. The Spelunking Tour was later renamed the Wild 

Caving Tour.

295 Jewel Cave National Monument, Core Operations Report, 2008, 20.

296 Block to Johnson, Annual Report – Interpretive Division, September 30, 2012, 12.
342 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Figure 153. A park ranger leads 

visitors on a Scenic Tour, pictured 

here on the platform in the Target 

Room, 2010.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

Figure 154. Interpretive rangers 

continued to offer aboveground 

programs while visitors waited for 

cave tours. Here, in 2006.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 343

Jewel Cave offered Scenic Tours (limited to 30 people per tour), Historic Candlelight Tours 

(limit reduced from 25 to 20 people in 2000 “for safety and visitor enjoyment”), and Spelunking 

Tours (two to five people per tour), which were called “Wild Caving Tours” starting in 2009 (see 

Figure 155).297 Scenic Tours were offered year-round, Historic Tours usually just for the summer 

months, and Wild Caving Tours were offered in the summer and occasionally the winter and 

autumn.298Aboveground, staff offered free hiking tours and orientation talks along the monument’s 

trails and outdoor areas, including the Roof Trail, the Canyons Trail, and the visitor center patio.299

Figure 155. The Wild 

Caving Tour is an offtrail opportunity for both 

experienced and novice

cavers, 2008.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave 

NM.

The rehabilitation and renovation of the CCC ranger cabin ushered in major changes to 

interpretation in the historic area. The monument completed a Draft Comprehensive Interpretive 

Plan (CIP) around the time of the renovations, which outlined the plan for the historic area: 

The guided tour will include access to the interior of the Ranger Station. Standing as a very striking 

“artifact”, the structure will provide a tangible connection to the monument's development, the role 

of park rangers in resources protection and visitor enjoyment during that period, and the contribution 

of the Civilian Conservation Corps to visitor facilities in the National Park System . . . Installation of 

historic furnishings will offer tangible reminders of the function of the Ranger Station and the people 

who served the monument. To support the effectiveness of the Ranger Station segment of the 

comprehensive guided tour of the Historic Area, the monument no longer will use the Ranger Station 

297 “Jewel Cave National Monument Continues to Explore, Offering Wild Caving Tours,” news release, September 

4, 2009, Cabinet 3, Drawer 3, Folder K3415 Press Releases, Jewel Cave NM CF.

298 “Jewel Cave National Monument Continues to Explore, Offering Wild Caving Tours,” news release, September 

4, 2009; “Jewel Cave National Monument Offers Off-Season Wild Caving Tours,” news release, December 8, 2010, 

Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, Folder K3415 Press Releases, Jewel Cave NM CF; JCMM, August 23, 2016, Jewel Cave NM DF.

299 JCMM, October 9, 2012; Chief of Interpretation to Superintendent, April 23, 2003, 2; Block to Johnson, Annual 

Report – Interpretive Division, September 30, 2012, 1.
344 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

for cooperating association sales, tour ticket sales, and staff work space. This will enable the public to 

focus their attention on the historic significance and meaning of the structure." Therefore, we have a 

need to develop purpose, goals, and objectives for the use of the cabin; in other words, a detailed plan 

for the cabin.300

The 2006 CLR (see above) and a Historic Furnishing Report (HFR) guided restoration and 

interpretation of the historic area.301 The BHPFA set up a sales area in the cabin. Responsibilities for 

interpretive staff in the historic area included selling bookstore materials; fee collection; leading 

hikes, cave tours, roves, and surface programs in historic uniform; and staffing the cabin. In keeping 

with the cultural interpretive themes of the monument, interpreters addressed topics such as Jewel 

Cave’s history, the CCC, and above- and belowground natural resources.302

Suess, Rosga, Dilts, Wiles, and 

Baughman almost decided to end costumed 

interpretation, for which rangers wore circa 

1938 NPS uniforms, because of the cost to 

purchase and maintain the uniforms. 

Ultimately, they decided that the replica 

uniforms added significantly to 

interpretation in the historic area and that 

their use should be continued.303 Starting in 

2000, historic area staff rotated between the 

Historic Candlelight Tour and the Scenic 

Tour, as they had before 1996 when 

costumed interpretation began at the 

historic area, and they continued to wear 

replica uniforms in the historic area when 

possible (see Figure 156).304 In 2003, the 

Historic Candlelight Tours were renamed 

“Lantern Tours” and staff switched to using 

paraffin-oil lanterns. The change aimed to protect cave resources, because wax deposits from 

candles had resulted in extensive mold growth in the historic area of the cave. Resource 

management staff undertook a four-year project to remove remnant candle wax.305

300 Jewel Cave Superintendent to all employees, memorandum, July 6, 2001, Cabinet 3, Drawer 1, Folder Cabin –

Misc. reports, Jewel Cave NM CF.

301 Jewel Cave Superintendent to all employees, memorandum, July 6, 2001; Jewel Cave Superintendent to Jewel 

Cave Interpretive Staff, memorandum, August 6, 2001, Cabinet 3, Drawer 1, Folder Cabin – Misc. reports, Jewel Cave 

NM CF. 

302 “Historic Area Program,” undated [ca. 2001], Cabinet 3, Drawer 1, Folder Cabin – Misc. reports, Jewel Cave NM 

CF.

303 Cabin Meeting, notes, July 19, 2001, Cabinet 3, Drawer 1, Folder Cabin – Misc. reports, Jewel Cave NM CF.

304 JCSM, July 31, 2001; JCSM, February 26, 2008; Stoll, Superintendent’s Annual Narrative Report, Jewel Cave 

National Monument, 2000; Chief of Interpretation to Superintendent, February 1, 2002, 1.

305 Chief of Interpretation to Superintendent, February 13, 2004, 2; Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020.

Figure 156. Jewel Cave Rangers giving cave tours from the 

historic entrance in ca. 1938 replica NPS uniforms.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 345

Fee Collection 

Jewel Cave charged entrance fees for cave tours, but it operated differently from other NPS sites 

that charged entrance fees. Starting in April 2000, the monument was considered a “like Fee Demo” 

site, which meant that it sold National Park Passes (annual passes and Golden Eagle passes for 

seniors) but did not accept those passes for cave tour fees. The monument did not charge a fee to 

enter the monument and use the parking area.306 Starting in 2003, in response to visitor frustration 

about not being able to use their National Park Passes at the monument, interpretive staff developed 

a Discovery Tour that could be paid for with National Park Passes. The Discovery Tour was a 20-

minute visit to the first large room along the Scenic Tour route and was similar to the Target Tour 

offered in the 1990s. The Discovery Tour also gave visitors with physical disabilities a less 

demanding way to experience the cave.307

For the most part, dedicated fee collection personnel handled ticket transactions but did not 

provide cave tours (see Figure 157).308 The Lead Visitor Use Assistant (VUA) ran the fee program at 

Jewel Cave and completed audits every year.309 As of 2001, cave tour fees were $8 for adults and $4 

for youths or seniors for the Scenic and Candlelight Tours and $20 for adults and $10 for seniors for 

the Spelunking Tour.310 From every ticket sale, 75 cents continued to go the “Elevator Cost 

Recovery” fund and another 75 cents went to resource protection efforts at the cave.311

Figure 157. A ranger helps 

someone at the visitor center 

desk, while Jan Conn passes

by in the background. 2013.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave 

NM.

306 Stoll, Superintendent’s Annual Narrative Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 2000.

307 Chief of Interpretation to Superintendent, February 13, 2004, 1, 3.

308 Chief of Interpretation to Superintendent, February 13, 2004, 1.

309 JCLTM, July 12, 2016, Jewel Cave NM DF.

310 Stoll, Superintendent’s Annual Narrative Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 2000.

311 Chief of Interpretation to Superintendent, January 21, 2001, 2; Chief of Interpretation to Superintendent, 

February 13, 2004, 3; Jewel Cave NM FY01 Superintendent’s Annual Report, 2001, 4.
346 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Ticket sales occurred mostly at the front desk and at an interpretive kiosk near the parking lot, 

completed in 2001.312 Interpretive staff created temporary exhibits for the ticket kiosk, which they 

installed in 2004.313 In 2008, crews installed a new front desk. The same year, monument leadership 

made the ticket kiosk the primary sales area for cave tour tickets. As part of this change, tour safety 

reminders—previously given verbally by the ticket seller—were added in text to the back of the 

ticket, in order to reduce transaction time.314

Jewel Cave began using an internet and call center reservation system for cave tours in 2000. 

Biospherics, Incorporated, held the contract to operate the system, which was called the National 

Park Reservation Service (NPRS). Mammoth Caves and Carlsbad Caverns National Parks already 

used the NPRS. Visitors could still purchase tickets in person. In 2001, Suess considered 

discontinuing Jewel Cave’s association with the system, because it accounted for less than 10 percent 

of ticket sales and was a costly program that did not meet the needs of the monument. In addition, 

people who made reservations through the online system were not always prepared with proper 

clothing, footwear, and information about what the tour entailed.315

Suess and Rosga met with NPS officials in Washington, DC, along with staff from other parks, 

to discuss the online reservation system. The NPS decided to offer two tiers of service, and Jewel 

Cave opted for the lower level, which provided a call reservation system and a non-real-time 

connection to park ticket sales, which meant staff could not look up how many tickets had been sold 

up that point.316 In 2003, Jewel Cave ceased using the NPRS and entered into a new contract with 

Electronic Solutions for phone and internet sales, which, staff determined, would be better meet the 

monument’s needs. The new system was not functional for several years, and visitors continued to 

buy tickets for cave tours primarily in person. The system used proprietary software and had poor 

support as the system aged.317

Black Hills Central Reservations managed large tour groups and package tours starting sometime 

before 2011. Monument leadership considered asking the company to expand its offerings to cover 

all Jewel Cave tours, but the company charged a $3 transaction fee that would have been passed to 

visitors as a fee increase, which staff wanted to avoid.318 At the urging of the NPS Washington 

Office, Johnson considered switching to Recreation.gov, the reservation system used by many other 

parks at that point, but that would also entail a fee of $3 per ticket.319 In 2016, in need of some 

312 Jewel Cave NM FY01 Superintendent’s Annual Report, 2001, 5.

313 Chief of Interpretation to Superintendent, February 1, 2002, 3; Chief of Interpretation to Superintendent, 

February 13, 2004, 4.

314 Jewel Cave Superintendent to all employees, memorandum, March 11, 2008, Jewel Cave NM DF.

315 “Jewel Cave and Wind Cave on Reservation System,” news release, March 30, 2000, Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, Folder 

K3415 Press Releases, Jewel Cave NM CF; JCSM, October 16, 2001, Jewel Cave NM DF; Chief of Interpretation to 

Superintendent, February 1, 2002, 1; Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

316 JCSM, October 30, 2001.

317 Chief of Interpretation to Superintendent, April 23, 2003, 1; Chief of Interpretation to Superintendent, February 

13, 2004, 3; Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 

318 JCMM, March 15, 2011, Jewel Cave NM DF.

319 JCMM, August 30, 2011; Block to Johnson, Annual Report – Interpretive Division, September 30, 2012, 7.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 347

solution to the online ticket sales problem, the NPS signed an agreement with Black Hills Central 

Reservations to manage Jewel Cave’s cave tour ticket online sales, and the system went live in 

2017.320

Brochures and Maps 

Jewel Cave provided brochures, informational pamphlets, and newspapers to the public. In 

2000, interpretive staff worked with the Harpers Ferry Center (HFC) to convert the monument 

brochures to the black-banded “unigrid” design that the NPS was adopting as standard across all 

units.321 BHPFA funds supported other publications, such as a bulletin about bats in 2003 and park 

newspapers.322 Interpretive staff drafted a Climate Friendly Parks Site Bulletin in 2012 and 

periodically produced bulletins about natural and cultural resources.

323 They assisted with the 

monument’s website, which was converted to a standardized NPS format in 2000 and updated in 

2012 according to revamped NPS guidelines.324

In 2015, Jewel Cave contracted out the production of a new park film to Aperture Films, to 

replace an older one created by South Dakota Public Broadcasting. The older film lasted about 12 

minutes and provided general orientation. The new film used exploration as the central interpretive 

theme of the park. It improved “access” to the cave resource by showing viewers the far reaches of 

the cave, which only experienced cavers could see in person. Therefore, the monument was able to 

fund the film in part with NPS funds designated for projects that increased access to park resources. 

Interpretive and resource management staff completed the film script in 2016, which included 

interviews with explorers and audio from Jan Conn, singing a song she wrote and composed, called 

“It’s a Long, Long Crawlway.”325 Two caver cinematographers, who had filmed caves for National 

Geographic, filmed some of the video. However, they did not feel comfortable going deep into the 

cave, so volunteer cavers shot the deep cave footage.326

Junior Ranger and Youth Education/Outreach 

Jewel Cave interpretive staff offered a variety of educational and youth programs, both on site 

and in local schools and libraries. Staff participated in the Custer School District “Choice” program 

and then the “Adopt a Classroom” program to reach out to elementary schools and provide 

320 JCLTM, August 2, 2016, Jewel Cave NM DF; JCLTM, July 18, 2017; JCLTM, July 20, 2017.

321 Stoll, Superintendent’s Annual Narrative Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 2000; Chief of Interpretation 

to Superintendent, February 1, 2002, 3.

322 Chief of Interpretation to Superintendent, February 13, 2004, 5; JCMM, October 5, 2010; JCMM, September 6, 

2012, Jewel Cave NM DF; JCMM, March 12, 2015.

323 Block to Johnson, Annual Report – Interpretive Division, September 30, 2012, 13–14.

324 Stoll, Superintendent’s Annual Narrative Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 2000; Block to Johnson, 

Annual Report – Interpretive Division, September 30, 2012, 4.

325 JCLTM, August 2, 2016.

326 Conversation between Bradley Block and the author, June 29, 2019. 
348 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

students with cave tours (see Figure 158).327 Teachers could apply for an Academic Fee Waiver to 

bring their classes on cave tours free of charge, and the monument encouraged these field trips in 

January and February, when other visitation was low.328 Off-site offerings included programs for 

Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts and after-school library programs in Newcastle and Custer.329

Figure 158. Ranger Rene Ohms 

talks to students as part of the 

Adopt a Classroom program, 

2011.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

Jewel Cave interpretive staff applied for special grant funding for programming. For example, in 

2002, Jewel Cave received a $7,850 grant through the National Park Foundation for digital imaging 

products from Kodak.330 In 2010, Jewel Cave received a $9,958 grant from the National Park 

Foundation for a “Belt Loop-a-looza” program for Cub Scouts held at Jewel Cave in partnership 

with Wind Cave, Devils Tower, Black Hills National Forest, Custer State Park, and the BHPFA. 

Scouts came to Jewel Cave for a day and participated in activity stations on a day in July, and they 

327 Jewel Cave NM FY01 Superintendent’s Annual Report, 2001, 4; Chief of Interpretation to Superintendent, April 

23, 2003, 2; NPS, “Jewel Cave Bids Farewell the Superintendent Suess,” news release, February 5, 2010; JCSM, February 

26, 2008; JCSM, October 7, 2015, Jewel Cave NM DF.

328 “Jewel Cave National Monument Gears Up for School Programs,” news release, January 1, 2010, Cabinet 1, 

Drawer 3, Folder K3415 Press Releases, Jewel Cave NM CF. 

329 Stoll, Superintendent’s Annual Narrative Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 2000; Block to Johnson, 

Annual Report – Interpretive Division, September 30, 2012, 1; Block to Cremonini, FY16 Youth Programs 

Accomplishments Report, September 23, 2016, 1–2; PMIS 151979, “Develop Badge Partnership Between Jewel Cave 

National Monument and the BSA,” February 17, 2009, Cabinet 3, Drawer 3, Folder #151979 1569-YPP9-SSC FY09. 

Jewel Cave NM CF; JCMM, September 6, 2012; JCMM, October 9, 2012.

330 “Jewel Cave and Wind Cave Receive Grants from Kodak to Enhance Park Programs,” news release, May 6, 

2002, Cabinet 3, Drawer 3, Folder K3415 Press Releases, Jewel Cave NM CF. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 349

won belt loops for accomplishing the activities (see Figure 159).331 Other special programs included 

a Junior Spelunking project and badge and a curriculum project called “Project Underground” 

(taught by resource management staff), both of which were modeled after programs at other NPSmanaged caves.332

Figure 159. Jewel Cave held “Belt 

Loop-a-looza” events at the 

monument, in partnership with 

other NPS units, Custer State Park, 

and the BHPFA. Here, the event 

in 2011.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

In 2000, interpretive staff developed Junior Ranger booklets for Jewel Cave (one for ages 5–8 

and one for ages 9–12), which they tested the following year. They also developed a badge to give to 

children who completed a booklet.333 The BHPFA usually paid for the printing of Junior Ranger 

booklets and purchasing Junior Ranger patches. Jewel Cave held a Junior Ranger weekend in 2003, 

during which families could try out the new Junior Ranger booklet.334 More recently, the monument 

has held Junior Ranger Days on one Saturday per month throughout the summer, during which time 

interpretive staff offer hands-on activities in an effort to attract local families to the monument. 

Thousands of kids participate in the Junior Ranger program annually (6,000 in 2016 alone).335

331 JCMM, October 5, 2010; JCMM, December 7, 2010; Block to Johnson, Annual Report – Interpretive Division, 

September 30, 2012, 2; Jewel Cave Awarded National Park Foundation Impact Grants, news release, February 17, 2011, 

Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, Folder K3415 Press Releases, Jewel Cave NM CF.

332 JCLTM, June 14, 2016, Jewel Cave NM DF; Jewel Cave Hosts Teacher Workshop about Cave Education, news 

release, August 5, 2016, Drawer 1, Cabinet 2, [loose in drawer], Jewel Cave NM CF; Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 

2020. 

333 Jewel Cave National Monument, Long Range Interpretive Plan, Action Items – FY2001; Stoll, Superintendent’s 

Annual Narrative Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, 2000; Chief of Interpretation to Superintendent, April 23, 

2003, 4.

334 Jewel Cave NM FY01 Superintendent’s Annual Report, 2001, 6; Chief of Interpretation to Superintendent, April 

23, 2003, 4; Baldwin, Annual Narrative Report, Black Hills Parks & Forests Association, February 15, 2005; Steve 

Baldwin, Annual Narrative Report, Black Hills Parks & Forests Association, March 30, 2008.

335 Block to Johnson, Annual Report – Interpretive Division, September 30, 2012, 2; Block to Cremonini, FY16 

Youth Programs Accomplishments Report, September 23, 2016, 2.
350 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Exhibits

The fire exhibits installed outside the visitor center in 2002 were intended to be temporary, but 

they still stood a decade later. In 2011, the NPS contracted with Lyn Henley to complete a wayside 

exhibit plan for the outdoor areas of the monument. Henley’s contract included only the plan, not 

the installation of exhibits. As of 2020, no exhibits had been produced or installed.336

The visitor center originally housed formal, professionally curated and installed exhibits, along 

with temporary exhibits built in-house by interpretive or resource management staff. The latter 

included exhibits on monument history, speleothem protection, barometric winds, exploration, and 

other caves in the National Park System.337 The formal exhibits had not changed substantively since 

they were installed in 1972, although interpretive staff worked with Mount Rushmore and HFC 

curators to clean the speleothems in the exhibits and install new bases and signs.338 In 2011, Split 

Rock Studios won a contract to produce new visitor center displays at Jewel Cave, in partnership 

with the HFC and Jewel Cave staff. Fee revenues from cave tours paid for the $500,000 project, 

which was completed in 2013 (see Figure 160). These new exhibits more accurately represent current 

understandings of the cave and are more interactive than the previous exhibits.339

Figure 160. Jan Conn 

checks out the new 

visitor center 

exhibits, 2013.

Source: NPS, Jewel

Cave NM.

336 Betsy Ehrlich to Bradley Block, June 23, 2011, Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, Folder [no title], Jewel Cave NM CF; Henley 

Company, Trip Report, June 10, 2011, 1–7, Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, Folder [no title], Jewel Cave NM CF; JCSM, May 8, 

2012; Cockrell to Greenwald, April 7, 2020.

337 JCSM, September 18, 2001, Jewel Cave NM DF; Chief of Interpretation to Superintendent, February 1, 2002, 3; 

Chief of Interpretation to Superintendent, April 23, 2003, 3–4; JCSM, February 26, 2008.

338 JCSM, April 15, 2002, Jewel Cave NM DF; JSCM, April 30, 2002; Chief of Interpretation to Superintendent, 

April 23, 2003, 3–4.

339 JCMM, January 18, 2011; JCMM, July 26, 2011; Jewel Cave response to Midwest Region Call to Action, 2012, 

Cabinet 1, Drawer 4, [loose in drawer], Jewel Cave NM CF; “Jewel Cave Updates Display models, roads, and online 

presence,” Custer Chronicle, April 25, 2012, Cabinet 1, Drawer 3, Folder [no title], Jewel Cave NM CF; Nathan 

Ellenbecker, “Jewel Cave expanding visitor center, bookstore for educational opportunities,” Rapid City Journal, June 15, 

2015; Wiles, comments on draft, April 7, 2020. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 351

Conclusion 

Jewel Cave recovered from the devastating Jasper Fire with its buildings intact and the cave 

resource relatively unscathed, but fire focused new attention on fire management, exotic plant 

control, and the effects of surface hydrology on cave resources. While interpretation remained 

primarily focused on the cave, the Jasper Fire shifted some interpretive attention to the drastically 

changed surface environment. Natural resource managers made significant progress in this period, 

including the completion of a CKMP. The CKMP formalized exploration protocols consistent with 

responsible management of cave resources, while also providing for the safety of explorers (see 

Figure 161).

Jewel Cave National Monument exists for the purpose of protecting Jewel Cave, but the known 

size and extent of the cave is always changing. In the last several decades, protecting a changing and 

growing resource has become a central theme of both resource management and interpretation at 

the monument. 

Figure 161. Cavers have discovered over 200 miles of passageways in Jewel Cave, but there is much left to explore. Here, 

inside the cave in 2015.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 353

Chapter 8: Beyond 200 Miles

In December 2018, cavers surveyed the 200th mile 

of Jewel Cave. To celebrate the milestone, the Black 

Hills Parks and Forests Association (BHPFA) and the 

Paha Sapa Grotto of the National Speleological 

Society (NSS) assisted the park in hosting a 200-mile 

reunion in Custer the following June. Cavers who had 

explored Jewel Cave from the 1950s to 2019 attended, 

along with former and current National Park Service 

(NPS) staff, community partners, and other federal 

agency partners. Dwight Deal, Jan Conn, Mike Wiles, 

and Dan Austin gave talks on the history of 

exploration of Jewel Cave. Art Palmer emceed parts of 

the program. Dr. Andreas Pflitsch came from 

Germany to discuss his climatology research at Jewel 

Cave, Corissa Busse of The Nature Conservancy 

(TNC) spoke about land exchanges, and Forest 

Service and other state and federal partners discussed 

their cave management programs. 

Three generations of cavers—Jan Conn and

Dwight Deal, Mike Wiles, and Rene Ohms—took the 

stage on the last day of the reunion to answer 

questions about what it was like to explore Jewel Cave. They answered with humor and candor. 

Recalling the years when the NPS allowed only Herb and Jan Conn to enter the cave while they 

completed surveys of a new tour route, Jan remarked, “The Park Service stipulated that we weren’t 

supposed to have fun in there” (see Figure 162).1She confessed that she and Herb kept exploring 

new cave during this period despite the restrictions placed on them, and that Herb gave the NPS 

those surveys in small chunks once they were allowed to cave again, so as not to arouse suspicion. 

Jan said, “We felt we were pioneering just as much as they [the astronauts] were and nobody knew 

about it—not even the Park Service!”2

These explorers transformed Jewel Cave in only a century from a “small cave” in the side of a 

cliff to the third-longest cave in the world and a hub of speleological exploration and research. 

Through cavers and employees, the NPS has developed partnerships with the NSS and the National 

Cave and Karst Research Institute (NCKRI) to study the geology, hydrology, biology, and 

climatology of Jewel Cave, as well as the effects of human use on the resource. These organizations 

form far-flung communities of cavers and cave researchers who share knowledge to improve 

protection of cave resources. 

1

Jan Conn, “Informal Panel Session,” talk, Jewel Cave 200-mile Reunion, June 30, 2019, Custer, SD.

2

Jan Conn, “Jewel Cave Exploration from 1959–1979,” talk, Jewel Cave 200-mile Reunion, June 29, 2019, Custer, 

SD. 

Figure 162. Jan Conn reaches out a helping hand 

to a fellow caver.

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.
354 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Exploration of Jewel Cave has affected every aspect of management at the monument. For many 

years, Jewel Cave was considered a small cave, and federal agencies managed it under that 

assumption. The Forest Service invested almost nothing in its management and contracted out guide 

service. When the NPS took over in 1933, it continued to contract guide service when it could and, 

after that, sent over seasonal rangers from Wind Cave to give tours at Jewel Cave. The NPS only 

started staffing the site with full-time, year-round employees after Herb and Jan Conn’s initial 

explorations revealed that Jewel Cave was something more than “typical” and “small.” 

The Wind Cave superintendent oversaw Jewel Cave managers for decades, but the Jewel Cave 

manager position slowly gained more autonomy as the size of the known cave increased. For some 

time, the NPS used the senior position at Jewel Cave as a training superintendency for promising 

managers. As the size of Jewel Cave was found to be longer and longer, management became ever 

more complex, and Jewel Cave finally received an independent superintendency in the 2000s. 

Beyond the superintendent, Jewel Cave’s administrative structure remains lean. There are now 

division chiefs for interpretation, resource management, maintenance, and law enforcement, but the 

staffing of those divisions remains mostly seasonal. Because of this, volunteers and interns have 

performed significant roles for the monument. All of the cave exploration is carried out by 

volunteers: even staff who go caving log those hours as volunteer time. Interpreters and fee 

collectors are supplemented by Volunteers In Parks (VIPs) and Student Conservation Association 

(SCA) interns, and Youth Conservation Corps (YCC) crews have assisted with many maintenance 

projects over the years.

Partnerships also fill gaps in staffing. There is a long history of shared administrative services 

among Black Hills area parks, starting with the Black Hills Area Office in the 1950s, the Black Hills 

Administrative Group (BHAG) and the NEKOTA group in the 1990s and 2000s, and shared IT 

staff and regional administrative groupings that remain in 2020. Cooperative agreements with the 

Forest Service, Custer County Sheriff’s Office, and Mount Rushmore National Memorial provide 

law enforcement support for the cave. Wind Cave and Mount Rushmore maintenance crews assist 

Jewel Cave crews with large projects and lend expensive equipment, and Jewel Cave’s archival and 

museum collections are stored at the Mount Rushmore Curatorial Facility. Jewel Cave fire 

management is carried out through cooperative agreements with other NPS sites and the Forest 

Service.

Tours and visitor facilities changed markedly after the Conns’ initial discoveries. Tours through 

the Michauds’ entrance to the cave, led first by the Jewel Cave Corporation (JCC) and then by the 

NPS, traversed dim, small passageways on old wooden staircases. The Conns’ explorations led to 

skyrocketing visitation and miles of new cave that could potentially be opened up to the public. 

These discoveries prompted the NPS to scrap its plans for delisting the monument. Instead, the 

NPS initiated a land exchange with the Forest Service, drilled an elevator and a tunnel into the cave 

near Lithograph Canyon, built a state of the art, Mission-66-era visitor center on top of the shaft, 

and created a new cave tour. The new tour had metal platforms and stairs, lighting to illuminate cave 

features, an elevator to bring visitors down in comfort, and room to stand upright the entire length 

of the tour. Interpreters continued to offer what they now called the “Lantern Tour” from the 

historic entrance, a new caving tour to emulate exploration, and accessible tours for those not 

physically able to go deep in the cave. Exploration became an increasingly important interpretive 

theme, one that visitors could experience whether on one of the cave tours, reading the exhibits, or 

watching the park film. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 355

Managing a cave resource is a unique challenge that requires innovative solutions, because 

accepted methods of resource management rarely work in a cave environment. When cavers found 

more and more passageways under Forest Service land, NPS managers at Jewel Cave worked with 

the Forest Service to initiate mineral withdrawals and establish cooperative agreements. Some of the 

cave was under private land, so the NPS worked with the Forest Service and TNC on land 

exchanges in the Pass Creek area. To address issues of rockfall in the Target Room, accumulated lint 

from people entering the cave, algae from the cave lighting system, cave airflow from the artificial 

entrances, and mold growing from candle wax drippings, resource management staff at Jewel Cave 

experimented with different fixes until they found one that worked, and if that stopped working, 

they tried others. Managers in the 1980s and 1990s prioritized baseline studies of cave geology and 

biology to improve future management of cave resources by having historic data to compare to 

future findings. Resource management staff continue to explore novel solutions to problems and to 

communicate with other cave specialists to share best practices. 

Figure 163. Much of Jewel Cave remains unexplored. Here, an NPS employee inside of the cave. 

Source: NPS, Jewel Cave NM.

Exploration has always been an integral part of Jewel Cave, but it is now a formal part of its 

management and interpretive goals (see Figure 163). Mike Wiles explained: 

Going back thirty years, it was thought of as “those guys going in and exploring and it’s fun and it’s 

exciting,” but now it is formally what we do. [When the] next superintendent comes in, I mean, they 

might have different opinions. They have the capacity to do different things. But they’ll look at the 

management, that Foundation Document [and realize,] “oh, yeah, exploration’s what you do. It’s not 

an optional thing, and it’s not just for fun. . . . it is just fundamental to knowing what Jewel Cave is 

and how to manage it.3

3 Mike Wiles, interview by Jackie Gonzales, June 26 and 27, 2019, Custer, SD. 
356 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

NPS managers and cavers will be ready to meet challenges as they come, having learned from many 

years of exploration to embrace the unknown. That ethos is part of the culture of Jewel Cave and 

stays with people who work, explore, or visit the cave. As Herb and Jan Conn put it, 

All in all, our Jewel Cave adventure has taught us much more than where the passages go and how to 

refuel a carbide lamp. It has reached out to change our lives, our outlook, and our goals. Hiding in a 

tiny cranny from a tour one day, we overheard a question that convulsed us in silent giggles. “Is all of 

the cave underground?” But as we thought about it later and pondered the far-reaching effect that 

Jewel Cave has had upon us, we feel almost as if all of the cave is not underground. Surely there is a 

part of it that we take with us wherever we go.4

4 Herb and Jan Conn, The Jewel Cave Adventure: Fifty Miles of Discovery Under South Dakota (St. Louis: Cave Books, 

1977), 277. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 357

Appendix A: Legislation and Executive 

Orders Related to Establishment of Jewel 

Cave National Monument and its 

Boundaries

FIFTY-NINTH CONGRESS. SESS. I . CH,-, . 3060, 3061 . 1906.

225

CHAP. 3060.-An Act For the preservation of American antiquities .

June 8,1906. [s . 4698 .]

Be it enacted by the Senate and Ifouse of Representatives of the United [Public, No . 209.]

States of America 2R. Congress assembled, That any person who shall American antiquiappropriate, excavate, injure, or destroy any historic or prehistoric ties .

Penalty for unau . ruin or monument, or any object of antiquity, situated on lands owned thorized excavations,

or controlled by the Government of the United States, without the

etc .

permission of the Secretary of the Department of the Government

having jurisdiction over the lands on which said antiquities are situated, shall, upon conviction, be fined in a sum of not more than five

hundred dollars or be imprisoned for a period of not more than ninety

days, or shall suffer both fine and imprisonment, in the discretion of

the court .

SEC. 2 . That the President of the United States is hereby authorSetting apart of his.

toric, etc., public

ized, in his discretion, to declare by public proclamation historic land- lands .

marks, historic and prehistoric structures, and other objects of historic

or scientific interest that are situated upon the lands owned or controlled by the Government of the United States to be national monuments, and may reserve as a part thereof parcels of land, the limits of

which in all cases shall be confined to the smallest area compatible with

the proper care and management of the objects to be protected : ProProviso.

vided, That when such objects are situated upon a tract covered by a

Relinquishment of

bona fide unperfected claim or held in private ownership, the tract, or

private c laims .

so much thereof as may be necessary for the proper care and management of the object, may be relinquished to the Government, and the

Secretary of the Interior is hereby authorized to accept the relinquishment of such tracts in behalf of the Government of the United States .

SEC. 3 . That permits for the examination of ruins, the excavation Permits for excava.

of archaeological sites, and the gathering of objects of antiquity upon

tions, etc'

the lands under their respective jurisdictions may be granted by the

Secretaries of the Interior, Agriculture, and War to institutions which

they may deem properly qualified to conduct such examination, excavation, or gathering, subject to such rules and regulations as they may

prescribe : Provided, That the examinations, excavations, and gather- Pro -

iso .

Preservation in muings are undertaken for the benefit of reputable museums, universities, seums .

colleges, or other recognized scientific or educational institutions, with

a view to increasing the knowledge of such objects, and that the gatherings shall be made for permanent preservation in public museums .

SEC. 4 . That the Secretaries of the Departments aforesaid shall make

Regulations.

and publish from time to time uniform rules and regulations for the

purpose of carrying out the provisions of this Act .

Approved, June 8, 1906 .

CHAP. 3061 .-An Act To appropriate the sum of forty thousand dollars as a part June s, 1906. contribution toward the erection of a monument at Provincetown, Massachusetts, in [s . 4370 .]

commemoration of the landing of the Pilgrims and the signing of the Mayflower [Public, No . 210 .]

compact .

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

States of America in Congress assembled, That there is hereby appro- Provincetown,nrass.

Appropriation to aid

priated, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, in erecting monument

the sum of forty thousand dollars, to aid in erecting a monument at

of landing of Pilgrims.

Provincetown, Massachusetts, in commemoration of the first landing

of the Pilgrims on Cape Cod and the signing of the compact in the

cabin of the Mayflower in the harbor of said Provincetown : Provided, Provisos .

That the said Sum of forty thousand dollars shall not be payable until condition .

there shall have been raised and made available for the erection of

said monument an additional stud of at least forty thousand dollars :

I'roviderl, f+n thei , That the design of said monument shall be approved Approval of design

by the Secretary of War, the governor of the Commonwealth of alas- efC' vot . xxxiv, r •r 1-15
2180 PROCLAMATIONS, 1908.

February 7, 1908. BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

A PROCLAMATION

Jewel Cave Na- WHEREAS, the natural formation known as the Jewel Cave, tional Monument,

S. Dak. which is situated upon the public land, within the Black Hills

Preamble. National Forest, in the State of South Dakota, is of scientific interest, • Vl.30,p.1783.Nti

and it appears that the public interests would be promoted by reserving this formation as a National Monument, with as much land as

may be necessary for the proper protection thereof;

National monu- Now, therefore, I, Theodore Roosevelt, President of the United ment,S kota. South Da- States otf America, by virtue of the power in me vested by section two

Vol. 34, p. 25. of the Act of Congress, approved June eighth, nineteen hundred and

six, entitled, "An Act For the preservation of American antiquities,"

do proclaim that there are hereby reserved from settlement, entry, .and all forms of appropriation under the public land laws, subject

to all prior valid adverse claims, and set apart as a National Monument, all the tracts of land, in the State of South Dakota, shown as

the Jewel Cave National Monument on the diagram forming a part

hereof.

Forest uses not gf- The reservation made by this proclamation is not intended to pre- rected. vent the use of the lands for purposes consistent with the withdrawal

Vol. 29, p. 902. made by this proclamation, or for forest purposes under the proclamation establishing the Black Hills National Forest but the two reservations shall both be effective on the land withdrawn, but the

National Monument hereby established shall be the dominant reservation. Reserved f r o m Warning is hereby given to all unauthorized persons not to approsettlement, etc.

priate, injure, or destroy any feature of this National Monument or

to locate or settle upon any of the lands teserved by this proclamation.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and

caused the seal of the United States to be affixed.

Done at the City of Washington this 7th day of February, in the

year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and eight,

[SEAL.] and of the Independence of the United States the one

hundred and thirty-second.

THEODORE ROOSEVELT

By the President:

ELIHU ROOT

Secretary of State.

February 13, 1908. BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STAWES OF A3IERICA

A PROCLAMATION

Modoe National WHEREAS, it appears that the public good would be promoted b

Forest, Cal.

Preamble. adding to the Modoc National Forest certain lands, within the Stat

Vol. 33, p. 2380. of California, which are in part covered with timber;

Boundaries en- Now, therefore, I, Theodore Roosevelt, President of the United

larged. States of America, by virtue of the power in me vested by the Act of

Vol. 30, p. 3(6. Congress, approved June fourth, eighteen hundred and ninety-seven,

entitled, "An Act Making gppropriations for sundry civil expenses

of the Government for the fiscal year ending June thirtieth, eighteen

hundred and ninety-eight, and for other purposes," 'do proclaim that

the Modoc National Forest is hereby enlarged to include the said

additional lands, and that the boundaries of the aforesaid National

Poet, p. 2232. Forest are now as shown on-the diagram forming a part hereof;
Executive Order 6166 of June 10, 1933: Organization of Executive 

Agencies

WHEREAS section 16 of the act of March 3, 1933 (Public, No. 428, 47 Stat. 1517), provides for 

reorganizations within the executive branch of the Government; requires the President to investigate 

and determine what reorganizations are necessary to effectuate the purposes of the statute; and 

authorizes the President to make such reorganizations by Executive order; and

WHEREAS I have investigated the organization of all executive and administrative agencies of the 

Government and have determined that certain regroupings, consolidations, transfers, and abolitions 

of executive agencies and functions thereof are necessary to accomplish the purposes of section 16;

NOW, THEREFORE, by virtue of the aforesaid authority, I do hereby order that:

Section 1.--Procurement

The function of determination of policies and methods of procurement, warehousing, and 

distribution of property, facilities, structures, improvements, machinery, equipment, stores, and 

supplies exercised by any agency is transferred to a Procurement Division in the Treasury 

Department, at the head of which shall be a Director of Procurement.

The Office of the Supervising Architect of the Treasury Department is transferred to the 

Procurement Division, except that the buildings of the Treasury Department shall be administered 

by the Treasury Department and the administration of post office buildings is transferred to the 

Post Office Department. The General Supply Committee of the Treasury Department is abolished.

In respect of any kind of procurement, warehousing, or distribution for any agency the Procurement 

Division may, with the approval of the President, (a) undertake the performance of such 

procurement, warehousing, or distribution itself, or (b) permit such agency to perform such 

procurement, warehousing, or distribution, or (c) entrust such performance to some other agency, or 

(d) avail itself in part of any of these recourses, according as it may deem desirable in the interest of 

economy and efficiency. When the Procurement Division has prescribed the manner of 

procurement, warehousing, or distribution of any thing, no agency shall thereafter procure, 

warehouse, or distribute such thing in any manner other than so prescribed.

The execution of work now performed by the Corps of Engineers of the Army shall remain with 

said corps, subject to the responsibilities herein vested in the Procurement Division.

The Procurement Division shall also have control of all property, facilities, structures, machinery, 

equipment, stores, and supplies not necessary to the work of any agency; may have custody thereof 

or entrust custody to any other agency; and shall furnish the same to agencies as need therefore may 

arise.
The Fuel Yards of the Bureau of Mines of the Department of Commerce are transferred to the 

Procurement Office.

[Sec. 1 amended by EO 6623 of Mar. 1, 1934]

Section 2.--National Parks, Buildings, and Reservations

All functions of administration of public buildings, reservations, national parks, national 

monuments, and national cemeteries are consolidated in an Office of National Parks, Buildings, and 

Reservations in the Department of the Interior, at the head of which shall be a Director of National 

Parks, Buildings, and Reservations; except that where deemed desirable there may be excluded from 

this provision any public building or reservation which is chiefly employed as a facility in the work 

of a particular agency. This transfer and consolidation of functions shall include, among others, 

those of the National Park Service of the Department of the Interior and the National Cemeteries 

and Parks of the War Department which are located within the continental limits of the United 

States. National cemeteries located in foreign countries shall be transferred to the Department of 

State, and those located in insular possessions under the jurisdiction of the War Department shall be 

administered by the Bureau of Insular Affairs of the War Department.

The functions of the following agencies are transferred to the Office of National Parks, Buildings, 

and Reservations of the Department of the Interior, and the agencies are abolished:

Arlington Memorial Bridge Commission

Public Buildings Commission

Public Buildings and Public Parks of the National Capital

National Memorial Commission

Rock Creek and Potomac Parkway Commission

Expenditures by the Federal Government for the purposes of the Commission of Fine Arts, the 

George Rogers Clark Sesquicentennial Commission, and the Rushmore National Commission shall 

be administered by the Department of the Interior.

Section 3.--Investigations

All functions now exercised by the Bureau of Prohibition of the Department of Justice with respect 

to the granting of permits under the national prohibition laws are transferred to the Division of 

Internal Revenue in the Treasury Department.

All functions now exercised by the Bureau of Prohibition with respect to investigations and all the 

functions now performed by the Bureau of Investigation of the Department of Justice are 

transferred to and consolidated in a Division of Investigation in the Department of Justice, at the 

head of which shall be a Director of Investigation.

All other functions now performed by the Bureau of Prohibition are transferred to such divisions in 

the Department of Justice as in the judgment of the Attorney General may be desirable.
Section 4.--[Repealed]

[Sec. 4 repealed by Pub. L. 97-258 of Sept. 13, 1982 (96 Stat. 1086)]

Section 5.--Claims by or against the United States

The functions of prosecuting in the courts of the United States claims and demands by, and offenses 

against, the Government of the United States, and of defending claims and demands against the 

Government, and of supervising the work of United States attorneys, marshals, and clerks in 

connection therewith, now exercised by any agency or officer, are transferred to the Department of 

Justice.

As to any case referred to the Department of Justice for prosecution or defense in the courts, the 

function of decision whether and in what manner to prosecute, or to defend, or to compromise, or 

to appeal, or to abandon prosecution or defense, now exercised by any agency or officer, is 

transferred to the Department of Justice.

For the exercise of such of his functions as are not transferred to the Department of Justice by the 

foregoing two paragraphs, the Solicitor of the Treasury is transferred from the Department of 

Justice to the Treasury Department.

Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect the function of any agency or officer with respect 

to cases at any stage prior to reference to the Department of Justice for prosecution or defense.

Section 6.--Insular Courts

The United States Court for China, the District Court of the United States for the Panama Canal 

Zone, and the District Court of the Virgin Islands of the United States are transferred to the 

Department of Justice.

Section 7.--Solicitors

The Solicitor for the Department of Commerce is transferred from the Department of Justice to the 

Department of Commerce.

The Solicitor for the Department of Labor is transferred from the Department of Justice to the 

Department of Labor.

Section 8.--Internal Revenue

The Bureaus of Internal Revenue and of Industrial Alcohol of the Treasury Department are 

consolidated in a Division of Internal Revenue, at the head of which shall be a Commissioner of 

Internal Revenue.

Section 9.--Assistant Secretary of Commerce

The Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Aeronautics shall be an Assistant Secretary of Commerce 

and shall perform such functions as the Secretary of Commerce may designate.
Editorial note: The functions of all officials of the Department of Commerce were transferred to 

the Secretary of Commerce by Reorganization Plan No. 5 of 1950, 15 FR 3174, 3 CFR, 1949-1953 

Comp., p. 1004, effective May 24, 1950.

Section 10.--Official Register

The function of preparation of the Official Register is transferred from the Bureau of the Census to 

the Civil Service Commission.

Section 11.--Statistics of Cities

The function of the Bureau of the Census of the Department of Commerce of compiling statistics 

of cities under 100,000 population is abolished for the period ending June 30, 1935.

Section 12.--Shipping Board

The functions of the United States Shipping Board including those over and in respect to the United 

States Shipping Board Merchant Fleet Corporation are transferred to the Department of Commerce, 

and the United States Shipping Board is abolished.

Section 13.--National Screw Thread Commission

The National Screw Thread Commission is abolished, and its records, property, facilities, 

equipment, and supplies are transferred to the Department of Commerce.

Section 14.--Immigration and Naturalization

The Bureaus of Immigration and of Naturalization of the Department of Labor are consolidated as 

an Immigration and Naturalization Service of the Department of Labor, at the head of which shall 

be a Commissioner of Immigration and Naturalization.

Section 15.--Vocational Education

The functions of the Federal Board for Vocational Education are transferred to the Department of 

the Interior, and the Board shall act in an advisory capacity without compensation.

Section 16.--Apportionment of Appropriations

The functions of making, waiving, and modifying apportionments of appropriations are transferred 

to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget.

[Sec. 16 amended by EO 12608 of Sept. 9, 1987, 52 FR 34617, 3 CFR, 1987 Comp., p. 245]

Section 17.--Coordinating Service

The Federal Coordinating Service is abolished.

Section 18.--[Revoked]

[Sec. 18 revoked by EO 6586 of Feb. 6, 1934]
Section 19.--General Provisions

Each agency, all the functions of which are transferred to or consolidated with another agency, is 

abolished.

The records pertaining to an abolished agency or a function disposed of, disposition of which is not 

elsewhere herein provided for, shall be transferred to the successor. If there be no successor agency, 

and such abolished agency be within a department, said records shall be disposed of as the head of 

such department may direct.

The property, facilities, equipment, and supplies employed in the work of an abolished agency or the 

exercise of a function disposed of, disposition of which is not elsewhere herein provided for, shall, 

to the extent required, be transferred to the successor agency. Other such property, facilities, 

equipment, and supplies shall be transferred to the Procurement Division.

All personnel employed in connection with the work of an abolished agency or function disposed of 

shall be separated from the service of the United States, except that the head of any successor 

agency, subject to my approval, may, within a period of four months after transfer or consolidation, 

reappoint any of such personnel required for the work of the successor agency without 

reexamination or loss of civil-service status.

Section 20.--Appropriations

Such portions of the unexpended balances of appropriations for any abolished agency or function 

disposed of shall be transferred to the successor agency as the Director of the Budget shall deem 

necessary.

Unexpended balances of appropriations for an abolished agency or function disposed of, not so 

transferred by the Director of the Budget, shall, in accordance with law, be impounded and returned 

to the Treasury.

Section 21.--Definitions

As used in this order--

"Agency" means any commission, independent establishment, board, bureau, division, service, or 

office in the executive branch of the Government.

"Abolished agency" means any agency which is abolished, transferred, or consolidated.

"Successor agency" means any agency to which is transferred some other agency or function, or 

which results from the consolidation of other agencies or functions.

"Function disposed of" means any function eliminated or transferred.

Section 22.--Effective Date

In accordance with law, this order shall become effective 61 days from its date; Provided, That in case 

it shall appear to the President that the interests of economy require that any transfer, consolidation, 
or elimination be delayed beyond the date this order becomes effective, he may, in his discretion, fix 

a later date therefore, and he may for like cause further defer such date from time to time.1

1 According to the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), “The provisions of Executive Order 

6166 of June 10, 1933, do not appear in the Federal Register system.” The next above is from the NARA website, at 

https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/codification/executive-order/06166.html. 
PUBLIC LAW 89-250-OCT. 9, 1965

prospective serviceability in comparison with a new unit of like kind, but not to exceed fair market value. The provisions of this section

shall not apply to concessioners whose current contracts do not include

recognition of a possessory interest, unless in a particular case the

Secretary determines that equitable considerations warrant recognition

of such interest.

SEC. 7. The provisions of section 321 of the Act of June 30, 1932

(47 Stat. 412; 40 U.S.C. 308 (b)), relating to the leasing of buildings

and properties of the United States, shall not apply to privileges,

leases, permits, and contracts granted by the Secretary of the Interior

for the use of lands and improverients thereon, in areas administered

by the National Park Service, for the purpose of providing accommodations, facilities, and services for visitors thereto, pursuant to the

Act of August 25, 1916 (39 Stat. 535), as amended, or the Act of 16 usc 1.

August 21, 1935, chapter 593 (49 Stat. 666; 16 U.S.C. 461-467), as

amended.

SEC. 8. Subsection (h) of section 2 of the Act of August 21, 1935,

the Historical Sites, Buildings, and Antiquities Act (49 Stat. 666; 16

U.S.C. 462(h)), is amended by changing the proviso therein to read

as follows: "Provided, That the Secretary may grant such concessions,

leases, or permits and enter into contracts relating to the same with

responsible persons, firms, or corporations without advertising and

without securing competitive bids."

SEC. 9. Each concessioner shall keep such records as the Secretary Records.

may prescribe to enable the Secretary to determine that all terms of

the concession contract have been and are being faithfully performed,

and the Secretary and his duly authorized representatives shall, for

the purpose of audit and examination, have access to said records and

to other books, documents, and papers of the concessioner pertinent

to the contract and all the terms and conditions thereof.

The Comptroller General of the United States or any of his duly Availability.

authorized representatives shall, until the expiration of five (5) calendar years after the close of the business year of each concessioner or

subconcessioner have access to and the right to examine any pertinent

books, documents, papers, and records of the concessioner or subconcessioner related to the negotiated contract or contracts involved.

Approved October 9, 1965, 6:35 a.m.

Public Law 89-250

AN ACT October 9, 1965

To revise the boundary of Jewel Cave National Monument in the State of South [H. R. 9417]

Dakota, and for other purposes.

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

United States of America in Congress assembled, That, for the pur- National Jel Cave Monupose of including within the Jewel Cave National Monument signif- ment, S. Dak.

icant caverns and other geological features beneath lands within the

Black Hills National Forest adjacent to the national monument, the

boundary of said monument is hereby revised in accordance with

drawing numbered N.M.-J.C.-7100, dated June 10, 1964, prepared by

the National Park Service of the Department of the Interior. Lands

within the revised monument shall hereafter be administered in

accordance with the Act of Congress entitled "An Act to establish a

National Park Service, and for other purposes," approved August 25,

1916 (39 Stat. 535), as amended and supplemented. Lands excluded 16 USC 1 et

from the monument pursuant to this Act shall remain and be admin- . istered as a part of the Black Hills National Forest.

Approved October 9, 1965, 6:35 a.m.

79 STAT. ]
36 1980 SOUTH DAKOTA SESSION LAWS

WHEREAS, the increased authority of the secretary would result in a

commensurate reduction in the administrative authority and control of the

citizen lay boards including the state board of education, the state board

of vocational education, the board of regents, the board of cultural

preservation, the fine arts council, the state board of educational television and the state library commission; and

WHEREAS, the transfer of administrative control from citizen lay boards

to appointed officeholders is contrary to legislative intent expressed

since statehood through the establishment of citizen lay boards with administrative authority over the educational systems of our state; and

WHEREAS, the educational television board is the licensee of public

television in South Dakota under the Communications Act of 1934, as

amended, and any unauthorized transfer of control of the licensee would be

in contravention of section 301(d) of the Communications Act and the rules

and regulations promulgated thereunder by the Federal Communications Commission would result in the revocation of their license:

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Senate of the Fifty-fifth Legislature of the state of South Dakota, that Executive Order 80-2, presented

to the Fifty-fifth Legislature, as the same appears in the Senate Journal

on pages 140 to 143, inclusive, is hereby disapproved pursuant to section 8

of Article IV of the Constitution of the state of South Dakota.

CHAPTER 8

(S.B. 116)

JURISDICTION OVER CERTAIN LANDS CEDED

AND ACCEPTED FROM FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

AN ACT

ENTITLED, An Act to cede concurrent jurisdiction to the United States over

national park and monument land and to accept such jurisdiction over

certain federal lands used for park and monument purposes.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA:

Section 1. Concurrent jurisdiction over crimes and offenses under the

laws of the state of South Dakota is hereby ceded to the United States over

and within all the territory dedicated to national park, national memorial

and national monument purposes included in the tracts of land in South

Dakota designated as:

(1) Mount rushmore national memorial;

(2) Badlands national park;

(3) Wind cave national park;

(4) Jewel cave national monument.
STATE AFFAIRS AND GOVERNMENT - Chapter 8 37

Section 2. The concurrent jurisdiction ceded by section 1 of this Act

shall be vested upon acceptance by the United States by and through its

appropriate officials and shall continue so long as the lands within the

designated areas are dedicated to park purposes.

Section 3. The consent of the state is hereby given to the retrocession

of exclusive jurisdiction by the United States over lands owned by the

United States within the boundaries of badlands national park. The Governor

may accept retrocession of jurisdiction for the state.

Section 4. Upon the establishment of concurrent jurisdiction, the

appropriate county sheriffs with the approval of the appropriate state's

attorneys will develop memoranda of agreement with the park superintendents

of the national park service areas in South Dakota.

Signed February 27, 1980

CHAPTER 9

(H.B. 1098)

SALARIES OF STATE CONSTITUTIONAL

AND ELECTED OFFICERS INCREASED

AN ACT

ENTITLED, An Act to raise the compensation of certain state constitutional

and elected officers.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA:

Section 1. That § 1-7-5 be amended to read as follows:

1-7-5. The annual salary of the Governor of the state of South Dakota

is forty-five thousand dollars.

Section 2. That § 1-11-2 be amended to read as follows:

1-11-2. The annual salary of the attorney general is thirty-eight thousand dollars.

Section 3. That § 1-8-3 be amended to read as follows:

1-8-3. The annual salary of the secretary of state is thirty thousand

dollars.

Section 4. That § 1-9-2 be amended to read as follows:

1-9-2. The annual salary of the state auditor is thirty thousand

dollars.

Section 5. That § 1-10-3 be amended to read as follows:

1-10-3. The annual salary of the state treasurer is thirty thousand

dollars.

A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 371

Appendix B: Withdrawal from Mineral Entry 

of Forest Service Lands Above Jewel Cave

NOTICES

Copies of these diagrams are for sale

at one dollar ($1.00) per sheet by the

Cadastral Engineering Office, Bureau of

Land Management, 1245 North 29th

Street, Billings, Montana.

GEORGE L. TURCOTT,

Acting State Director.

[F.R. Doc. 61-4328: Filed, May 10, 1961;

8:47 a.m.] -

MONTANA

Notice of Proposed Withdrawal and

Reservation of Lands

MAY 3, 1961.

The Bureau of Reclamation, United

States Department of the Interior has

filed an application, Serial Number M043471 for the withdrawal of the lands

described below, from all forms of appropriation under the public land laws

including the general mining laws and

mineral leasing laws subject to valid

existing rights.

The applicant desires the land for a

material site for the construction of the

Clark Canyon Dam, East Bench Unit,

Three Forks Division, Missouri River

Basin Project, Montana.

For a period of 30 days from the date

of publication of this notice, all persons

who wish to submit comments, suggestions, or objections in connection with

the proposed withdrawal may present

their views in writing to the undersigned

officer of the Bureau of Land Management, Department of the Interior, 1245

North 29th Street, Billings, Montana.

If circumstances warrant it, a public

hearing will be held at a convenient time

and place, which will be announced.

The determination of the Secretary

on the application will be published in

the FEDERAL REGISTER. A separate notice

will be sent to each interested party of

record.

The lands involved in the application

are:

PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, MONTANA

T. 9 S., R. 10 W.,

Sec. 31, Lot 6, N1/2SE/.

The land described above contains an

area of 119.27 acres.

GEORGE L TURCOTT,

Acting State Director.

[F.R. Doc. 61-4327; Filed, May 10, i961;

8:47 a.m%]

MONTANA

Notice of Proposed Withdrawal and

Reservation of Lands

MAY 3, 1961.

The Forest Service, U.S. Department

of Agriculture has filed an application,

Serial Number M-037720 for the withdrawal of the lands described below,

from all forms of appropriation under

the General Mining Laws, but not the

mineral leasing laws and subject to valid

existing rights.

The applicant desires the land for the

Madison River Canyon Earthquake Area

to provide campgrounds, public service areas and an area of geologic interest to

the public.

For a period of 30 days from the date

of publication of this notice, all persons

who wish to submit comments, suggestions, or objections in connection with

the proposed withdrawal may present

their views in writing to the undersigned

officer of the Bureau of Land Management, Department of the Interior, 1245

North 29th Street, Billings, Montana.

If circumstances warrant it, a public

hearing will be held at a convenient time

and place, which will be announced.

The determination of the Secretary

on the application will be published in

the FEDERAL REGISTER. A separate notice

will be sent to each interested party of

record.

The lands involved in the application

are:

PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN MONTANA

GALLATIN NATIONAL FOREST

Potomageton Park Campground

T. 10 S., R. 3 E., Unsurveyed but when surveyed probably will be:

Sec. 33, NW/ 4 NE/ 4 .

Total area 40 acres.

Landslide Area

T. 11 S., R. 2 E.,

Sec. 35, Lots 1. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, N'ASI/ 1 ;

See. 36, Lots 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, NW'/4 SW!/, SE V4SE 14.

T. 12 S., R. 2 E.,

Sec. 1, Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, S'1N/2.

Total area 900.56 acres.

West Fork Beaver Creek Campground

T. 11 S.,R. 3 E.,

Sec. 4, S NE, N SEV4 . Total area 160 acres.

Red Canyon Campground and Fault Area

T. 11S., R. 4 E.,

Sec. 26, All.

Total area 640 acres.

Cabin Creek-nebgen Lake Faults and Beaver

Creek Campground Administrative and

Public Service Area

T. 11 S., R. 3 E.,

Sec. 13, S%;

Sec. 14, S1;

Sec. 15, Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, N1

/Sy 2, SW%

SW 1/;

Sec. 20, SE;

Sec. 21, All; -

Sec. 22, Lots 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, SWV

Sw ; Sec. 23, Lots 1, 3, 4,7, NEo ESE%, NWA

SEV4, NE '4NW A;

Sec. 24, All;

Sec. 25, Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, NNI/;

Sec. 26, Lots 1 and 2;

Sec. 27, Lot 3;

Sec. 28, Lots 1, 3, 5,.6;

Sec. 29, Lots 1, 4, IEVNE1/.

Total Area 3,664.88 acres.

The land described above contains an

area of 5,405.44 acres.

GEORGE L. TURCOTT,

Acting State Director.

[F.R. Doe. 61-4325; Piled, May 10, 1961;

8:46 a.m.]

SOUTH DAKOTA

Notice of Proposed Withdrawal and

Reservation of Lands

MAY 3, 1961.

The National Park Service has filed

an application, Serial Number M-043423

(SD) for the withdrawal of the lands

described below, from all forms of appropriation under the public land laws

including the general mining laws and

the mineral leasing laws, subject to valid

existing rights.

The applicant desires the land for protection of extensive caverns and underground passages originating within. the

Jewel Cave National Monument.

For a period of 30 days from the date

of publication of this notice, all persons

who wish to submit comments, suggestions, or objections in connection with

the proposed withdrawal may present

their views in writing to the undersigned

officer of the Bureau of Land Management, Department of the Interior, 1245

North 29th Street, Billings, Montana.,

If circumstances warrant it, a public

hearing will be held at a convenient

time and place, which will be announced.

The determination of the Secretary

on the application will be published in

the FEDERAL REGISTER. A separate notice

will be sent to each interested party of

record.

The lands involved in the application

are:

BLACK HILLS MERIDIAN, SOUTH DAKOTA

T. 3 S.,R.2 E.,

Sec. 36: S/.

T. 4 S., R. 2 E.,

Sec. 1: All; Sec. 2: SE4.

The land described above contains an

area of 1,119.84 acres.

GEORGE L. TuRCOTT,

Acting State Director.

[F.R. Doc. 61-4324;. Filed, May 10, 1961;

8:46 a.m.]

SOUTH DAKOTA

Notice of Proposed Withdrawal and

Reservation of Lands

MAY 3, 1961.

The South Dakota National Guard has

filed an application, Serial Number M034355(SD) for the withdrawal of the

lands described below, from all forms of

appropriation including the general

mining laws but not the mineral leasing

laws, subject to valid existing rights.

The applicant desires the land for a

field training site and emergency assembly area for combat engineers.

For a period of 30 days from the date

of publication of this notice, all persons

who wish to submit comments, suggestions, or objections in connection with

the proposed withdrawal may present

their views in writing to the undersigned

officer of the Bureau of Land Management, Department of the Interior, 1245

North 29th Street, Billings, Montana.

If circumstances warrant it, a public

hearing will be held at a convenient time

and place which will be announced.

The determination of the Secretary on

the application will be published in the

FEDERAL REGISTER. A separate notice will.

be sent to each interested party of

record.

The lands involved in the application

are:

4074
Thursday, May 11, 1961

BLACK HILLS MERIDIAN, SOUTH DAKOTA

T. 5 N., R. 5 E.,

See. 1: Lots 2, 3, 4;

Sec. 2: Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. 7, SI/2NV/, W 12SW 1/;

Sec. 3: Lots 1, 8, 9, 10. T. 6 N., R. 5 E.,

Sec. 26: Lots 5, 6, 7, 8, 8 ;

Sec. 27: Lots 4, 5, and 6; Sec. 34: Lots 5, 6, 7, and 8; Sec. 35: All;

See. 36: Lots 5, 6, 7, 8, Wy2 .

Total acres 2,113.13.

GEORGE L. TURCOTT,

Acting State Director.

[F.R. Doc. 61-4326; Flied, May 10, 1961;

8:47 a.m.]

Fish and Wildlife Service

BUREAU OF COMMERCIAL FISHERIES

Delegations of Authority

The regulations issued herein are based on the authority of the Director, Bureau

of Commercial Fisheries, to issue such

regulations. The requirements herein

set forth apply as a portion of the directives system of the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries. Such material follows the format of the Bureau's manual,

and is to be included therein. Material

that relates solely to internal management has not been included.

SERIES 2000-ADMINISTRATION

TITLE 2500-PROPERTY UTILIZATION

Chapter 2510-Delegations of Authority

2511.2 General delegation. The Assistant Director, Chief, Division of Administration, and Chief, Branch of Property Management, of the Washington Office, and Regional and Area Directors,

and such others as are specified in this

delegation are severally authorized,

unless specifically excepted to the extent

stated in each case, to exercise the au- thority of the Dirqctor with respect to

administrative matters listed herein.

A. Disaster assistance. Authorize and

be responsible for the utilization of materials, supplies, and equipment which are available so as 'to provide the maximum

assistance in major disasters upon the

request and authorization of the Office

of Civil and Defense Mobilization.

(205DM4).

B. Evacuation of employees' families. Designate or approve the zones from

which the immediate families of civilian

employees should be evacuated for military or other causes, which create imminent danger to life or property, or adverse living conditions seriously affecting the health, safety, or accom- modations of such families; and the

payment of travel and transportation - expenses to locations designated by the

said employees or, if such be impossible. or impracticable, to locations designated -by their immediate families, pursuant to

subsection (d) of section 1 of the Act of

August 2, 1946, as amended (5 U.S.C.

73b-ld), (Secretary's Order No. 2634,

dated May 17, 1951): Provided, That no evacuation shall be authorized or ap- proved for military purposes without

orders from the military authorities in

'charge of the area or place where the

FEDERAL REGISTER

families are living; Provided further,

That no evacuation shall be authorized or approved for non-military purposes

unless such action is fully justified by the circumstances including, but not

limited to, fires, floods, epidemics, earthquakes, or circumstances considered acts

of God. f .

C. Excess personal property. Exercise

the authority of the Director to dispose and/or transfer personal property excess to the needs of the Department of the Interior, including the donation and execu- tion of transfers and deliveries of donable

property, in accordance with the Federal

Property and Administrative Services Act

of 1949, as amended (40 U.S.C. 471 et

seq.) and regulations issued thereunder

by the Administrator of General Services. (Secretary's Order No. 2642, dated

June 19, 1951, and Secretary's Order No.

2830, dated September 8, 1958.)

D. Scientific research equipment. (1) Exercise the authority of the Director

to vest title to equipment purchased with

funds provided in a contract for basic or applied research to nonprofit institutions of higher education or nonprofit organizations whose primary purpose Is

the conduct of scientific research; (2) exercise the same authority for equipment purchased with funds provided in a grant for basic research to nonprofit institutions of higher education or non- profit organizations whose primary purpose is the gonduct of scientific research.

(42 U.S.C. 1892; 205 DM 9.1; and 418

DM 4).

E. Excess real property improvements.

Dispose of real property improvements,

except industrial improvements, having a fair market value of $1,000 or less located on government-owned land or on land leased to the Government, which

government-owned land or leasehold interest is not excess and is not expected to become excess, pursuant to regula- tions of the Administrator of the General Services. (Secretary's Order No.

2830, dated September 8, 1958.)

F. Quarters, subsistence, and services.

Require employees to occupy Government quarters, in accordance with 5

U.S.C. 75a-1 and 424 DM 3.2. (205 DM

10.1.) Fix rates to be charged for all

quarters, subsistence, and services furnished to Bureau employees, to other

Government employees, or to non-gov- ernment employees.

G. Records inspection. Make determinations with respect to the availability of official records for inspection or copying as authorized by Part 2, Title

43, Code of Federal Regulations: Pro- vided, That inspection or copying of

records shall be denied in all cases when

it is determined that the disclosure

would be prejudicial to the interests of

the Government and when the person making the request is not properly and

directly concerned with the subject

matter.

H. Issuance of permits. The Assistant

Director, Chief, Division of Administration, Chief, Division of Resource Development, and the Regional Director,

Region 1, may issue permits to Federal or State organizations, common carriers

and individuals for landing and remaining on the Pribilof Islands and to individuals to kill, capture, transport, im4075

port, offer for sale, or possess fur seals or fur seal skins in accordance with the

Fur Seal Act of February 26, 1944 (58 Stat. 100, 16 U.S.C. secs. 631, et seq.). 2511.3 Redelegation. A. With the ex- ception of the authority included in sec- tion 2511.2C, General Delegation, Excess

Personal Property, section 2511.2G, Gen- eral Delegation, Records Inspection, and

2511.2H, General Delegation, Issuance of permits, the foregoing authorities may not be redelegated.

B. The authority granted in section

2511.2C-Excess Personal Property, may be redelegated to:

1. Regional Offlces. Assistant Regional Directors, Chiefs, Division of Administrative Services and Property Management Officers.

2. Other Offices. 'Chief and Assistant Chief, Division of Administrative

Services, Hawaii Area; and Administrative Officer, California Area.

C. The authority granted in section

2511.2G-Records Inspection, may be re- delegated to:

1. Regional Offices. Assistant Re- gional Directors, Chiefs, Division of Ad- ministrative Services and Property Management Officers.

2. Other Offlces. Chief and Assistant

Chief, Division of Administrative Services, Hawaii Area; Administrative Officer, California Area; and all Station Chiefs.

D. The authority granted in section

2511.2H--Issuances of Permits, may be redelegated to the Assistant Regional Director, the Chief Division of Administrative Servi6es and the Program Director, Marine Mammal Resources, Region 1.

2511.4 Limitations. The foregoing authorizations shall be exercised in strict

conformity with applicable regulations,

statutory requirements, policies, and administrative procedures and subject to the availability of funds.

2511.5 Revocation All prior delega- tions and redelegations of authorities of

the types contained herein are hereby revoked. (Commissioner's Order No. 3

(22 P.R. 8126).)

MAY 8, 1961.

DONALD L. MCKERNAN,

Director.

[F.R. Doc. 61-4343; Filed, May 10, 1961; 8:48 a.m.]

CIVIL AERONAUTICS BOARD

[Docket 12367]

ALL NIPPON AIRWAYS CO., LTD.

Notice of Prehearing Conference

Notice is hereby given that a prehear- ing conference is assigned to be held on the .above-entitled application on May 16, 1961, at 10:00 a.m., e.d.s.t., in Room

701, Universal Building, Connecticut and

Florida Avenues NW., Washington, D.C., before Examiner Franklin M. Stone.

Dated at Washington, D.C., May 8, 1961.

[SEAL] FRANCIS W. BROWN,

Chief Examiner.

[F.R. Doc. 61-4346; Filed, May 10, 1961;

8:48a.m.]
Federal Register / Vol. 55, No. 97 / Friday, May 18, 1990 / Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

43 CFR Public Land Order

IMT-930-00--4214-10; SDM 767981

Withdrawal of National Forest System

Lands Near Jewel Cave National

Monument; South Dakota

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management,

Interior.

ACTION: Public Land Order.

SUMMARY: This order withdraws 2,387.22

acres of National Forest System lands

from mining for 20 years for the

protection of the unique cave resources

in the area surrounding Jewel Cave

National Monument. The lands have

been and remain open to such other

forms of disposition as may by law be

made of National Forest System lands

and to mineral leasing.

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 18, 1990.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

James Binando, BLM Montana State

Office, P.O. Box 36800,: Billings, Montana

59107, 406-255-2935.

By virtue of the authority vested in the

Secretary of the Interior by Section 204

of the Federal Land Policy and

Mangement Act of 1976, 90 Stat. 2751; 43

U.S.C. 1714, it is ordered as follows:

1. Subject to valid existing rights, the

following described National Forest

System lands are hereby withdrawn

from location and entry under the

mining laws (30 U.S.C., ch. 2), but not

from leasing under the mineral leasing

laws, to provide additional protection to

cave resources surrounding Jewel Cave

National Monument:

Black Hills Meridian

Black Hills National Forest.

T. 3 S., R. 2 E.. . Sec. 34, SS . T.4 S., R. 2 E.,

Sec. 2, lot 4. SW4NW4. SW excluding

that portion of the NEV4NE SWY4 east

of U.S. Highway 16, and those portions of

lot 3, SW NE4, and SE ANW A west of

U.S. Highway 16;

Sec. 3, lots to I to 4. inclusive, S AN , and

Sec. 10, N ;

Sec. 11, N%;

Sec. 12, S N . T. 4 S., R 3 L,

Sec. 6. lots 6 and 7. El/2SW' , and WI/2

SE/;

Sec. 7. lots I and 2, WANEA, and E

NW .

The areas described aggregate 2,387.22

acres, more or less, in Custer County.

2. The withdrawal made by this order

does notalter the applicability of those

public land laws governing the use of

the lands under lease, license, or permit,

or governing thedisposal of their

mineral or vegetative resources other

than under the mining laws.

3. This withdrawal will expire 20

years from the effective date of this

order unless. as a result of a review

conducted before the expiration date

pursuant to section 204(f) of the Federal

Land Policy and Management Act of

1976, 43 U.S.C. 1714(f), the Secretary

determines that the withdrawal shall be

extended.

Dated: May 16, 1990.

Dave O'Neal,

Assistant Secretary of the Interior.

(FR Doc. 90-11813 Filed 5-17-90 11:06 am]

BLUING CODE 4310-0N20766
Federal Register/Vol. 73, No. 76 /Friday, April 18, 2008/Notices

Dated: January 22, 2008.

Carl J. Artnian,

Assistant Secretary-Indian Affairs.

[FR Doc. E8-8334 Filed 4-17-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310-W7-P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

[NM-030-1220-NLCS]

Emergency Closure to Unpermitted

Collection of Petrified Wood and Plant

Fossils in the Robledo Mountains on

Federal Land, Dona Ana County, NM.

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management

(BLM), Interior.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that

certain public land located in the

southern Robledo Mountains, Dona Ana

County, New Mexico, is subject to an

emergency closure to unpermitted

collection (free use) of fossilized wood

and plant fossils. This closure is

necessary in order to prevent further

adverse impacts to paleontological

resources in the area while the formal

conservation status of the region'is

under determination. Closure will

remain in effect for 2 years and may be

renewed upon the completion of the

Tri-County Resource Management Plan.

Closure signs will be posted at main

entry points to this area. Maps of the

closure area, as well as documents

associated with environmental review of

this closure may be obtained at the Las

Cruces District Office.

DATES: This closure is effective upon

publication in the Federal Register, and

will remain in effect for two years from

April 18, 2008. This closure may be

renewed upon the completion of the

Tri-County Resource Management Plan.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tim

Sanders, Assistant District Manager,

Multi-Resources, 1800 Marquess Street,

Las Cruces, New Mexico 88005,

Telephone (575) 525-4393.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The area

has been proposed as an Area Of Critical

Environmental Concern and also is

under Congressional consideration for

National Monument status. A

management plan to address the longterm management of paleontological

resources would be initiated upon

designation. Resource damage has

already taken place and the potential for

additional adverse effects occurring as a

result of unrestricted collection within

this area is substantial and significant.

The authorities for this closure may be

found at 43 CFR Subpart 3622, and 43

CFR Subpart 8364. This order applies to

all forms of collection of fossilized plant

and petrified wood materials; all

unpermitted collection or free use of

fossilized plant and petrified wood

materials in the location identified in

this closure order is prohibited.

On all public land, under section

303(a) of the Federal Land Policy and

Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA), 43

U.S.C. 1733(a), 43 CFR 8360.0-7,'and 43

CFR 9262.1, any person who violates

any closures or restriction on public

land as announced in this order may be

tried before a United States Magistrate

and fined no more than $1,000.00 or

imprisoned for no more that 12 months,

or both. Such violations may also be

subject to enhanced fines provided for

by 18 U.S.C. 3571 (not to exceed

$100,000.00 and/or imprisonment not to

exceed 12 months).

The public land affected by the

closure order is located northwest of Las

Cruces, New Mexico, and west of

Interstate-25, in Dona Ana County, New

Mexico and is described as follows:

New Mexico Principal Meridian

T., 22 S., R. 1W.,

Section 24

Section 25 and

Portions of Sections 13, 14, 15, 22, 23, 26,

35, 36.

T. 22 S., R. 1 E.,

Portions of Sections 19, 30, 31.

The area described contains approximately

5,240 acres, more or less, of the Robledo

Mountain Range. Maps of the land affected

by this closure, as well as documents

associated with environmental review of the

closure are available in the Las Cruces

District Office, 1800 Marquess Street, Las

Cruces, New Mexico. The area affected by

this order will be posted with appropriate

signs announcing this closure.

Authority: 43 CFR 3622.3(a), and 43 CFR

8364.1.

Bill Childress,

District Manager, Las Cruces.

[FR Doc. E8-8384 Filed 4-17-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310-FB-P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

[MT-924-1430-FO; SDM 034316]

Public Land Order No. 7702; Partial

Revocation of Public Land Order No.

1446; South Dakota

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management,

Interior.

ACTION: Public Land Order.

SUMMARY: This order revokes a Public

Land Order insofar as it affects 20 acres

of public land within the Black Hills

National Forest withdrawn from surface

entry and mining and reserved for use

of the Forest Service as the Pactola

Administrative Site. The land is no

longer needed for administrative

purposes. This order opens the land for

sale.

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 19, 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sandra Ward, BLM Montana State

Office, 5001 Southgate Drive, Billings,

Montana 59101-4669, 406-896-5052.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

revocation is needed to facilitate a

Forest Service land sale conducted in

accordance with Public Laws 106-329

and 109-54.

Order

By virtue of the authority vested in

the Secretary of the Interior by Section

204 of the Federal Land Policy and

Management Act of 1976, 43 U.S.C.

1714 (2000), it is ordered as follows:

1. Public Land Order No. 1446 (22 FR

5873 (1957)), which withdrew public

land from surface entry and mining and

reserved it for use of the Forest Service

as the Pactola Administrative Site, is

hereby revoked insofar as it affects the

following described land:

Black Hills Meridian

Black Hills National Forest

T. 2 N., R. 5 E.,

Sec. 26, EI2NE ISE'/4.

The area described contains 20 acres in

Pennington County.

2. The above-described land is hereby

made available for sale in accordance

with Public Law 106-329 and Public

Law 109-54.

Authority: 43 CFR 2370.

Dated: April 3, 2008.

C. Stephen Allred,

Assistant Secretary-Land and Minerals

Management.

[FR Doc. E8-8409 Filed 4-17-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3419-11-P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

[SDM 94312]

Public Land Order No. 7705;

Withdrawal of National Forest System

Land To Preserve Cave Resources

Adjacent to Jewel Cave National

Monument; South Dakota

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management,

Interior.

ACTION: Public Land Order.

SUMMARY: This order withdraws

4,595.78 acres of National Forest System

21151
Federal Register/Vol. 73, No. 761Friday, April 18, 2008/Notices

land from mining for a period of 20

years to preserve unique cave resources

adjacent to Jewel Cave National

Monument. The land has been and will

remain open to such forms of

disposition as may by law be made of

National Forest System land and to

mineral leasing.

EFFECTIVE DATE: April 18, 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Valerie Hunt, U.S. Forest Service, Rocky

Mountain Region, 303-275-5122 or

Sandra Ward, BLM Montana State

Office, 5001 Southgate Drive, Billings,

Montana 59101-4669, 406-896-5052.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Geologicql

formations nearby indicate that

continued exploration may result in

discovery of additional passageways

and caverns beyond the known extent of

Jewel Cave. This order protects the

passageway and caverns extending

beyond the exterior boundaries of the

Jewel Cave National Monument.

Order

By virtue of the authority vested in

the Secretary of the Interior by Section

204 of the Federal Land Policy and

Management Act of 1976, 43 U.S.C.

1714 (2000), it is ordered as follows:

1. Subject to valid existing rights, the

following described National Forest

System land is hereby withdrawn from

settlement, sale, location or entry under

the United States mining laws (30

U.S.C. Ch. 2 (2000)), to preserve unique

cave resources adjacent to the Jewel

Cave National Monument:

Black Hills National Forest

Black Hills Meridian

T. 4 S., R. 2 E.,

Sec. 12, El/2SW/4 and SE'/4;

Sec. 13, E1/2 and E1/2NW'/4.

T. 4 S., R. 3 E.,

Sec. 5, lot 6 and lots 10 to 16, inclusive;

Sec. 6, lots I to 5, inclusive, S1/2NE'/4,

SE'/4NW'/4, and EI/2SE1/ 4;

Sec. 7, lots 3 and 4, E1/2NE'/4, E1/2SW/4,

and SE4/4;

Sec. 8, lots 1 to 16, inclusive;

Sec. 9, lots 4 to 8, inclusive, and lots 11

to 14, inclusive;

Sec. 16, lots 4, 5, 8, and 9, NW/4NW and SE'/4SW1/4;

Sec. 17, lots 1 to 14, inclusive;

Sec. 18, lots 1 to 4, inclusive, E/2, and E1/2W1/2;

Sec. 19, lots 1 and 2, NE1/4, and E'/2NW'/4;

Sec. 20, lots 1 to 9, inclusive, S1/zNEI/4,

SW'/ 4NW'/ 4 , NW1

/ 4SW'/ 4 , S/2SW/4, and

N'/2SE1

/4;

Sec. 21, lots I to 9 inclusive, and

NW'/4SW/4.

The area described contains 4,595.78 acres in Custer County.

3. The withdrawal made by this order

does not alter the applicability of those

public land laws governing the use of

National Forest System land under

lease, license, or permit, or governing

the disposal of their mineral or

vegetative resources other than under

the mining laws.

4. This withdrawal will expire 20

years from the effective date of this

order unless, as a result of a review

conducted before the expiration date

pursuant to Section 204(f) of the Federal

Land Policy and Management Act of

1976, 43 U.S.C. 1714(f) (2000), the

Secretary determines that the

withdrawal shall be extended.

Authority: 43 CFR 2310.3-3.

Dated: April 7, 2008.

C. Stephen Allred,

Assistant Secretary-Land and Minerals

Management.

[FR Doc. E8-8410 Filed 4-17-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

[CO-923-1430-ET; COC-69155]

Public Land Order No. 7700; Transfer

of Public Land for the Maybell West

Uranium Repository; Colorado

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management,

Interior.

ACTION: Public Land Order.

SUMMARY: This order permanently

transfers 160 acres of public land to the

Department-of Energy for its Maybell

West Uranium Repository, in

accordance with the terms of the

Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation

Control Act of 1978 (Public Law 95-

604), as amended.

EFFECTIVE DATE: April 18, 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Andy Senti, BLM Colorado State Office,

2850 Youngfield Street, Lakewood,

Colorado 80215-7093, 303-239-3713.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Umetco MayBell Uranium Mill Site has

been stabilized and the Department of

Energy plans to convert the site to a

uranium mill tailings repository. Under

Public Law 95-604, the Department of

Energy is legally obligated to become

the long-term custodian of the stabilized

Umetco Maybell Uranium Mill Site. The

long-term custodial responsibility is

perpetual and is administered by the

DOE under a Nuclear Regulatory

Commissibn license. The land must be

transferred in order for the Department

of Energy to execute its responsibilities

under Public Law 95-604.

Order

By virtue of the authority vested in

the Secretary of the Interior by the

Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation

Control Act of 1978 (42 U.S.C. 7916

(2000)), as amended, it is ordered as

follows:

1. Subject to valid existing right, the

following described public land is

hereby permanently transferred to the

Department of Energy, and as a result of

this transfer, the land is no longer

subject to the operation of the general

land laws, including the mining and

mineral leasing laws, for the Maybell'

West Uranium Repository:

Sixth Principal Meridian

T. 7 N., R. 95 W.,

Sec. 24, S1/NW'/4 and N/2SW/4.

The area described contains 160 acres in

Moffat County.

2. The transfer of the above-described

land to the Department of Energy vests

in that Department, full management,

jurisdiction, responsibility, and liability

for such land and all activities

conducted thereon, except as provided

in Paragraph 3.

3. The Secretary of the Interior shall

retain the authority to administer any

existing claims, rights, and interests in

this land that were established before

the effective date of the transfer.

Dated: March 27, 2008.

C. Stephen Allred,

Assistant Secretry-Land and Minerals

Management.

[FR Doc. E8-8418 Filed 4-17-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310-JB-P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Minerals Management Service

[Docket No. MMS-2008-OMM-0020]

Notice of Nominations Received and

Proposed Limited Alternative Energy

Leases on the Outer Continental Shelf

(OCS) and Initiation of Coordination

and Consultation

AGENCY: Minerals Management Service

(MMS), Interior.

ACTION: Announcement of nominations

and processing priorities, inquiry on

competing nominations for proposed,

limited alternative energy leases, and

request for comments from interested

and affected parties.

SUMMARY: On November 6, 2007, the

Minerals Management Service (MMS)

published in the Federal Register (72

FR 214, pp. 62673-62675) a request for

information and nominations of areas

for leases authorizing alternative energy

21152
Federal Register/Vol. 80, No. 167/Friday, August 28, 2015/Notices

Education, Office of the Director,

Washington, DC 20240, (202) 208-5810.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Background

In 2013, Secretary of the Interior and

Secretary of Education convened an

American Indian Education Study

Group (Study Group) to diagnose the

systemic challenges facing the Bureau of

Indian Education (BIE) and to propose

a comprehensive plan for reform to

ensure all students attending BIEfunded schools receive a world-class

education. The Study Group drafted a

framework for reform based on several

listening sessions in the fall of 2013

with tribal leaders, Indian educators and

others throughout Indian Country on

how to facilitate tribal sovereignty in

American Indian education and how to

improve educational outcomes for

students at BIE-funded schools. Overall,

the Study Group met with nearly 400

individuals and received nearly 200

comments that helped it prepare the

draft framework for educational reform

that became the subject of four tribal

consultation sessions held in April and

May of 2014. These efforts resulted in

"Findings and Recommendations

Prepared by the Bureau of Indian

Education Study Group, dated June 27,

2014" (Blueprint for Reform).

Acting on the recommendations in the

Blueprint, BIE will award enhancement

funds to tribes and their tribal education

agencies to promote tribal control and

operation of BIE-funded schools on their

Indian reservations. The purpose of

these funds is to support the tribe's

capacity to manage and operate tribally

controlled schools as defined in the

Tribally Controlled Schools Act of 1988

(Pub. L. 100-297). These funds will (a)

support development of a school-reform

plan to improve educational outcomes

for students and (b) improve efficiencies

and effectiveness in the operation of

BIE-funded schools within a

reservation.

Enhancement funding will range from

$100,000 to $200,000 per fiscal year

depending on the number of schools

involved, number of students,

complexity of creating a new tribally

managed school system and the tribe's

technical approach. These funds will

provide funds for the tribe to:

* Research and develop an alternative

definition of adequate yearly progress

(AYP);

* Develop an implementation plan

that will reform a tribe's current

organizational structure towards an

expert and independent tribal education

agency that will support schools and

students; and

* Cover the execution of the

implementation plan with identified

staffing, projected timelines, proposed

budgets, and activities.

BIE is seeking proposals from tribes

that support efforts to take control and

operate BIE-funded schools located on

the tribe's reservation. Each proposal

must include a project narrative, a

budget narrative, a work plan outline,

and a Project Director to manage the

execution of the grant. The Project

Directors will participate in monthly

collaboration meetings, submit quarterly

budget updates, ensure an annual report

is submitted at the end of each project

year, and ultimately ensure that the

tribal education agency fulfills the

obligations of the grant. Complete

details on requirements for proposals

and the evaluation and selection process

can be found on the BIE Web site at the

address in the ADDRESSES section of this

notice. In addition, BIE will hold pregrant proposal training as noted below:

BIE PRE-GRANT PROPOSAL TRAINING

Date Time Location

Tuesday, September 1, 2015 ......... 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time ................. Webinar Session (Washington, DC): To register, go to: https://

dcma 100. webex.com/dcma 100/k2/.php?MTID=tOOOe99c4eOd

9f65d3114d32015e04a 74

Thursday, September 8, 2015 ........ 11:00 a.m. Eastern Time ............... Webinar Session (Washington, DC) To register, got to: https://

dcma 100. webex.com/dcma 100/k2/.php?MTID=tf2b~f596

b 10eb0d91240198a49afcf89

Monday, September 21, 2015 ........ 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time ................. Deadline for grant proposal submission.

The grant proposal is due September

21, 2015, at 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time. The

proposal should be packaged for

delivery to permit timely arrival. The

proposal package should be sent or

hand delivered address in the

ADDRESSES section of this notice.

Fax applications will NOT be

accepted. Email submissions will be

accepted at the address in the

ADDRESSES section of this notice. Email

submissions are limited to attachments

compatible with Microsoft Office Word

2007 or later or files with a .pdf file

extension. Emailed submissions shall

not exceed 3MB total in size.

Proposals submitted by Federal

Express or Express Mail should be sent

two or more days prior to the closing

date. The proposal package should be

sent to the address shown in the

ADDRESSES section of this notice. The

tribe is solely responsible for ensuring

its proposal arrives in a timely manner.

Dated: August 24, 2015.

Kevin K. Washburn,

Assistant Secretary-Indian Affairs.

[FR Doe. 2015-21338 Filed 8-27-15; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4337-15-P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

[SDM 100347]

Public Land Order No. 7838;

Withdrawal of National Forest System

Land Adjacent to Jewel Cave National

Monument; South Dakota

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management,

Interior.

ACTION: Public Land Order.

SUMMARY: This order withdraws

2,387.22 acres of National Forest System

land from location and entry under the

United States mining laws for a period

of 20 years on behalf of the United

States Forest Service to protect the

unique cave resources in the area

adjacent to the Jewel Cave National

Monument.

DATES: Effective Date: August 28, 2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Valerie Hunt, U.S. Forest Service,

Region 2, 740 Simms Street, Golden,

Colorado 80401, 303-275-5071,

vbhunt@fs.fed.us, or Deborah Sorg,

Bureau of Land Management, Montana

State Office, 5001 Southgate Drive,

Billings, Montana 59101, 406-896-

5045, dsorg@blm.gov. Persons who use

a telecommunications device for the

deaf (TDD) may call the Federal

Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-

800-877-8339 to contact either of the

above individuals. The FIRS is available

24 hours a day, 7 days a week, to leave

a message or question with either of the

52334
Federal Register/Vol. 80, No. 167/Friday, August 28, 2015/Notices

above individuals. You will receive a

reply during normal business hours.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

United States Forest Service is

managing the land to protect the

significant cave ecosystems located

within the Black Hills National Forest

adjacent to Jewel Cave National

Monument.

Order

By virtue of the authority vested in

the Secretary of the Interior by Section

204 of the Federal Land Policy and

Management Act of 1976, 43 U.S.C.

1714, it is ordered as follows:

1. Subject to valid existing rights, the

following described National Forest

System land is hereby withdrawn from

location and entry under the United

States mining laws, but not from leasing

under the mineral leasing laws, to

protect the unique cave resources in the

land adjacent to Jewel Cave National

Monument:

Black Hills National Forest

Black Hills Meridian

T. 3 S., R. 2 E.,

Sec. 34, 1/2SW'/4 and 1/2SE1/4.

T. 4 S., R. 2 E.,

Sec. 2, lot 4, SW'/ 4NW'/4, SW'/4 excluding

that portion of the NE'/ 4NE'/4SW'/4 east

of U.S. Highway 16, and those portions

of lot 3, SW'/ 4 NE1/4, and SE'/ 4NW'/4 west

of U.S. Highway 16;

Sec. 3, lots 1 to 4, inclusive, 51/ 2NE1/4,

5'/ 2NW'/4, and 51/2;

Sec. 10, N1/2;

Sec. 11, N1/2 ;

Sec. 12, 51/ 2NE1/4 and 51/2 NW/4.

T. 4 S., R. 3 E.,

Sec. 6, lots 6 and 7, E1/2SW/4, and

W / 2 SE 1/4;

Sec. 7, lots 1 and 2, W/ 2NE1/4, and

E1/2NW1/4 .

The area described contains 2,387.22 acres

in Custer County.

2. The withdrawal made by this order

does not alter the applicability of the

public land laws other than the mining

laws.

3. This withdrawal will expire 20

years from the effective date of this

order, unless, as a result of a review

conducted before the expiration date

pursuant to Section 204(f) of the Federal

Land Policy and Management Act of

1976, 43 U.S.C. 1714(f), the Secretary

determines that the withdrawal shall be

extended.

Dated: August 8, 2015.

Janice M. Schneider,

Assistant Secretary, Land and Minerals

Management.

[FR Doe. 2015-21327 Filed 8-27-15; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3411-15-P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service

[NPS-WASO-NRNHL-19066;

PPWOCRADIO, PCUOORP14.R50000]

National Register of Historic Places;

Notification of Pending Nominations

and Related Actions

Nominations for the following

properties being considered for listing

or related actions in the National

Register were received by the National

Park Service before August 8, 2015.

Pursuant to section 60.13 of 36 CFR part

60, written comments are being

accepted concerning the significance of

the nominated properties under the

National Register criteria for evaluation.

Comments may be forwarded by United

States Postal Service, to the National

Register of Historic Places, National

Park Service, 1849 C St. NW., MS 2280,

Washington, DC 20240; by all other

carriers, National Register of Historic

Places, National Park Service,1201 Eye

St. NW., 8th floor, Washington, DC

20005; or by fax, 202-371-6447. Written

or faxed comments should be submitted

by September 14, 2015. Before including

your address, phone number, email

address, or other personal identifying

information in your comment, you

should be aware that your entire

comment-including your personal

identifying information-may be made

publicly available at any time. While

you can ask us in your comment to

withhold your personal identifying

information from public review, we

cannot guarantee that we will be able to

do so.

Dated: August 13, 2015.

J. Paul Loether,

Chief, National Register of Historic Places/

National Historic Landmarks Program.

COLORADO

El Paso County

Old North End Historic District (Boundary

Increase), Bounded by Monument Valley

Park, alley between Nevada Ave. & Weber

St., Lilac, & Uintah Sts.,Colorado Springs,

15000585

CONNECTICUT

New Haven County

United States Post Office and Court House,

145 Church St.,New Haven, 15000586

FLORIDA

Alachua County

Weil-Cassisi House, (Sarasota School of

Architecture MPS)3105 SW. 5th Ct.,

Gainesville, 15000587

Palm Beach County

Royal Poinciana Way Historic District,

Bounded by 207-283 Royal Poinciana

Way, 95-118 N. Cty. Rd. 184-280, Palm

Beach, 15000588

GEORGIA

Troup County

Riverside Club-Magnolia Club, 802 1st

Ave.,West Point, 15000589

ILLINOIS

McLean County

Van Dolah, David Hyatt, House, 10 N.

Spencer St.,Lexington, 15000590

INDIANA

Boone County

Ulen Historic District, (Historic Residential

Suburbs in the United States, 1830-1960

MPS) Roughly Ulen Country Club & Golf

Course & houses along Ulen Blvd. & East

Dr., Ulen, 15000591

Carroll County

Delphi Methodist Episcopal Church,118 N.

Union St., Delphi, 15000592

Fountain County

Covington Courthouse Square Historic

District,Roughly bounded by 3rd St. &

alleys N. of Washington, E. of 4th & S. of

Liberty Sts., Covington, 15000593

Covington Residential Historic District,

Roughly bounded by Pearl, Liberty, 4th &

7th Sts., Covington, 15000594

Hancock County

Browne-Rafert House, 534 N. Merrill St.,

Fortville, 15000595

Madison County

Lauter, H., Company Complex,35-101 S.

Harding St., Indianapolis, 15000596

Noble County

Cromwell Historic District,Jefferson between

2nd & Orange Sts.,Cromwell, 15000597

Putnam County

Forest Hill Cemetery, 2181 S. Cty. Rd. 50

W.,Greencastle, 15000598

Tippecanoe County

Archeological Sites 12T59 and

12T530,Address Restricted, West Lafayette,

15000599

Wabash County

Hopewell Methodist Episcopal Church and

Cemetery, 5031 E. 300 N.,Urbana,

15000600

Warren County

Van Reed Farmstead, 5322 Old US

41,Williamsport, 15000601

Wayne County

Richmond High School, 380 Hub Etchison

Pkwy.,Richmond, 15000602

MARYLAND

Baltimore Independent city

Auchentoroly Terrace Historic

District,Roughly bounded by Auchentoroly

Terrace, Reisterstown Rd., Liberty Heights

& Fulton Aves., Baltimore (Independent

City), 15000604

52335

A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 381

Appendix C: Legislation Pertaining to Cave 

Resource Management

PUBLIC LAW 100-691-NOV. 18, 1988

Public Law 100-691

100th Congress

Nov. 18, 1988

[H.R. 1975]

Federal Cave

Resources

Protection Act of

1988.

Minerals and

mining.

Conservation.

16 USC 4301

note.

16 USC 4301.

To protect cave resources on Federal lands, and for other purposes.

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

United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be referred to as the "Federal Cave Resources

Protection Act of 1988".

SEC. 2. FINDINGS, PURPOSES, AND POLICY.

(a) FINDING.-The Congress finds and declares that-

(1) significant caves on Federal lands are an invaluable and

irreplaceable part of the Nation's natural heritage; and

(2) in some instances, these significant caves are threatened

due to improper use, increased recreational demand, urban

spread, and a lack of specific statutory protection. (b) PusPosEs.-The purposes of this Act are-

(1) to secure, protect, and preserve significant caves on Federal lands for the perpetual use, enjoyment, and benefit of all

people; and

(2) to foster increased cooperation and exchange of information between governmental authorities and those who utilize

caves located on Federal lands for scientific, education, or recreational purposes.

(c) POLICY.-It is the policy of the United States that Federal lands

be managed in a manner which protects and maintains, to the

extent practical, significant caves.

16 USC 4302. SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

For purposes of this Act:

(1) CAVE.-The term "cave" means any naturally occurring

void, cavity, recess, or system of interconnected passages which

occurs beneath the surface of the earth or within a cliff or ledge

(including any cave resource therein, but not including any vug,

mine, tunnel, aqueduct, or other manmade excavation) and

which is large enough to permit an individual to enter, whether

or not the entrance is naturally formed or manmade. Such term

shall include any natural pit, sinkhole, or other feature which is

an extension of the entrance.

(2) FEDERAL LANDs.-The term "Federal lands" means lands

the fee title to which is owned by the United States and

administered by the Secretary of Agriculture or the Secretary of

the Interior.

(3) INDIAN LANDS.-The term "Indian lands" means lands of

Indian tribes or Indian individuals which are either held in

trust by the United States for the benefit of an Indian tribe or

subject to a restriction against alienation imposed by the United

States.

An Act

102 STAT. 4546
PUBLIC LAW 100-691-NOV. 18, 1988

(4) INDIAN TmEa.-The term "Indian tribe" means any Indian

tribe, band, nation, or other organized group or community of

Indians, including any Alaska Native village or regional or

village corporation as defined in, or established pursuant to, the

Alaska Native Claims settlement Act (43 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.).

(5) CAvE RIsouIcJ.-The term "cave resource" includes any

material or substance occurring naturally in caves on Federal

lands, such as animal life, plant life, paleontological deposits,

sediments, minerals, speleogens, and speleothems.

(6) SECRETARY.-The term "Secretary" means the Secretary of

Agriculture or the Secretary of the Interior, as appropriate.

(7) SPEIEoTHrm.-The term "speleothem" means any natural

mineral formation or deposit occurring in a cave or lava tube,

including but not limited to any stalactite, stalagmite, helictite,

cave flower, flowstone, concretion, drapery, rimstone, or formation of clay or mud.

(8) SPELzoGEN.-The term "speleogen" means relief features

on the walls, ceiling, and floor of any cave or lava tube which

are part of the surrounding bedrock, including but not limited

to anastomoses, scallops, meander niches, petromorphs and rock

pendants in solution caves and similar features unique to volcanic caves.

SEC. 4. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS. 16 USC 4303.

(a) REGULATIONS.-Not later than nine months after the date of

the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall issue such regulations

as he deems necessary to achieve the purposes of this Act. Regulations shall include, but not be limited to, criteria for the identification of significant caves. The Secretaries shall cooperate and consult

with one another in preparation of the regulations. To the extent

practical, regulations promulgated by the respective Secretaries

should be similar.

(b) IN GmENa.AL.-The Secretary shall take such actions as may be

necessary to further the purposes of this Act. Those actions shall

include (but need not be limited to)-

(1) identification of significant caves on Federal lands:

(A) The Secretary shall prepare an initial list of signifi- Records.

cant caves for lands under his jurisdiction not later than

one year after the publication of final regulations using the

significance criteria defined in such regulations. Such a list

shall be developed after consultation with appropriate private sector interests, including cavers.

(B) The initial list of significant caves shall be updated

periodically, after consultation with appropriate private

sector interests, including cavers. The Secretary shall pre- Regulations.

scribe by policy or regulation the requirements and process

by which the initial list will be updated, including management measures to assure that caves under consideration for

the list are protected during the period of consideration.

Each cave recommended to the Secretary by interested

groups for possible inclusion on the list of significant caves

shall be considered by the Secretary according to the

requirements prescribed pursuant to this paragraph, and

shall be added to the list if the Secretary determines that

the cave meets the criteria for significance as defined by the

regulations.

102 STAT. 4547
PUBLIC LAW 100-691-NOV. 18, 1988

(2) regulation or restriction of use of significant caves, as

appropriate; Contracts. (3) entering into volunteer management agreements with

persons of the scientific and recreational caving community;

and

(4) appointment of appropriate advisory committees.

(C) PLANNING AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION.-The Secretary shall-

(1) ensure that significant caves are considered in the

preparation or implementation of any land management plan if

the preparation or revision of the plan began after the enactment of this Act; and

(2) foster communication, cooperation, and exchange of

information between land managers, those who utilize caves,

and the public.

16 USC 4304. SEC. 5. COFIDENTIALITY OF INFORMATION CONCERNING NATURE

AND LOCATION OF SIGNIFICANT CAVES.

(a) IN GmNuA.-Information concerning the specific location of

any significant cave may not be made available to the public under

section 552 of title 5, United States Code, unless the Secretary determines that disclosure of such information would further the

purposes of this Act and would not create a substantial risk of harm,

theft, or destruction of such cave.

State and local (b) ExcPToNs.-Notwithstanding subsection (a), the Secretary governments. may make available information regarding significant caves upon Schools and the written request by Federal and State governmental agencies or bona fide educational and research institutions. Any such written

request shall, at a minimum-

(1) describe the specific site or area for which information is

sought; (2) explain the purpose for which such information is sought;

and

(3) include assurances satisfactory to the Secretary that adequate measures are being taken to protect the confidentiality of

such information and to ensure the protection of the significant

cave from destruction by vandalism and unauthorized use.

16 USC 4305. SEC. 6. COLLECTION AND REMOVAL FROM FEDERAL CAVES.

(a) Pmurr.-The Secretary is authorized to issue permits for the

collection and removal of cave resources under such terms and

conditions as the Secretary may impose, including the posting of

bonds to insure compliance with the provisions of any permit: (1) Any permit issued pursuant to this section shall include

information concerning the time, scope, location, and specific

purpose of the proposed collection, removal or associated activity, and the manner in which such collection, removal, or

associated activity is to be performed must be provided. (2) The Secretary may issue a permit pursuant to this subsection only if he determines that the proposed collection or removal activities are consistent with the purposes of this Act,

and with other applicable provisions of law.

(b) REVOCATION OF PmMrr.-Any permit issued under this section

shall be revoked by the Secretary upon a determination by the

Secretary that the permittee has violated any provision of this Act,

or has failed to comply with any other condition upon which the

permit was issued. Any such permit shall be revoked by the Secretary upon assessment of a civil penalty against the permittee

102 STAT. 4548
PUBLIC LAW 100-691-NOV. 18, 1988

pursuant to section 8 or upon the permittee's conviction under

section 7 of this Act. The Secretary may refuse to issue a permit

under this section to any person who has violated any provision of

this Act or who has failed to comply with any condition of a prior

permit.

(c) TANsmAmrY oF Pmdrr.-Permits issued under this Act

are not transferable.

(d) CAVE REsoucEs LOCATED ON INIAw LANs.-(1)(A) Upon application by an Indian tribe, the Secretary is authorized to delegate to the tribe all authority of the Secretary under this section

with respect to issuing and enforcing permits for the collection or

removal of any cave resource, or to carrying out activities associated

with such collection or removal, from any cave resource located on

the affected Indian lands.

(B) In the case of any permit issued by the Secretary for the

collection or removal of any cave resource, or to carry out activities

associated with such collection or removal, from any cave resource

located on Indian lands (other than permits issued pursuant to

subparagraph (A)), the permit may be issued only after obtaining the consent of the Indian or Indian tribe owning or having jurisdiction over such lands. The permit shall include such reasonable

terms and conditions as may be requested by such Indian or Indian

tribe.

(2) If the Secretary determines that issuance of a permit pursuant Religion.

to this section may result in harm to, or destruction of, any religious

or cultural site, the Secretary, prior to issuing such permit, shall

notify any Indian tribe which may consider the site as having

significant religious or cultural importance. Such notice shall not be

deemed a disclosure to the public for purposes of section 5.

(3) A permit shall not be required under this section for the

collection or removal of any cave resource located on Indian lands or

activities associated with such collection, by the Indian or Indian

tribe owning or having jurisdiction over such lands.

(e) Err~cr oF PRMirr.-No action specifically authorized by a

permit under this section shall be treated as a violation of section 7.

819C. 7. PROHIBITED ACTS AND CRIMINAL PENALTIES. 16 USC 4306.

(a) PRomIrED Acts.-

(1) Any person who, without prior authorization from the Animals.

Secretary knowingly destroys, disturbs, defaces, mars, alters, Plants.

removes or harms any significant cave or alters the free movement of any animal or plant life into or out of any significant

cave located on Federal lands, or enters a significant cave with

the intention of committing any act described in this paragraph

shall be punished in accordance with subsection (b). (2) Any person who possesses, consumes, sells, barters or

exchanges, or offers for sale, barter or exchange, any cave

resource from a significant cave with knowledge or reason to

know that such resource was removed from a significant cave

located on Federal lands shall be punished in accordance with

subsection (b).

(3) Any person who counsels, procures, solicits, or employs

any other person to violate any provisions of this subsection

shall be punished in accordance with section (b). (4) Nothing in this section shall be deemed applicable to any

person who was in lawful possession of a cave resource from a

significant cave prior to the date of enactment of this Act.

102 STAT. 4549
PUBLIC LAW 100-691-NOV. 18, 1988

(b) PUNISHMENT.-The punishment for violating any provision of

subsection (a) shall be imprisonment of not more than one year or a

fine in accordance with the applicable provisions of title 18 of the

United States Code, or both. In the case of a second or subsequent

violation, the punishment shall be imprisonment of not more than 3

years or a fine in accordance with the applicable provisions of title

18 of the United States Code, or both.

16 Usc 4307. SEC. 8. CIVIL PENALTIES.

(a) AssEssMENT.-(1) The Secretary may issue an order assessing a civil penalty against any person who violates any prohibition contained in this Act, any regulation promulgated pursuant to this act,

or any permit issued under this Act. Before issuing such an order,

the Secretary shall provide such person written notice and the

opportunity to request a hearing on the record within 30 days. Each

violation shall be a separate offense, even if such violations occurred

at the same time.

(2) The amount of such civil penalty shall be determined by the

Secretary taking into account appropriate factors, including (A) the

seriousness of the violation; (B) the economic benefit (if any) resulting from the violation; (C) any history of such violations; and (D)

such other matters as the Secretary deems appropriate. The maximum fine permissible under this section is $10,000.

District of (b) JUDICIAL REvIEw.-Any person aggrieved by an assessment of

Columbia. a civil penalty under this section may file a petition for judicial

review of such assessment with the United States District Court for

the District of Columbia or for the district in which the violation

occurred. Such a petition shall be filed within the 30-day period beginning on the date the order assessing the civil penalty was

issued.

(c) COLLECTION.-If any person fails to pay an assessment of a civil

penalty-(1) within 30 days after the order was issued under subsection

(a), or

(2) if the order is appealed within such 30-day period, within

10 days after court has entered a final judgment in favor of the

Secretary under subsection (b),

the Secretary shall notify the Attorney General and the Attorney

General shall bring a civil action in an appropriate United States

district court to recover the amount of penalty assessed (plus costs,

attorney's fees, and interest at currently prevailing rates from the

date the order was issued or the date of such final judgment, as the

case may be). In such an action, the validity, amount, and appro- priateness of such penalty shall not be subject to review.

(d) SUBPOENAS.-The Secretary may issue subpoenas in connection

with proceedings under this subsection compelling the attendance

and testimony of witnesses and subpoenas duces tecum, and may

request the Attorney General to bring an action to enforce any Courts, U.S. subpoena under this section. The district courts shall have jurisdic- tion to enforce such subpoenas and impose sanctions.

16 USC 4308. SEC. 9. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS.

(a) AUTHORIZATION.-There are authorized to be appropriated

$100,000 to carry out the purposes of this Act.

(b) EFFECT ON LAND MANAGEMENT PLANS.-Nothing in this Act

shall require the amendment or revision of any land management

102 STAT. 4550
PUBLIC LAW 100-691-NOV. 18, 1988

plan the preparation of which began prior to the enactment of this

Act.

(c) FUND.-Any money collected by the United States as permit fees for collection and removal of cave resources; received by the

United States as a result of the forfeiture of a bond or other security by a permittee who does not comply with the requirements of such

permit issued under section 7; or collected by the United States by

way of civil penalties or criminal fines for violations of this Act shall

be placed in a special fund in the Treasury. Such moneys shall be

available for obligation or expenditure (to the extent provided for in

advance in appropriation Acts) as determined by the Secretary for

the improved management, benefit, repair, or restoration of significant caves located on Federal lands.

(d) Nothing in this Act shall be deemed to affect the full operation of the mining and mineral leasing laws of the United States, or

otherwise affect valid existing rights.

SEC. 10. SAVINGS PROVISIONS. 16 USC 4309.

(a) WATER.-Nothing in this Act shall be construed as authorizing the appropriation of water by any Federal, State, or local agency, Indian tribe, or any other entity or individual. Nor shall any

provision of this Act-

(1) affect the rights or jurisdiction of the United States, the

States, Indian tribes, or other entities over waters of any river

or stream or over any ground water resource;

(2) alter, amend, repeal, interpret, modify, or be in conflict

with any interstate compact made by the States; or

(3) alter or establish the respective rights of States, the

United States, Indian tribes, or any person with respect to any

water or water-related right.

(b) FISH AND WILDLIFE.-Nothing in this Act shall be construed as

affecting the jurisdiction or responsibilities of the States with

respect to fish and wildlife.

Approved November 18, 1988.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY-H.R. 1975:

HOUSE REPORTS: No. 100-534 (Comm. on Interior and Insular Affairs). SENATE REPORTS: No. 100-559 (Comm. on Energy and Natural Resources). CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 134 (1988): Mar. 28, considered and passed House.

Oct. 21, considered and passed Senate, amended. House concurred in Senate

amendment.

0

19-194 0-91-Part 5-18: QL 3

102 STAT. 4551
112 STAT. 3038 PUBLIC LAW 105–325—OCT. 30, 1998

Public Law 105–325

105th Congress

An Act

To establish the National Cave and Karst Research Institute in the State of New

Mexico, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of

the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘National Cave and Karst Research

Institute Act of 1998’’.

SEC. 2. PURPOSES.

The purposes of this Act are—

(1) to further the science of speleology;

(2) to centralize and standardize speleological information;

(3) to foster interdisciplinary cooperation in cave and karst

research programs;

(4) to promote public education;

(5) to promote national and international cooperation in

protecting the environment for the benefit of cave and karst

landforms; and

(6) to promote and develop environmentally sound and

sustainable resource management practices.

SEC. 3. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE INSTITUTE.

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of the Interior (referred to

in this Act as the ‘‘Secretary’’), acting through the Director of

the National Park Service, shall establish the National Cave and

Karst Research Institute (referred to in this Act as the ‘‘Institute’’).

(b) PURPOSES.—The Institute shall, to the extent practicable,

further the purposes of this Act.

(c) LOCATION.—The Institute shall be located in the vicinity

of Carlsbad Caverns National Park, in the State of New Mexico.

The Institute shall not be located inside the boundaries of Carlsbad

Caverns National Park.

SEC. 4. ADMINISTRATION OF THE INSTITUTE.

(a) MANAGEMENT.—The Institute shall be jointly administered

by the National Park Service and a public or private agency,

organization, or institution, as determined by the Secretary.

(b) GUIDELINES.—The Institute shall be operated and managed

in accordance with the study prepared by the National Park Service

pursuant to section 203 of the Act entitled ‘‘An Act to conduct

certain studies in the State of New Mexico’’, approved November

15, 1990 (Public Law 101–578; 16 U.S.C. 4310 note).

(c) CONTRACTS AND COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS.—The Secretary

may enter into a contract or cooperative agreement with a public

National Cave

and Karst

Research

Institute Act of

1998.

16 USC 4310

note.

Oct. 30, 1998

[S. 231]
PUBLIC LAW 105–325—OCT. 30, 1998 112 STAT. 3039

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—S. 231:

HOUSE REPORTS: No. 105–496 (Comm. on Resources).

SENATE REPORTS: No. 105–37 (Comm. on Energy and Natural Resources).

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD:

Vol. 143 (1997): July 11, considered and passed Senate.

Vol. 144 (1998): Oct. 10, considered and passed House.

Æ

or private agency, organization, or institution to carry out this

Act.

(d) FACILITY.—

(1) LEASING OR ACQUIRING A FACILITY.—The Secretary may

lease or acquire a facility for the Institute.

(2) CONSTRUCTION OF A FACILITY.—If the Secretary determines that a suitable facility is not available for a lease or

acquisition under paragraph (1), the Secretary may construct

a facility for the Institute.

(e) ACCEPTANCE OF GRANTS AND TRANSFERS.—To carry out

this Act, the Secretary may accept—

(1) a grant or donation from a private person; or

(2) a transfer of funds from another Federal agency.

SEC. 5. FUNDING.

(a) MATCHING FUNDS.—The Secretary may spend only such

amount of Federal funds to carry out this Act as is matched by

an equal amount of funds from non-Federal sources.

(b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized

to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out

this Act.

Approved October 30, 1998.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 391

Appendix D: Personnel 

Wind Cave National Park Superintendents

Superintendent Years Served

William A. Rankin 1903–1909

Joseph E. Pilcher 1909–1910

Rufus J. Pilcher 1910–1911

A. C. Boland 1911–1912

William M. Boland (Acting) 1912–1913

Fred Merle (Custodian) 1913–1913

Frederick N. Dille (Acting) 1913–1914

Thomas W. Brazell 1914–1919

Roy W. Brazell 1919–1928

Anton J. Snyder 1928–1931

Edward D. Freeland* 1931–1939

Harry J. Liek 1939–1950

William J. Watson (Acting)** 1950–1951

Earl M. Semingsen** 1951–1960

Jess H. Lombard 1960–1965

Warren D. Hotchkiss 1966–1969

Lester F. McClanahan 1969–1983

James A. Randall 1983–1985

Ernest W. Ortega 1985–1990

Martin C. Ott 1990–1992

Jimmy Taylor 1992–1999

Linda Stoll*** 2000–2010

Vidal Davila 2010–2019

* First Wind Cave superintendent to also manage Jewel Cave National Monument. 

** Supervised by Black Hills Area General Superintendent, 1950–1954. 

*** Last Wind Cave superintendent to also manage Jewel Cave National Monument. 

Source: http://npshistory.com/publications/tolson/histlist7.htm, Jewel Cave National Monument Central Files, Jewel 

Cave National Monument Digital Files. 
392 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Jewel Cave National Monument Personnel 

BHAG = Black Hills Administrative Group, covering budgeting, IT, and general administrative 

support for Jewel Cave National Monument, Wind Cave National Park, and Mount Rushmore 

National Memorial.

NEKOTA = Administrative group covering human resources, contracting, and purchasing for NPS 

units in Nebraska and the Dakotas.

Employee Title Years Served

Elwood K. Wolfe Jr.* Park Ranger 1941–1944

Lyle K. Linch* Park Ranger 1946–1948

Harold Jones* Park Ranger 1951–1951

Joseph L. Orr* Park Naturalist 1952–1952

Richard T. Hart* Ranger-in-Charge 1953–1955

John S. Shepherd* Ranger-in-Charge 1956–1957 

Walter L. Lienau* Ranger-in-Charge 1958–1959 

Keith E. Miller Ranger-in-Charge 1959–1961 

Homer A. (Pete) Robinson Ranger-in-Charge 1962–1963 

Wallace B. (Wally) Elms Management Assistant 1963–1965

James B. Thompson Management Assistant 1965–1966 

William H. Sherman Maintenance Foreman 1966 -1968?

Donald F. Gillespie Management Assistant 1966–1969

Leonard A. Krueger Maintenance Foreman 1969–?

Dave Todd Management Assistant / Park Manager 1970–1972

Steve Hurd Unit Manager 1973–1976 

Larry Dilts Chief Ranger 1974–1977

Al Hendricks Unit Manager 1976–1981 

Bob Appling Chief Ranger 1977–1980?

Steve Riley Maintenance Leader ?–1983 

Dennis Ditmanson Unit Manager 1981–1986 

Don Lytle Maintenance Leader (acting) 1983–1984

Larry Dilts Maintenance Leader /Maintenance Mechanic Foreman 1984–2002?

Herschel Schulz Chief of Interpretation and Resource Management 1984–1986

Brian Adams Chief of Interpretation and Resource Management 1986–1991
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 393

Employee Title Years Served

Joanne Bornong Clerk-Typist 1986–1988

Steve Holder Unit Manager 1987–1989 

Don Lytle Maintenance Worker (permanent, subject-to-furlough) 1988–1999?

Kate Cannon Superintendent 1990–1997 

Tom Casey Chief of Interpretation and Resource Management 1992–1998 

Mike Wiles Cave Specialist / Chief of Resource Management 1993–present 

Donna Bentley Interpretive Park Ranger 1993–?

Karen Rosga Interpretive Park Ranger / Chief of Interpretation 1996–2009?

Jill Hart Administrative Officer / BHAG Budget Specialist 1996–2008

Paul Menard Administrative Officer (BHAG and NEKOTA) 1996–2000

Marie Curtain Administrative Office Clerk 1996–2000?

Kimberley Weisser Interpretive Park Ranger (Interpretation) 1998–?

Peggy O'Dell Superintendent 1998–1999 

Jayne Weiss IT Specialist (BHAG, then shared) 2000–2014

Miriam Gola Administrative Office Clerk 2000?–2004?

Todd Suess Superintendent** 2000–2010 

Rene Ohms Physical Science Technician 2001?–2012?

Merrith Baughman

Supervisory Park Ranger (Interpretation) and Assistant 

Chief of Interpretation 2001–2005

Phil Heckman Administrative Officer (BHAG and NEKOTA) 2001–2006

Bob King Chief of Maintenance 2002?–2009?

Beckie Carder Administrative Office Clerk 2005?–present

Paul Menard Administrative Officer (BHAG and NEKOTA) 2007–2008

Katie Atkins (Keil) Administrative Officer 2009–present 

Dan Austin Physical Science Technician 2009–present

Bradley Block Chief of Interpretation 2009–present 

Dave Tashner Chief of Facilities Management (Acting) 2010–2012

Don Morrison Chief of Facilities Management (Acting) ?–2010 

John Black Chief of Facilities Management 2015–present?

Larry Johnson Superintendent 2010–2014
394 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Employee Title Years Served

David Yim Chief of Law Enforcement 2013–2016

Bruce Baird IT Specialist (shared) 2014–2017

Bonnie Schwartz Superintendent 2015–2017 

Nancy Martinz Chief of Law Enforcement 2016–2019 

Michelle Wheatley Superintendent 2018–present

*Wind Cave employee who staffed Jewel Cave during the summer months. 

**Partway through his tenure, Suess became the first Jewel Cave Superintendent to report directly to the regional 

office, rather than to the Wind Cave superintendent. 

Source: Jewel Cave National Monument Central Files, Jewel Cave National Monument Digital Files.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 395

Appendix E: Visitation Numbers 

Year Recreation Visitors

1934 1,952

1935 1,468

1936 1,353

1937 2,067

1938 2,797

1939 5,203

1940 3,744

1941 4,953

1942 1,148

1943 102

1944 0

1945 409

1946 7,430

1947 17,018

1948 9,365

1949 8,301

1950 5,943

1951 8,344

1952 16,458

1953 15,731

1954 13,400

1955 21,400

1956 20,200

1957 29,500

1958 29,100

1959 32,000

1960 31,700

1961 31,400

1962 41,200

1963 44,000

Year Recreation Visitors

1964 54,900

1965 57,400

1966 74,500

1967 75,000

1968 68,200

1969 75,100

1970 75,500

1971 65,800

1972 79,570

1973 80,500

1974 81,600

1975 77,900

1976 84,200

1977 105,000

1978 101,107

1979 76,921

1980 90,198

1981 105,448

1982 87,417

1983 89,412

1984 101,578

1985 128,650

1986 134,767

1987 141,749

1988 126,635

1989 130,950

1990 137,316

1991 152,329

1992 154,782

1993 132,277
396 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Year Recreation Visitors

1994 148,372

1995 154,688

1996 144,634

1997 133,115

1998 131,058

1999 134,834

2000 128,960

2001 125,330

2002 131,215

2003 126,363

2004 108,948

2005 102,318

2006 97,395

Year Recreation Visitors

2007 105,321

2008 100,481

2009 129,595

2010 103,462

2011 77,146

2012 109,300

2013 98,259

2014 104,348

2015 116,444

2016 137,275

2017 144,537

2018 142,356

Source: National Park Service, Integrated Resource Management Applications Portal, Recreation Visitation, Jewel Cave 

National Monument, accessed February 12, 2020, 

https://irma.nps.gov/STATS/SSRSReports/Park%20Specific%20Reports/Annual%20Park%20Recreation%20Visitatio

n%20(1904%20-%20Last%20Calendar%20Year)?Park=JECA. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 397

Appendix F: Annual Park Budgets 

Year 

Congressional 

Appropriations (ONPS 

Funds) 

1900 $ 0 

1901 $ 0 

1902 $ 0 

1903 $ 0 

1904 $ 0 

1905 $ 0 

1906 $ 0 

1907 $ 0 

1908 $ 0 

1909 $ 0 

1910 $ 0 

1911 $ 0 

1912 $ 0 

1913 $ 0 

1914 $ 0 

1915 $ 0 

1916 $ 0 

1917 $ 0 

1918 $ 0 

1919 $ 0 

1920 $ 0 

1921 $ 0 

1922 $ 0 

1923 $ 0 

1924 $ 0 

Year 

Congressional 

Appropriations (ONPS 

Funds) 

1925 $ 0

1926 $ 0 

1927 $ 0 

1928 $ 0 

1929 $ 0 

1930 $ 0 

1931 $ 0 

1932 $ 0 

1933 $ 0 

1934 $ 0 

1935 $ 0 

1936 $ 0 

1937 $ 0 

1938 $ 0 

1939 Not available 

1940 Not available 

1941 Not available 

1942 Not available

1943 $2,370.00 

1944 $ 0 

1945 $ 0 

1946 $2,740.00 

1947 $4,199.00 

1948 $3,498.00 

1949 Not available 
398 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Year 

Congressional 

Appropriations (ONPS 

Funds) 

1950 Not available 

1951 Not available 

1952 $3,978.00 

1953 Not available 

1954 $3,818.00 

1955 $5,475.00 

1956 $8,449.00 

1957 $8,700.00 

1958 $15,308.79 

1959 $27,134.00 

1960 $26,048.00 

1961 $22,032.00 

1962 $27,764.00 

1963 $25,820.00 

1964 Not available 

1965 Not available 

1966 Not available 

1967 Not available 

1968 Not available 

1969 Not available 

1970 Not available 

1971 Not available 

1972 Not available 

1973 Not available 

1974 Not available 

1975 Not available 

1976 Not available 

1977 Not available 

1978 Not available 

Year 

Congressional 

Appropriations (ONPS 

Funds) 

1979 Not available 

1980 Not available 

1981 Not available 

1982 Not available 

1983 $205,500.00 

1984 $229,700.00 

1985 Not available 

1986 $240,700.00 

1987 Not available 

1988 Not available 

1989 $279,100.00 

1990 $237,800.00 

1991 $240,500.00 

1992 $ 228,100.00 

1993 $264,500.00 

1994 Not available 

1995 Not available 

1996 $392,800.00 

1997 $438,000.00 

1998 $633,000.00 

1999 $684,000.00 

2000 $783,000.00 

2001 $858,000.00 

2002 $865,740.00 

2003 $862,420.00 

2004 $843,674.00 

2005 $885,000.00 

2006 $897,140.00 

2007 $904,647.00 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 399

Year 

Congressional 

Appropriations (ONPS 

Funds) 

2008 $1,002,870.00 

2009 $1,138,261.00 

2010 $1,229,382.00

2011 $1,179,319.00 

2012 $1,174,14.00

2013 $1,100,390.00

Year 

Congressional 

Appropriations (ONPS 

Funds) 

2014 $1,183,387.00 

2015 $1,169,190.00

2016 $1,182,060.00

2017 $1,187,010.00

2018 $1,220,670.00 

2019 $1,191,425.00

Source: Jewel Cave NM CF, Jewel Cave NM DF, Midwest Regional Office Files, NARA KC. 

A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 401

Appendix G: Organizational Charts 

Wind Cave National Park Organizations and Functions as of February 1, 1952 

Completed by Earl M. Semingsen, 

Approved by Black Hills Area Superintendent Harry J. Liek, March 12, 1952

Protection Division 

Responsible for the coordination 

and supervision of all protection 

activities within the park; for 

enforcement of rules and 

regulations, protection of park 

features and its wildlife together 

with the protection of park forest 

and range lands from fire, insects 

and tree diseases. For protection of 

government property and public 

safety. 

Chief Ranger, GS-7 – (Vacant) 

Park Ranger, GS-6 – Wilcox, G. H. 

Park Ranger, GS-5 – Jones, H. R. 

Park Warden CPC-5 – Aaberg, E. T. 

Fire C. Aid, GS-4 – (Seasonal)

Park Ranger, GS-4 – (13 Seasonal)

Naturalist Division 

Responsible for the 

coordination and supervision 

of all park interpretive and 

research activities; for public 

contact work, wild flower 

display, public exhibits and 

interpretive methods, 

procedures and techniques.

Maintaining park library, 

historical photographic 

records. Conducting public 

wildlife caravans and lectures. 

Park Naturalist, GS-4 –

(Seasonal) 

Office of the Superintendent

Under the general supervision of the Superintendent, Black Hills Areas has immediate supervision over all activities within 

the area in connection with its administration, maintenance, interpretation and protection. Supervises concession 

operations, enforcement of rules and regulations, traffic management, fire control, wildlife control, and collection and 

deposit of fees for guided cave tours. Supervises activities as Jewel Cave and Fossil Cycad National Monuments. 

Superintendent, GS-9 – Semingsen, Earl M. 

Jewel Cave Nat’l Monument 

Under the immediate supervision 

of the Supt. W.C.N.P. has 

responsibility for coordination 

and supervision of monument 

management, protection, 

interpretation, maintenance, and 

construction programs. 

Park Ranger, GS-4 – (3 Seasonal) 

Clerical Division 

Responsible for the coordination 

and supervision of all park clerical, 

stenographic and duplicating work. 

For filing, records, handling and 

routing of all mail. Custodian of 

safe, cash receipts and deposits. 

Maintains property accountability 

records and equipment reports. 

Clerk-Stenographer, GS-3 – (Proposed) 

Fossil Cycad N. M. 

Under the immediate 

supervision of the Supt. 

W.C.N.P. has responsibility for 

coordination and supervision of 

monument management, 

protection, interpretation, 

maintenance, and construction 

programs. 

No positions established. Supervised 

by Wind Cave National Park 

personnel. 

Maintenance and Construction 

Division 

Responsible for the coordination and 

supervision of all park maintenance 

and construction projects; for 

maintenance of roads, trails, walks, 

building, elevator, electric system, 

communication system, grounds, 

campgrounds, signs and fences. For 

minor repair and operation of mobile 

and stationary equipment. Supervises 

maintenance and construction at 

Jewel Cave & Fossil Cycad National 

Monuments. Maintain time records 

for equipment and maintenance. 

Foreman C&M, CPC-8 – Lusher, C. L. 

Equipment Operator – Ungr. Knisley

Maintenance Man – Ungr. Gratopp

Source: National Parks and Monuments Central Classified Files (1936–52), Box 125, Folder 201-13.1 Organization Charts, 

Records of the National Park Service Region II (Midwest Region), NARA KC, 1952. 
402 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Source: Cabinet 3, Drawer 2, Folder D18 Master Plan, Jewel Cave NM CF, 1969. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 403
404 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Source: Jewel Cave NM DF, 2008. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 405

Source: Jewel Cave NM DF, 2010. 
406 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 407

Source: Jewel Cave NM DF, 2014. 
408 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 409
410 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 411

A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 413

Bibliography 

Archives 

Al Hendricks, personal files. 

Central Files, Jewel Cave National Monument, Custer, South Dakota. 

Digital Files, Jewel Cave National Monument, Custer, South Dakota. 

Jewel Cave Museum Collection, Keystone, South Dakota. 

Record Group 75, Records of the National Park Service National Archives and Records 

Administration, Kansas City, Missouri.

Government Documents and Contracted Studies

Albers, Patricia. The Home of the Bison: An Ethnographic and Ethnohistorical Study of Traditional Cultural 

Affiliations to Wind Cave National Park, Volume One. National Park Service, September 29, 

2003. 

Alexander, E. Calvin and Marsha Davis. “Hydrogeologic Study of Jewel Cave/Wind Cave: Final 

Report – Year 2.” August 1987. 

Bogan, Michael A., and Cynthia A. Ramotinik. “Baseline Surveys for Mammals at Jewel Cave 

National Monument South Dakota.” March 1, 1994.

Bohi, John W. “75 Years at Wind Cave: A History of the National Park.” National Park Service,

1962. 

Booth, H. M. USDA, USFS. Rapid City Land District. Black Hills National Forest. Custer 

(Unorganized) Mining District. “Report on the Jewel et al Lode Mining Claims and the Jewel 

Cave.” June 1911. 

Brown, Peter M. “Fire History of the Southern Black Hills, South Dakota.” June 13, 1994. 

Burzynski, Kathleen M. “The Biological Control of Leafy Spurge at Jewel Cave National 

Monument.” July 30, 1995. 

Cockrell, Ron. Amidst Ancient Monument: The Administrative History of Mound City Group National 

Monument/Hopewell Culture National Historical Park Ohio. Omaha: Division of Cultural 

Resources, Midwest Support Office, NPS, DOI, 1999, 343.

Evans-Hatch, Gail and Michael Evans-Hatch, Place of Passages: Jewel Cave National Monument Historic 

Resource Study. Omaha: National Park Service Midwest Regional Office, 2006.

Graves, Henry S. Black Hills Forest Reserve. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1899. 

Hill, W. F. Report on Mining Claim, Jewel Lode. February 19, 1908.

Jablonsky, Pat, et al. “Report: Develop Preventive Measures For Future Accumulations Of Cave 

Lint, Wind Cave National Park.” June 1, 1994.
414 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Jenney, Walter P. “Report of Geological Survey of the Black Hills.” In Annual Report of the 

Commissioner of Indian Affairs to the Secretary of the Interior (1875).

John Milner Associates, Inc., and Rivanna Archaeological Consulting. “Wind Cave National Park 

Cultural Landscape Report.” May 2005. 

Jones, Bruce. “Archeological Investigations at Jewel Cave National Monument Custer County, 

South Dakota 2000–2003.” National Park Service, Midwest Archeological Center, Technical 

Report 94a, 2006. 

Kappler, Charles J. ed. Indian Affairs: Laws and Treaties, volume II. Washington, DC: Government 

Printing Office, 1904.

Kellerlyn, Katie. NPS, Natural Resource Program Center. “Jewel Cave National Monument 

Geologic Resources Inventory Report.” March 2009. 

Montes, Geoff. “Sacred Native American Sites: Bear Butte and Wind Cave.” National Trust for 

Historic Preservation, June 16, 2015. 

Moore, John C. Survey of the Biota and Trophic Interactions Within Wind Cave and Jewel Cave, 

South Dakota. August 15, 1996.

Mora, Dave. “Bats of Jewel Cave.” Undated [1988?]. 

Neel, H. C., and C. W. Fitzgerald, United States Forest Service. “Report on the Proposed Jewel Cave 

Game Preserve.” September 1907. 

O’Bright, Alan E. “Rugged Charm: Ranger Cabin (HS-1) Historic Structure Report, Jewel Cave 

National Monument, Custer, South Dakota.” 1999. 

Oshier, Edwin H. “Report on Proposed Underground Development of Jewel Cave National 

Monument.” June 17, 1965. 

Quinn Evans Architects. Cultural Landscape Report and Environmental Assessment: Jewel Cave Historic Area, 

Jewel Cave National Monument. National Park Service, March 2005.

Rom, Lance W. “A Level III Cultural Resource Inventory of the Jewel Cave Dugouts.” June 1984.

Ronscavage, John A. Master Plan: Jewel Cave National Monument, General Development 

Narrative. 1965. 

Schrader, F. C. USGS. “Report on the Jewel and Four Other Lode Claims.” April 15, 1909. 

Sheveland, Glenna J. “An Intensive Cultural Resources Survey of Jewel Cave National Monument:

Preliminary Report.” National Park Service, July 10, 1993.

Strobel, Michael L., et al. U.S. Geological Survey. “Potentiometric Surface of the Madison Aquifer in 

the Black Hills Area, South Dakota.” 1999.

Trexler, Keith A. Lehman Caves . . . its Human Story. Baker, NV: NPS, 1966, updated through 1975 by 

NPS staff. 

Unrau, Harlan D., and G. Frank Williss. Expansion of the National Park Service in the 1930s: 

Administrative History. Denver: NPS, 1983.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 415

US Congress. House. Department of the Interior and Related Agencies: Appropriations for 1975: Hearings on 

H.R. 16027. 93rd Cong. 2d sess., 1974. 

US Congress. Senate. Federal Cave Resources Protection Act and Restriction of Dams in Parks and Monuments: 

Hearings on S. 927/H.R. 1975 and H.R. 1173, Before the Senate Subcommittee on Public Lands, 

National Parks and Forests of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, 100th Cong. 2d sess., 

1988. 

US Department of Agriculture. List of Workers in Subjects Pertaining to Agriculture, 1920–1921. 

Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1921. 

“The USDA Forest Service—The First Century,” U.S. Forest Service, April 2005.

US Department of the Interior. National Park Service. Foundation Document, Jewel Cave National 

Monument, South Dakota. February 2016. 

______. Jewel Cave National Monument: Mission 66 Prospectus (revised). October 1, 1958.

______. The Master Plan for Jewel Cave National Monument. 1942.

______. Bryant. Mission 66 Prospectus for Jewel Cave National Monument. July 15, 1955.

______. Bryant and Alberts. Master Plan Development Outline Jewel Cave National Monument, 

South Dakota. August 1958.

______. Jewel Cave National Monument. “Cave Search and Rescue Plan: Jewel Cave National 

Monument.” February 1999.

______. Core Operations Report. 2008. 

______. “Final General Management Plan/Environmental Impact Statement. Jewel Cave National 

Monument, South Dakota.” June 1994. 

______. “Geologic Resources Inventory Report.” March 2009. 

______. “Housing Management Plan.” 1988. 

______. “Housing Management Plan.” 1990.

______. “Housing Management Plan.” 1995.

______. Master Plan Development Outline, Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota. April 

1952.

______. “Natural and Cultural Resource Management Plan and Environmental Assessment for 

Jewel Cave National Monument.” 1983.

______. Resource Management Plan. Jewel Cave National Monument. 1999. 

______. Wildland Fire Prevention Plan. August 1992. 

______. Rocky Mountain Regional Office. Long, Barbara Bevin. “Jewel Cave National Monument 

Historic Resource Study: Historic Contexts and National Register Guidelines.” 1992. 

______. Wind Cave National Park. “Cave and Karst Resources Management Plan, Wind Cave 

National Park.” 2007.
416 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

US Government Accountability Office. “National Park Service Needs a Maintenance Management 

System.” June 1, 1984.

Wiles, Michael W. “Microclimate Monitoring of the Scenic Tour Area at Jewel Cave.” undated 

[1987?]. 

______, and Rene Ohms. “Jewel Cave National Monument Cave and Karst Management Plan,” 

2007.

Worthington, David J., and Michael A. Bogan. Cave Entrance Modification and Potential Impact on 

Bat Populations at Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota. February 19, 1993. 

Yeh and Associates, Inc. Geotechnical Engineering Report, Jewel Cave National Monument, Visitor 

Center Parking Lot. August 31, 2012.

Oral History Interviews 

Transcriptions of the following interviews, conducted by Historical Research Associates, Inc., as 

part of this administrative history contract, are in the archives of Jewel Cave National 

Monument, Custer, South Dakota. 

Kate Cannon, interview by Emily Greenwald, June 13, 2019, Moab, Utah.

Dwight Deal, interview by Jackie Gonzales, June 30, 2019, Custer, South Dakota. 

Larry Dilts, interview by Jackie Gonzales, April 17, 2019, Colby, Kansas. 

Dennis Ditmanson, interview by Jackie Gonzales, April 19, 2019, Santa Fe, New Mexico. 

David Given, interview by Jackie Gonzales, April 9, 2019, Port Hadlock, Washington. 

Jill Hart, interview by Jackie Gonzales, June 27, 2019, Custer, South Dakota. 

Phil Heckman, interview by Jackie Gonzales, June 27, 2019, Custer, South Dakota. 

Al Hendricks, interview by Emily Greenwald, May 16, 2019, Ennis, Montana. 

Paul Menard, interview by Jackie Gonzales, April 9, 2019, Sequim, Washington. 

Marc Ohms, interview by Jackie Gonzales, June 30, 2019, Custer, South Dakota. 

Rene Ohms, interview by Jackie Gonzales, June 28, 2019, Custer, South Dakota. 

Ernest Ortega, interview by Jackie Gonzales, April 22, 2019, Santa Fe, New Mexico. 

Marty Ott, interview by Jackie Gonzales, April 24, 2019, Kanab, Utah. 

Bob Paulson and Corissa Busse, interview by Jackie Gonzales, June 26, 2019, Rapid City, South 

Dakota. 

Linda Stoll, interview by Jackie Gonzales, July 22, 2019, The Villages, Florida. 

James B. Thompson, interview by Jackie Gonzales, April 18, 2019, Estes Park, Colorado. 

Paul Wightman, interview by Jackie Gonzales, June 30, 2019, Custer, South Dakota. 

Mike Wiles, interview by Jackie Gonzales, June 26 and 27, 2019, Custer, South Dakota. 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 417

Books and Articles 

Allaback, Sarah. Mission 66 Visitor Centers: The History of a Building Type. Washington, DC: 

Government Printing Office, 2000. 

Baker, Howard. “The Early Days.” Courier 34, no. 3 (March 1989): 18–20. 

Beck, Warren A., and Ynez D. Haase. Historical Atlas of the American West. Norman: University of 

Oklahoma Press, 1989. 

Binkerd, A. D. The Mammoth Cave and its denizens; a complete descriptive guide. Cincinnati: R. Clarke & 

Co., 1869.

Buel, J. W. America’s Wonderlands: A Pictorial and Descriptive History of our Country’s Scenic Marvels. New 

York: John Williams, 1893.

Cassell, E. Steve. Prehistoric Hunters of the Black Hills. Boulder: Johnson Books, 1986. 

Conn, Herbert W. “Barometric Wind in Wind and Jewel Caves, South Dakota.” National Speleological 

Society Bulletin 28, no. 2 (April 1966): 55–69. 

Conn, Herb, and Jan Conn. The Jewel Cave Adventure: Fifty Miles of Discovery Under South Dakota. St. 

Louis: Cave Books, 1977. 

Croghan, John. Rambles in the Mammoth Cave: During the Year 1844, by a Visiter. Louisville: Morton & 

Griswold, 1845.

The Cumberland Valley Railroad Company. Rural resorts and summer retreats along the line of the 

Cumberland Valley Railroad, Including Picnic Parks and Pleasure Places. Philadelphia: Allen, Lane & 

Scott, 1881. 

Davidson, Rev. R. The Mammoth Cave and the Barrens of Kentucky, with Some Notices of the Early Settlement 

of the State. Lexington, KY: A. T. Skillman & Son, 1840. 

Freeman, John F. Black Hills Forestry: A History. Boulder: University Press of Colorado, 2014.

Halliday, William R. Depths of the Earth: Caves and Cavers of the United States. New York and London: 

Harper & Row, Publishers, 1966.

Hirt, Jen. Under Glass: The Girl with a Thousand Christmas Trees. Akron, OH: University of Akron Press, 

2010.

Hovey, Horace C. Celebrated American caverns, especially Mammoth, Wyandot, and Luray. Together with 

historical, scientific, and descriptive notices of caves and grottoes in other lands. Cincinnati: The Robert 

Clarke Company, 1896. 

Hovey, Edmund Otis. “The Wind Cave of South Dakota.” Scientific American 49 (June 16, 1900):

20458–59. 

Ingersoll, Ernest. Through the Shenandoah Valley: The chronicle of a journey through the uplands of Virginia. 

New York: Liberty Printing Company, 1886.

Lewis, James G. The Forest Service and the Greatest Good: A Centennial History. Durham, NC: Forest 

History Society, 2005. 

Love, Judy. Jewel Cave National Monument. Mount Pleasant, SC: Arcadia Publishing, 2008. 
418 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Mason, Kathy S. “Adapting to Endure: The Early History of Wind Cave National Park, 1903–1916.” 

South Dakota History 32, no. 2 (Summer 2002): 149–164. 

Mayer, Carl J. “The 1872 Mining Law: Historical Origins of the Discovery Rule.” University of Chicago 

Law Review 53, no. 2 (Spring 1986): 624–653.

Norfolk and Western Railway. “Luray Caverns.” 1898. 

Owen, Luella Agnes. Cave Regions of the Ozarks and Black Hills. Cincinnati: Editor Publishing Co., 

1898.

Palmer, Arthur N. Jewel Cave: A Gift from the Past. Hot Springs, SD: Wind Cave/Jewel Cave Natural 

History Association, 1984. 

Palmer, Arthur N. and Margaret V. Palmer. “Geologic History of the Black Hills Caves, South 

Dakota.” National Speleological Society Bulletin (December 1989): 74. 

Rothman, Hal. America’s National Monuments: The Politics of Preservation. Lawrence: University Press of 

Kansas, 1994. 

Sanford, John I. The Black Hills Souvenir: A Pictorial and Historic Description of the Black Hills. Denver: 

The Williamson-Haffner Engraving Co., 1902.

Sellars, Richard West. Preserving Nature in the National Parks: A History. New Haven and London: Yale 

University Press, 1997. 

Shaler, N. S. “Caverns and Cavern Life.” Scribner’s Magazine II (July–December): 452–53. 

Sundstrom, Linea. Storied Stone: Indian Rock Art of the Black Hills Country. Norman: University of 

Oklahoma Press, 2004. 

Thompson, James B. The Geology of Jewel Cave. Wind Cave Natural History Association, 1965. 

The Virginia Midland Railway. Excursion Guide of the Virginia Midland Railway, the Short-Line ThroughCar 

Route Between the North and South, The Virginia Springs, Western North Carolina and North Georgia 

Summer Resorts. New York: The Aldine Press, 1882. 

West, Thomas D. A guide to the lakes in Cumberland, Westmorland and Lancashire. London: B. Shaw, 

Richardson, and Urquhart, 1784. 

Wiles, Michael E. “The Origin Of Jewel Cave And Its Relationship To Landscape-Scale Processes –

Part 1.” Proceedings of the 17th International Congress of Speleology, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia 

2, ed. 2 (July 23–29, 2017): 315–317. 

Wiles, Michael E. “The Origin Of Jewel Cave And Its Relationship To Landscape-Scale Processes –

Part 2.” Proceedings of the 17th International Congress of Speleology, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia 

2, ed. 2 (July 23–29, 2017): 318–320. 

Williams, Gerald W., and Char Miller. “At the Creation: the National Forest Commission of 1896–

97.” Forest History Today (Spring–Fall 2005): 32–41.
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 419

Theses and Dissertations

Nelson, Elaine Marie. “Dreams and Dust in the Black Hills: Race, Place, and National Identity in 

America’s ‘Land of Promise.’” PhD dissertation, University of New Mexico, 2011.

Tratebas, Alice M. “Black Hills Settlement Patterns: Based on Functional Approach.” PhD

dissertation, Indiana University, 1986. 

Wiles, Michael E. “Infiltration [of groundwater] at Wind and Jewel Caves, Black Hills, South 

Dakota.” MS thesis, South Dakota School of Mines and Technology, 1992.

Newspapers and Periodicals

Argus-Leader (Sioux Falls, SD)

Black Hills Weekly Journal (Rapid City, SD)

Caving News 

Custer Chronicle 

Deadwood Pioneer-Times (Deadwood, SD)

High Country News 

Mitchell Capital (Mitchell, SD)

New York Times 

Queen City Mall (Spearfish, SD)

Rapid City Journal 

South Dakota Highway Magazine 

Utah Law Review

A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 421

Index

A

Abourezk, James (US Representative), 177, 229

AbTech Technologies, 310

A. C. Nelson Company, 169

Adams, Brian, 184, 185, 204, 221, 233, 237, 255, 392

Adams, James B., 42

agriculture, 16, 18

Ainslie, S. E., 70

Alaska, 185

Albers, Patricia, 9, 10, 11

Alberts, Edwin, 135

Alcatraz Island, 219, 220

Alexander, Calvin, 200, 234

Alexander, Scott, 200, 234

Aley, Tom, 189

Allen, Bruce, 79

Allgier, Ken, 192, 193, 194, 255

Allison, Stan, 262

American Cave Conservation Association, 203

American Cyanamid Company, 166

American Indians: Apache, 12; Arapaho, 12, 13, 14; Arikara, 14; Assiniboine, 14; and bison, 10, 11, 

14, 15; in Black Hills, 5, 9, 10, 12–14, 29, 338; Cheyenne, 12, 13, 14; Cheyenne River Sioux, 201; 

Chippewa, 11; Comanche, 10, 12; Cree, 11; Crow, 12, 14; Crow Creek Sioux, 201, 339; Dakota, 

11, 201; equestrian lifeway of, 11; in Great Lakes region, 11; Great Plains culture, 14; Great 

Sioux Reserve/Reservation, 14, 201; Gros Ventre, 14; Iroquois, 11; at Jewel Cave, 10, 11, 272, 

341; Kiowa, 12; Kiowa-Apache, 12; Lakota, 5, 11, 12–13, 14, 15, 18, 29, 201, 272; Lower Brule 

Sioux, 201; Mandan, 14; Mandan, Hidatsa, and Arikara, 11, 12; Missouri River culture, 11, 12; 

Nakota, 11, 201; Northwest Plains culture, 10; as NPS employees, 238; Oglala Sioux, 201; 

Padouca, 12; Plains Woodland culture, 10; Ponca, 12; relationships with, 338, 339; Rosebud 

Sioux, 201; Santee, 11; Santee Sioux of Nebraska, 201; Seven Council Fires, 201; Shoshone, 10, 

14; Sioux, 11, 14, 16; Sioux Nation, 201; Sioux Tribe of the Fort Peck Reservation, 201; Standing 

Rock Sioux, 201; Suhtai, 12; Teton, 11; Yankton-Yanktonai, 11

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 274, 280, 298

Ancient Order of United Workmen, 25

Anderson, John, 198

Anderson, Vernon M., 152

Antenna Theater, 219

Antiquities Act, 31, 33, 35, 36, 43, 46, 50

Aperture Films, 347

Appling, Bob, 181, 392

Arcadia Publishing, 302

Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979 (ARPA), 203
422 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

archeology, 5, 9, 10, 11, 29, 108, 201, 203, 210, 263, 272–73, 276, 286, 337, 339

Argus-Leader (Sioux Falls, SD), 52

Arlton, Stan, 8, 119, 140

Armstrong, Andy, 327

Arnold, Jay, 187

Atkins, Katie (Keil), 1, 295, 320, 393

Austin, Dan, 305, 323, 330, 331, 353, 393

AutoDesk, Inc., 194

Automated National Catalogue System (ANCS), 212

B

Badlands National Monument (later Badlands National Park), 74, 75, 77, 78, 88, 90, 147, 181–82, 

212, 243, 294, 296, 298

Baggley, George E., 128, 136, 140

Bailey, Zelda, 263

Baird, Bruce, 296, 321, 394

Baker, Howard W., 69, 74, 76–77, 78, 79, 96, 106, 108, 114–15, 115–16, 123, 125, 126–27, 132, 133

Baker, Robert M., 245

Baldwin, Steve, 193, 194, 262, 301

Barrett, Frank A. (US Representative), 86

Basinger, Jim, 196, 197, 215

Baughman, Merrith, 290, 344, 393

Bear Butte State Park, 188

Bear Mountain, 47

Beatty, M. E., 123, 124, 128, 147–48

Belleville, IL, 138

Bentley, Donna, 237, 238, 251, 276, 393

Berry, Ellis Y. (US Representative), 144, 177

Bethlehem Cave, 21, 194

Biffle, Earl C., 138, 141

Big Bend National Park, 308

Bighorn Cave, 197

Biospherics, Incorporated, 346

Bismarck, ND, 86, 265

bison, 10, 11, 14, 15, 182

Bison State Telephone Company, 155, 235

Bitz, Bruce, 214, 215

Black, John, 294, 302, 315, 316, 321, 393

Black & Veatch, 248

Black Elk Peak, 5, 13

Black Hills: American Indians in, 5, 9, 10, 11, 12–14, 29, 338; archeology of, 5, 9, 10, 29; attempts of 

United States to acquire, 16; caves in, 6, 18, 21, 82, 83, 87, 96, 97, 98, 102, 104, 120, 130, 178, 

189, 198, 304; fire protection in, 88–89, 207, 267, 269, 270; flora and fauna in, 33, 206; French 

Creek area, 15; geology of, 5; gold in, 15; history of, 217, 218; and Jasper Fire, 281, 282; mining

in, 12, 15, 16, 28, 29; NPS units in, 237, 243, 295, 296, 307, 308, 354; park proposed in, 201; rock 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 423

climbing in, 120; settlement in, 12, 15, 17, 29; significance to Lakota, 13; survey of, 15, 18; timber 

in, 16, 17, 56, 91–92, 218, 222; topography of, 312; tourism in, 16, 23, 27, 31, 47, 49, 58, 84, 108, 

222, 241, 273, 302; mentioned, 19, 42, 89, 192, 272

Black Hills Administrative Group, 239–40, 280, 294–96, 354

Black Hills Area Association (BHAA), 87. See also Black Hills Natural History Association.

Black Hills and Badlands Association, 303

Black Hills, Badlands, and Lakes Association Information Exchange, 188, 303

Black Hills Central Reservations, 346, 347

Black Hills Cooperative Fire Control Agreement, 150

Black Hills Discovered, 303

Black Hills Electric Cooperative, Inc., 155, 234

Black Hills Interagency Fire Group, 208

Black Hills National Forest, 16–18, 26, 29, 32, 33, 38, 123, 133, 144, 151, 188, 205, 207, 208, 221, 

222, 243, 261, 264, 269, 270, 271, 275, 282, 301, 348

Black Hills National Forest Reserve, 18, 20

Black Hills Natural History Association, 88, 119, 147–48. See also Wind Cave Natural History 

Association.

Black Hills Parks and Forest Association (BHPFA), 2, 187–88, 198, 221, 240–41, 242, 281, 301–2, 

305, 306, 317, 340, 344, 347, 348, 349, 353

Black Hills Souvenir, 23

Black Hills Sport and Travel Show, 188

Black Hills Weekly Journal, 23–24

Black Hills Wind Cave Company, 25

Blake, Bill, 306

Block, Bradley, 1, 294, 296, 297, 299, 302, 332, 340, 341, 393

Bogan, Michael A., 259–60, 276

Boland, A. C., 391

Boland, William M., 391

Booth, H. M., 39–40, 41

Bornong, Joanne, 183, 184, 393

Boucher, Rick (US Representative), 201

Bowling Green University, 198

Boy Scouts, 348

Bozeman Trail, 14

Bradley, Bill (US Senator), 201

Brady Engineering Company, 154

Brazell, Thomas W., 391

British Columbia, Canada, 28, 41, 50

Brookings, SD, 192

Brooks, John, 297

Brooks, Karen, 297

Brown, Delmer, 119, 122

Brown, Larry, 146

Brown, Peter M., 269

Bryan, William Jennings, 25

Bryant, Wayne, 88, 104–5
424 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Buffalo Gap National Grassland, 301

Burlington Northern Railroad, 218

Burma, Ben, 83

Bush, Charles, 18, 19, 22–24, 29

Bushfield, Harlan J. (SD Governor), 75

Busse, Corissa, 266, 267, 334, 353

C

Cache la Poudre River Valley, CO, 18

Cain, Bertha, 28, 31, 36, 37, 38, 39, 54

Cair, Stanley A., 162 

California, 12, 14, 289

Cannon, Kate, 237, 238, 239, 240, 241, 243–44, 246, 249, 252, 257, 260, 264, 265, 267, 271, 272, 275, 

276, 277, 278, 279, 280, 290, 393

Canyonlands National Park, 144

Carder, Beckie, 1, 290, 295, 393

Carlsbad, NM, 264

Carlsbad Cave National Monument, 54

Carlsbad Caverns, 54, 135, 194, 203, 257, 258

Carlsbad Caverns National Park, 54, 83, 196, 256, 262, 327, 346

Carnes, William G., 75, 76

Casey, Tom, 237, 238, 251, 267, 271, 273, 277, 278, 288, 308, 393

Castro, E. J., 104

Caucasus Mountains, 271

Cave Research Foundation, 262, 263

caves: bats in, 88, 145–46, 171, 172, 196, 198, 207, 217, 259–60, 261, 263, 276, 299, 304, 313, 330, 

333, 347; in Black Hills, 6, 18, 21, 82, 83, 87, 96, 97, 98, 102, 104, 120, 130, 178, 189, 198, 304; 

books about, 87; caving community, 254, 304; discovery of, 22; exploration of, 2, 18–20, 21, 22, 

70–71, 110, 113, 117–45, 158, 159, 171, 185, 190–94, 195, 202, 211, 217, 254, 255–57, 281, 292, 

296, 299, 304, 323–24, 328–30, 347, 350, 354, 355, 356; geology of, 5–9, 120; mystique of, 22; 

protection of, 53–54, 201–4; safety, 193, 195; tourism at, 20, 53; vandalism at, 203

Centennial Development Co., 163

Center for Biological Diversity, 332

Chicago, IL, 25, 96

Childs, Frank, 69, 76, 77, 89, 92

Chittum, Harold J., 152

Choate, Jerry, 198

Chokecherry Spring, 143

Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC): abandons Jewel Cave side camp, 72; camps, 274; and forest 

management, 69; historic document collection, 340; infrastructure improvements at Jewel Cave, 

3, 55–58, 59–60, 62–69, 94, 95, 98, 99, 143, 170, 172, 208–9, 210, 249, 273, 313, 337, 344; installs 

elevator at Wind Cave National Park, 83; pictured, 62; surveys of Jewel Cave, 120

Clark, Bill, 219

Clark Drilling Company, 141

Cleveland, Grover (US President), 16
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 425

Climate Friendly Parks Workshop, 298

Clinton, Bill (US President), 239

Cockrell, Ron, 1

Coe, S. V., 8, 32

Coe, Samuel U., 51

Coe, Vance I., 8, 32

Colorado, 14, 18

Conn, Herb: assists with determining Jewel Cave’s surface footprint, 138, 139, 141; assists with 

lighting system for Jewel Cave NM, 164, 166; attends ribbon-cutting at new visitor center at 

Jewel Cave NM, 177; caving equipment displayed at Jewel Cave, NM, 172; exploration of Jasper 

Cave, 124–25; exploration of Jewel Cave, 3–4, 113, 116, 121–22, 123, 124–30, 131, 133–37, 144, 

157–58, 159, 178, 185, 190–94, 255, 354, 356; and NSS, 262; opposes self-guided tours at Jewel 

Cave NM, 200–21; pictured, 121, 122, 124, 125, 129, 178, 184, 214; plans tour routes, 157–58, 

179; publishes book on Jewel Cave, 210–11, 223; retired, 323; reviews Jewel Cave NM brochure, 

223; rock climbing, 120–21; studies airflow at Jasper Cave, 125; studies airflow at Jewel Cave, 8–

9, 140, 172, 190, 332; mentioned, 181, 219, 329

Conn, Jan: assists with determining Jewel Cave’s surface footprint, 141; attends ribbon-cutting at 

new visitor center at Jewel Cave NM, 177; caving equipment displayed at Jewel Cave NM, 172; 

celebrates 200th mile at Jewel Cave, 353; exploration of Jasper Cave, 124–25; exploration of Jewel 

Cave, 3–4, 113, 116, 121–22, 123, 124–30, 131, 133–37, 144, 157–58, 159, 178, 185, 190–94, 255, 

354, 356; and NSS, 262; opposes closure of Jewel Cave exploration to volunteers, 329; opposes 

self-guided tours at Jewel Cave NM, 220–21; pictured, 121, 122, 124, 126, 131, 178, 345, 350, 

353; plans tour routes, 157–58, 179; publishes book on Jewel Cave, 210–11, 223; records film 

audio for Jewel Cave NM, 347; retired, 323; reviews Jewel Cave NM brochure, 223; rock 

climbing, 120–21; studies airflow at Jewel Cave, 190; mentioned, 181, 219

Conner, James F., 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52

Coolidge, Calvin (US President), 54

Corner Construction Company, 174

Crazy Horse Memorial, 303

Creative Act, 16

Cronenberger, Richard, 274

Crook County, WY, 267

Cross, Frank, 205, 271

Cross, W. R., 25

Crystal Cave. See Bethlehem Cave.

Cub Scouts, 348–49

Cumberland Gap Caves, 194

Cumberland Valley Railroad Company, 21

Curry, Diana, 297

Curry, Patrick, 297

Curtain, Marie, 239, 240, 244, 271, 276, 277, 393

Custer, George (Gen.), 15

Custer, SD, 1, 2, 15, 16, 18, 22, 25, 31, 48, 50, 51, 54, 58, 60, 61, 64, 70, 84, 86, 90, 115, 123, 130, 

141, 142, 148, 152, 153, 181, 188, 190, 199, 229, 243, 244, 252, 253, 265, 266, 283, 319, 325, 348, 

353

Custer 4-H, 153
426 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Custer Bank, 188

Custer Chamber of Commerce, 153, 188, 241, 254, 303

Custer Christmas Parade, 303

Custer Christmas for Kids, 303

Custer Chronicle, 23, 27, 86, 189, 193

Custer Commercial Club, 48, 50, 51

Custer Community Hospital, 188

Custer County, SD, 19, 32, 36, 41, 271

Custer County Commission, 265

Custer County Emergency Services Office, 307

Custer County Environmental Education Coordinating Committee, 221

Custer County School System, 221

Custer County Sheriff’s Office, 235, 236, 243, 307, 354

Custer County Weed Inspector, 271

Custer Housing Authority, 265–66

Custer Regional Hospital, 303

Custer Rotary Club, 86, 188, 303

Custer School District, 347

Custer Sportsmen Association, 153

Custer State Game Sanctuaries, 75

Custer State Park, 75, 91, 188, 229, 294, 301, 348, 349

D

Dance, Harold, 182–83

Danielson, W. C., 43–44, 45

Daschle, Tom (US Senator), 201, 202–3

Daughters of the American Revolution (DAR), 25

Dave, Dennis, 304

Davies, William, 120

Davila, Vidal, 391

Davis, Marsha, 200, 234, 259

Davis, Will E., 52

Deadwood, SD, 23, 26, 27

Deal, Dwight, 120, 121, 122, 130, 220, 262, 353

de Coursey, Wesley, 84, 88

Demaray, A. E., 86

Denver, CO, 42, 180, 237

Dersch, Rusty, 205

Despain, Joel, 256, 305

Devenport, J. F., 138

Devils Tower National Monument, 75, 77, 78, 87, 88, 147, 151–52, 208, 243, 269, 270, 288, 340, 348

Dille, Frederick N., 391

Dilts, Karen, 126

Dilts, Larry, 180, 184, 206, 216, 237, 244, 246, 247, 248, 249, 250, 274, 279, 285, 290, 344, 392
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 427

Ditmanson, Dennis, 181, 182, 183, 185, 187, 188, 192, 193, 196, 197, 205–6, 210, 218, 219, 224–25, 

226, 228, 392

Dobberstein, Paul, 41, 43

Doerr, John, 120

Dolinich, Peggy, 219

Donnell, Jean, 183

E

Eastern Star, 25

Eggers, Myron, 243

Eibert, Bill, 119–20, 122

Eilefson, Ron, 295

Electronic Solutions, 346

Elks, 25

El Morro National Monument, 182

Elms, Wallace B. (Walter, Wally), 116, 117, 124, 138, 141, 392

Emergency Relief and Construction Act, 59, 60

Engelbert, Bill, 62

Environmental Education Association of South Dakota, 188

Epworth League, 25

Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO), 298

Eubank, John, 138

Evans-Hatch, Gail, 9, 337

Evans-Hatch, Michael, 9, 337

Evans-Hatch and Associates, 337

Evans, Mike, 339

Everglades National Park, 77

Executive Order 6166, 56

F

Fagnan, Brian, 323

Fahrenbach, Mark, 259

Farrell, Don, 83

Farrell, Jane, 186

Farrell, Tom, 317

Fay, Dick, 189

Federal Cave Resources Protection Act, 201–4, 261, 264, 324

Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act (FLREA), 292

Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic Performance, 298

Federal Register, 142

Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy and Program Review Report, 269

Fellbaum, Keith, 166, 167

Fenton, MO, 138

Field, Ernest, 149–50

Fitzgerald, C. W., 19, 32–33
428 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Florissant Fossil Beds, 294

Forest Reserve Act, 16–18, 35

forest reserve system, 17, 53

Forest Service. See US Forest Service. 

Ford, Derek, 198

Fort Collins, CO, 91

Fort Hays State University, 198, 276

Ft. Morgan, CO, 232

Fossil Cycad National Monument, 79, 90–91

Four Mile Creek, 58

Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 324

Freeland, Edward D., 57, 391

Frontier Constructors, Inc., 160, 162, 163, 164

fur trade, 13–14

G

Garfield, James R., 33

General Land Office (GLO), 20, 26, 35, 40, 42

Geneva, NY, 120

geology: of Black Hills, 5; boxwork, 40, 42, 43, 132, 147; calcite crystals, 7, 40, 41, 43, 80, 95, 104, 

108, 127, 128, 130, 131, 137, 299; of caves, 5–9, 120; Deadwood Formation, 233; frostwork, 19, 

40, 42, 127, 147, 330; geodes, 42, 96, 132; of Jewel Cave, 5–9, 32, 69, 80, 83, 102, 104, 120, 128, 

130, 133, 137, 149, 158, 163, 187, 190, 211, 217, 237, 254, 259, 261, 276, 331, 353, 355; Laramide 

Orogeny, 5; Limestone Plateau, 108; Minnelusa formation, 5–6; Mississippian Period, 5; 

Pahasapa limestone, 5, 6; stalactites, 42, 80, 130; stalagmites, 42, 43, 130, 133, 134, 136, 137, 157; 

studied, 158, 187; surface, 149

Germany, 332, 353

Gillespie, Donald F., 117, 151, 153, 158, 164, 170, 392

Girl Scouts, 348

Given, Dave, 289

Glacier National Park, 115

Glass, Carl, 152

Gleicher, Michelle, 279

Glen Canyon National Recreation Area, 237

Gola, Miriam, 290, 295, 393

Golden Gate National Recreation Area, 183

Gore, Al (US Vice President), 239

Government Accountability Office (GAO), 225

Graves, Henry, 18

grazing, 16, 18, 32, 68

Grand Army of the Republic, 25

Grand Canyon, 33

Gratten, Weldon, 106

Great Basin National Monument, 305

Great Dakota Bust, 16
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 429

Great Depression, 59

Great Plains, 14

Great Sioux Reserve, 14

Greene, C. W., 26

Gregg, H. Raymond, 105

Gries, John Paul, 120

Grotto of the Redemption (West Bend, IA), 41

H

Hall, Robert G., 104

Hannan, John, 119–20

Hanson, Harold S., 79

Harding, Warren G., 53

Harney National Forest, 38, 44, 51, 54, 59, 75, 90, 92, 149

Harney Peak. See Black Elk Peak.

Harpers Ferry Center (HFC), 170, 172, 219, 222, 223, 288, 347, 350

Harrison, Benjamin (US President), 16

Hart, Jill, 239, 240, 252, 295, 393

Hart, Richard T. (Dick), 79, 80, 88, 108, 118, 147, 392

Hartzog, George, 137, 142, 170

Harvard University, 130

Hatton, John, 45, 46

Hayes, Willett Martin, 33

Hays, KS, 276

Hays, William, 40

HDR, 316

Heckman, Phil, 295, 393

Heideman, Eric, 86

Hell Canyon, 2, 18, 19, 22, 23, 28, 29, 43, 44, 50, 60, 61, 62, 70, 73, 90, 95, 100, 105, 106, 128, 143, 

153, 169, 170, 178, 190, 191, 206, 218, 233, 249, 252, 253, 254, 282, 286, 288, 312, 337

Hell Canyon Stream Channel, 286

Hendricks, Al, 2, 180, 181, 185, 187, 191, 212, 214, 215, 217, 226, 392

Henley, Lyn, 350

Hermann, Binger, 26

Highway 16: accidents on, 236; advertised, 86; Association, 153; centerline of, 142; fencing 

alongside, 207, 253; fire management near, 270; improvements to, 244, 252–54, 311–13; 

intersection with Jewel Cave NM road, 67, 100, 133, 154, 236, 253, 337; and Jasper Fire, 281, 

282, 283, 286; pictured, 60; plans to reroute, 105, 106, 253; portion adopted by Paha Sapa 

Grotto, 304; realigned, 58–61, 253; right-of-way, 68; side work for, 64; signage on, 95, 155; 

vegetation along, 206; water runoff from as potential source of pollutants, 200; mentioned, 50, 

219, 331

Highway 85, 58

Hill, W. F., 35–36

Hill City, SD, 151

Hill Spring. See Jewel Cave Spring.
430 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Hipschman, Don, 135–36, 157

Hitchcock, Ethan A., 26

Hockelberg, Cindy, 267

Holder, Steve, 183, 185, 205, 220, 221, 226, 227, 255, 393

Holmes, Clyde, 18

Holmes, Mark, 18

Hoover, Herbert (US President), 54

Horrocks, Rod, 304

Hosback, Lea, 64

Hotchkiss, Warren D., 149, 153, 171, 391

Hot Springs, SD, 16, 23, 25, 31, 174

Hot Springs Gem and Mineral Society, 153

Housing Corporation, 232

Hovey, Horace Carter, 22

Howard, Alan D., 130–32

Howe Investments and Northwestern Engineering Company (HINEC), 152, 156

Howe’s Cavern, 22

Hunt, Naomi, 181

Hunt, Wilson, 13

hunting, 31

Hurd, Steve, 180, 198, 216, 222, 392

Hylton, Jimmie D., 118

I

Ikeda, Noby, 181

Indiana, 22

Ingalls, George F., 76, 98

International Congress of Speleology (ICS), 262

Iowa, 41

J

Jablonski, Pat, 257–58

Janklow, William J. (SD Governor), 235

Jasper Cave: airflow at, 125; entrance excluded from Jewel Cave NM, 133, 144–45; explored, 124–

25; improvements suggested, 102, 103; included as a part of Jewel Cave NM, 33, 35, 48; 

interpretive statement ignores, 80; not to be developed, 104, 107, 125, 126; signs at, 110; tours 

not given, 52; vandalism at, 152; work not performed by CCC, 58; mentioned, 8, 32, 281

Jasper Fire (2002), 206, 281–88, 309, 311, 321, 334, 335, 351

Jennings, Ted, 259

Jewel Cave:

American Indians at, 10, 11, 272, 341; 

areas within: Big Duh, 256; Blue Heaven, 100; Brain Drain, 215; Broken Chamber, 70; Bye-Bye 

Canyon, 96; Corrigan Passage, 236; Cracker Barrel, 128; Curio Shop, 327; Deep Camp, 329; 

Deep Canyon, 100; Dingo Pass, 323; Dungeon Room, 82, 214; Eerie Boulevard, 127; Flat 

Top Room 70; Frosty Grotto, 127, 128; Formation Room, 157, 158, 197; Gothic Dome, 43, 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 431

70, 71; Haunted Loft, 128; Heavenly Room, 82; Hell Canyon Camp, 329; Hell’s Half Acre, 

329; historic area, 242, 250, 254, 279, 313, 343, 344; Hourglass Lake, 329; Hurricane Corner, 

9, 255; Junction Chamber, 43–44, 70; King Kong’s Cage, 131; Kittycombs, 66, 67; LongWinded Passage, 130; Mezzanine, 157; Milk River, 19, 43, 44, 70, 71, 80, 82, 83, 118, 123, 

126; New Wet Room 200; Onyx Hall, 44, 80; Penn Station, 123; Ragged Top Room, 70; 

Rambling Loft, 330; Rum Runners Road, 157; Seventh Heaven, 255, 256; Spooky Hollow, 

157; Station 108, 44; Target Room, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 158, 159–60, 162, 163, 165, 

166, 167, 168, 179, 190, 220, 278, 315, 316, 342; Torture Room (formerly Chinese Torture 

Chamber), 157, 213; Very Important Shortcut (VISC), 191, 193; Victory After Continuous 

Contortions (VACC), 194, 328; West Camp, 329

Dance Club, 23; 

estimated volume of, 8, 119, 139; 

exploration of, 2, 18–20, 22, 70–71, 110, 113, 117–45, 158, 159, 171, 185, 190–94, 195, 211, 217, 

254, 281, 292, 296, 299, 304, 323–24, 328–30, 347, 350, 354, 355, 356;

features of: airflow within, 7–9, 18, 32, 71, 119, 140, 147, 149, 158, 159, 171, 190, 227, 261, 299, 

331, 332, 350; alcoves, 96; aragonite, 127, 132, 330; bacon rind, 129, 137; boxwork, 40, 43, 

132, 147; calcite crystals, 7, 40, 41, 43, 80, 95, 104, 108, 127, 128, 130, 131, 137, 299; cave 

pearls, 132, 137; chert layers, 132; chiclet, 137; columns, 130; Cracker Jack, 44, 71; dogtooth 

spar, 124, 130, 215; draperies, 130; drip formations, 128, 130, 137; druses, 96, 131; flowstone, 

130, 131, 132, 137; frostwork, 19, 127, 129, 147, 330; geodes, 96, 132; globulites, 147; 

gypsum flowers, 147; helictites, 130, 147; hydrology, 158, 196, 263, 287, 331; hydromagnesite 

bubbles/balloons, 130, 131, 132, 147, 157, 199; limestone, 158, 160; logomites, 133, 134, 

136, 137, 157; manganese, 40, 131, 132; polished peppers, 132; popcorn, 131, 133, 137; red 

cave earth, 132; ribbon calcite, 96; rimstone, 132; sandstone intrusions, 131; scintillites, 130, 

131, 132, 137, 157; soda straws, 132; speleothems, 158, 192, 197, 278, 299, 350; stalactites, 

80, 130; stalagmites, 43, 130, 133, 134, 136, 137, 157; water pools, 132; wet rooms, 130

federal protection of, 53;

Game Preserve suggested, 31, 32, 54; 

geology of, 5–9, 32, 69, 80, 83, 102, 104, 120, 128, 130, 133, 137, 149, 158, 163, 187, 190, 211, 

217, 237, 254, 259, 261, 276, 331, 353, 355; 

local support for, 48; 

location of, 5; 

mining at, 19–20, 22, 27–28, 33–34, 35–41, 43, 47, 50, 51, 52, 54, 122–23, 211, 279; 

modifications to, 22–24; 

national monument status suggested, 32; 

national park status suggested, 27; 

promotion of, 22–24, 135–36; 

protection against vandalism, 35, 41–47, 48; 

purchase proposed, 27; 

routes through, 23, 43; 

specimens removed from, 23, 41, 42, 43, 45, 46, 48–49, 95, 104, 108; 

topographical survey of, 43–44;

tourism at, 20–24, 27, 28, 29, 31, 37, 38, 39, 40, 47–52, 54, 56, 70

Jewel Cave Corporation: disbanded, 72; formation, 50–52, 54; management of Jewel Cave, 55–58, 

66, 67; offers tours of Jewel Cave, 57, 58, 63, 70, 73, 80, 354; road construction, 64

Jewel Cave Employee Association, 303
432 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Jewel Cave Employee’s Recreation Association, 188

Jewel Cave National Monument: 

75th anniversary, 188, 210; 

100th anniversary, 302; 

75th mile surveyed, 193, 236; 

100th mile surveyed, 255; 

200th mile surveyed, 281, 324, 329–30, 351, 353; 

200-mile reunion, 1, 2, 302, 330; 

Accident Review Committee, 298; 

administrative history (proposed), 210–11; 

appropriations for, 47, 48, 57, 69, 73, 80, 101, 140, 162, 225, 229, 259, 279, 292, 293; 

archeology at, 9, 10, 11, 108, 263, 272–73, 276, 286, 337, 339; 

and Black Hills Administrative Group, 239–40, 280, 294–96, 321; 

Black Hills Natural History Association at, 88; Boneyard, 250–51; 

boundaries of, 68, 95, 103, 113, 142, 144–45, 149, 237, 242; 

brochure, 85–86, 147, 222–23, 347; 

climatology, 353; 

consideration of de-establishment, 40, 46, 72, 93–105; 

cultural landscape, 272, 337; 

cultural resource management, 184, 195, 208–12, 261, 272–77, 290, 292, 309, 337–40, 347; 

development of, 47, 49, 57, 108, 109, 131, 132–37, 153, 211;

entrances to: additional considered, 99–100, 113, 127, 128, 129, 132, 137, 158; historic (created), 

22, 23, 45, 61, 64, 65, 70, 74, 94, 133, 143, 178, 179, 209, 213, 228, 243, 260, 273, 276, 279, 

306, 313, 331, 337, 344, 354; modern (created), 113, 178; original (natural), 22, 299;

established, 31–35, 54, 211; 

ethnographic resources, 272; 

exhibits at, 172; 

Green Team, 298;

historic resources, 272, 274, 276, 337;

improvements to: campground, 58, 68–69, 94, 95, 98, 99, 102, 104, 105, 106–7, 108, 229; 

Canyons Trail, 254, 309, 321, 343; cave trails, 66–67, 99, 101, 102, 104, 107, 108, 109, 155, 

164–66, 198, 224, 227–28; by CCC, 3, 55–58, 59–60, 62–69, 94, 95, 98, 99, 143, 170, 172, 

208–9, 210, 249, 273, 313, 337, 344; communications systems, 100, 103, 166, 220, 234–35; 

concessions, 84, 99, 148, 242–43, 306; electricity, 103, 107, 111, 155, 164, 165, 220, 232–35; 

elevator, 102, 103, 104, 111, 132, 133, 143, 144, 155, 157–68, 172, 176, 177, 178, 179, 186, 

225, 226, 227, 229, 236, 237, 244–47, 258, 259, 278, 310, 313–15, 345, 354; historic log hotel, 

19, 23, 24, 33, 40, 45, 228, 273, 312; housing, 94, 99, 101, 102, 107, 132, 133, 144, 155, 162, 

172–74, 225, 229–32, 244, 251–52, 267, 285, 319–20; internet, 244, 321, 346; museum, 107–

8, 211–12, 272, 275–77, 350; ranger cabin, 63, 64, 94, 95, 98, 99, 100, 143, 170, 172, 208–9, 

272, 273–75, 306, 308, 313, 337, 343; roads, 59, 60, 64, 103, 105–6, 144, 154–56, 164; signs, 

67, 95, 100, 103, 109, 110, 145, 155, 170, 178, 224, 279; surface trails, 64–65, 94, 95, 101, 

102, 107, 217–18, 224, 228–29, 254, 343; underground lighting, 143, 144, 155, 164–66, 197, 

213, 228, 257, 261, 314, 354; visitor center, 102, 105, 107, 113, 124, 133, 138, 140, 143, 144, 

147, 152–77, 178, 181, 186, 187, 198, 212, 216, 218, 225, 226–27, 229, 236, 242, 244, 247–48, 

249, 250, 253, 254, 267, 280, 283, 287, 290, 291, 297, 301, 302, 310, 317–18, 321, 328, 343, 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 433

350, 354; Walk on the Roof trail, 254, 321, 343; water and sewage system, 62–63, 94, 98, 99, 

100–101, 103, 156, 169, 210, 230, 232–35, 242, 244, 249–50, 270, 271, 287, 320–21;

inclusion in Black Hills National Forest suggested, 32, 33; 

interpretation at, 72, 79, 80–86, 88, 93–94, 99, 102, 107, 130, 167, 168–72, 179, 180, 183, 184, 

187, 190, 195, 196, 211–23, 228–29, 236, 237, 238, 241, 243, 244, 246, 247, 257, 262, 277–80, 

281, 287, 288, 290, 291, 293, 296, 301–2, 304, 305, 326, 338, 340–50, 351, 354; 

and Jasper Fire, 281–88; 

Junior Ranger program, 222, 301, 340, 347–49; 

land leased to JCC, 52; 

land removed from settlement, 35; 

law enforcement at, 73, 152, 235–36, 238, 243–44, 306–9, 354; 

location of, 50; 

maintenance at, 72, 73, 74, 79, 101, 113, 172–74, 223–36, 242, 244–54, 267, 291, 293, 294, 296, 

309–21, 326, 354; 

Maintenance Management System (MMS), 225–26;

management by: Forest Service, 31, 35–52, 54, 72, 86, 354; NPS, 3, 4, 55–58, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 

72–93, 99, 100, 101, 110, 111, 123, 124, 126, 134, 136, 138, 144, 149, 150, 154, 164, 165, 173, 

177, 178, 179, 189, 190, 193, 194–98, 200, 208, 209, 210, 226, 228, 229, 232, 233, 239, 242, 

248, 249, 251, 254, 256, 264, 266, 269, 280, 288, 354, 355; Wind Cave National Park, 55, 57, 

59, 66, 68, 69, 70, 72, 74, 75, 77, 78, 79, 83, 84, 85, 90, 93, 96, 99, 101, 102, 104, 105, 107, 

109, 110, 113, 114–15, 116, 118, 121, 123, 145–46, 151, 167, 171, 172, 179, 181–82, 185, 196, 

197, 200, 216, 222, 223, 229, 230, 231, 235, 238, 247, 256, 281;

map of, 34, 35, 223, 237, 239, 275, 289, 294, 354; 

mapping, 118–20, 131, 168, 194, 258–59, 324;

natural resources: aboveground, 89–92, 149–52, 171, 196, 205–7, 217, 228–29, 271–72, 322; 

bats, 88, 145–46, 171, 172, 196, 198, 207, 217, 259–60, 261, 263, 276, 299, 304, 313, 330, 

333, 347; belowground, 88–89, 142, 179, 196, 205, 237, 238, 261, 322; biological, 237, 254, 

258, 261, 290, 353, 355; cave lakes, 299; cave management, 195, 196, 197, 198, 200–205, 237, 

238, 241, 254, 257–61, 281, 290, 301, 304, 326, 351; conservation, 198; fire management, 89–

90, 99, 103, 143, 150–52, 207–8, 211, 224, 229, 235, 241, 251, 267–70, 280, 281, 285, 288, 

297, 333, 335–37, 351, 354; Fire Management Unit, 335; Fire Use Module, 269, 281, 336; 

grazing, 92, 143, 149, 154, 204, 205, 206, 207, 271; hydrology, 158, 196, 200, 226, 234, 259, 

321, 351, 353; and insect infestations, 69, 91, 92, 98, 149–50, 206; invasive species, 206, 271, 

281, 286, 321, 334–35, 351; mammals, 88, 258, 276; management of, 180, 184, 190–208, 224, 

236, 238, 243, 244, 246, 249, 253, 254–72, 281, 288, 290, 291, 292, 296, 297, 304, 309, 316, 

321–37, 345, 347, 349, 350, 351, 354, 355; mineral deposits, 88–89, 122–23, 333; mineral 

specimens displayed, 84, 137, 171, 172; Natural Resource Program Review, 197, 204–5; 

photo-monitoring program, 198; soil and moisture conservation, 149; surface geology, 149; 

timber, 17, 32, 40, 56, 69, 80, 89, 91–92, 98, 99, 107, 128, 147, 149, 204, 211, 269, 270, 285, 

286, 288, 333; vegetation surveyed, 200, 206; weed control, 205, 206; withdrawal of land 

from mineral entry, 123, 143, 205;

and NEKOTA, 240, 280, 295–96; 

Park Safety Committee, 298; 

as part of Harney National Forest, 38; 

as part of potential Sioux National Park, 201; 

partnerships, 86–88, 188–189, 200–205, 222, 240–41, 262–64, 267, 280, 303–6, 336; 
434 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

planning, 297–300;

planning documents: Cave and Karst Management Plan (CKMP), 324, 325–27, 328, 351; Cave 

Rescue and Emergency Operations Plan, 193; Cave Rescue Pre-Planning, 257; Climate 

Friendly Parks Plan, 298; Continuation of Operations Plan, 298; Core Operations Report, 

291–92, 305, 341; Cultural Landscape Report (CLR), 337, 344; Draft Comprehensive 

Interpretive Plan (CIP), 343; Draft Human Use Document, 260; Environmental Assessment, 

288, 325–27, 337; Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), 242; Fire Management Plans, 208, 

268, 288, 337; First Master Plan (1942), 93–96; Foundation Document, 299, 300, 355; 

General Development Narrative, 142–43, 152; General Management Plans, 185–86, 204, 

241–42, 245, 249, 251, 257, 264, 273, 279, 297, 299; Geologic Resources Inventory Report, 

331; Hazard Fuel Reduction Program, 267, 268; Historic Furnishing Report (HFR), 344; 

Historic Resource Studies (HRS), 209, 273, 337–38; Historic Structure Report, 274; Housing 

Management Plans, 231, 251, 319; Interpretive Prospectuses, 186, 279; Jurisdictional 

Inventory, 308; Law Enforcement Needs Assessment (LENA), 306; Long Range 

Interpretive Plan, 341; Master Plan (1965), 143; Mission 66 Prospectus, 102–5, 107, 108, 111, 

117; Modified Environmental Management System (MEMS) plan, 298; Natural and Cultural 

Resource Management Plan (RMP), 195–96, 205, 206, 207, 209; Natural Resources 

Condition Assessment, 322; Operations Evaluation Report, 297, 302, 308, 309, 314, 319, 

328, 335, 338, 341; Park Safety Program Statement of Purpose, 244; Policy on the 

Distribution of Cave Data, 324, 326; Resource Management Plans (RMP), 253, 257, 261, 

272; Revised Master Plan and Prospectus (1957–1985), 105–10; Scope of Collections 

statement, 339, 340; Search and Rescue (SAR) Plans, 256, 327; Standard Operations 

Procedures (SOPs), 297; Superintendent’s Compendium, 298–99; Updated Master Plan 

(1952), 98–101; Visitor Management-Resource Protection Assessment Program (VRAP), 

244, 307; Wildland Fire Prevention Plan, 268;

primitive nature of, 82–83, 96, 98, 102, 104, 107, 111, 124, 131; 

promotion of, 82, 83, 87, 135–36, 219; 

proposed as part of Black Hills-Great Plains National Park, 75; 

protection of, 72, 73, 74, 79, 88, 180, 183, 190; 

radiation in, 194, 226–27, 232, 331; 

radiolocation at, 138–41, 330; 

recommended as a national forest, 46; 

recommended as a national monument, 33; 

recommended as a national park, 137; 

recommended as separate superintendency, 78, 114, 115–16; 

recycling at, 233; 

rockfall at, 166–67; 

safety at, 193, 194, 195, 245, 248, 278, 281, 298, 309, 346; 

search and rescue at, 304, 308, 327; 

solid waste disposal, 233, 250–51; 

significance of, 96–98; 

staffing at, 103, 107, 113–17, 145, 179–85, 186–87, 218, 220, 237–42, 288–94, 341, 345; 

Student Conservation Association (SCA) at, 185, 187, 218, 238, 290, 301, 354; 

Student Temporary Employment Program (STEP), 293; 

surveys of, 67, 70–71, 102, 120, 205; 

trespass on, 68, 95, 149, 152, 154, 205, 206;
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 435

tours: capacity of, 171, 214, 219, 220, 221, 228, 244–46, 277, 278, 343; costumed, 279, 344; 

demand, 212, 213–14, 217, 218, 219, 220, 221, 277, 278, 342; Discovery Tour, 345; fees for, 

171, 221, 236, 278, 340, 345–47; Heaven (Heavenly Room) tour, 82, 83, 109, 249; Hell 

(Dungeon Room) tour, 82, 109, 249, 313; from historic entrance, 179; in “historic” portion, 

169; Historic/Candlelight Tour, 213, 215, 278, 279, 330, 341, 343, 344, 345; incorporating 

elevator, 143, 157–68, 179, 236, 244, 245, 278, 354; Lantern Tour, 344, 354; Long 

Spelunking Tour, 213, 214, 216; loop tour, 123, 124, 126–27, 128, 159, 220; Milk River tour, 

82, 123; P.E.O. tour, 82; routes, 70, 71, 80, 82, 107, 123–28, 131, 157–68, 222, 248–49, 274; 

Scenic Tour, 197, 198, 213, 214, 227, 228, 248, 257, 278, 296, 297, 315–17, 331, 342, 343, 

344, 345; self-guided proposed, 219–21; Short Spelunking Tour, 213, 214; Spelunking Tour, 

189, 200, 214, 215, 216, 278, 341; for students, 348; Target Tours, 278, 345; Temple Dome 

tour, 82; Wild Caving Tour, 308, 341, 343; mentioned, 52, 55, 57, 58, 70–71, 72, 73, 74, 79, 

80–86, 88, 89, 107, 119, 168, 169, 177, 242, 263, 326, 340, 341–44, 354

vandalism at, 72, 73, 95, 152, 219, 229, 243, 251, 263, 308, 330; 

visitors, 58, 70, 80, 83, 84, 95, 98, 99, 107, 113, 117, 127, 136, 144, 148, 161, 168, 169, 171, 179, 

189, 190, 197, 211, 212, 214, 217, 220, 245, 247, 249, 251, 273, 277, 292, 302, 341–44; 

volunteers at, 185, 187, 193, 197–98, 218, 238, 255, 272, 290, 296–97, 301, 303, 309, 323, 324, 

326, 328, 329, 341, 347, 354; 

Volunteers in Parks (VIP) at, 185, 296–97, 303, 326, 354; 

water rights at, 93; 

WCNHA at, 148, 169–70, 186–88; mentioned, 1

Jewel Cave Spring, 33, 62

Johnson, Larry, 289, 294, 298, 303, 308, 314, 329, 333, 339, 393

Johnson, Laura, 274

Johnson, Lyndon B. (US President), 144

Johnson, Tim (US Congressman), 254

Jones, Bruce, 9, 338

Jones, Harold, 78, 392

Jones, Knox, 146

Journal of Cave and Karst Studies, 330

K

Kaas, Fred, 167

Kelsey, Clarence, 109

Kentucky, 20, 53

Kerbo, Ron, 305

Kerney, O. C., 50–51

KEVN, 189

Keyser, Willett, 86

King, Bob, 290, 319, 393

King, John, 245

Kinzer, Clarence, 118–19, 123

Kirbo, Ronald, 196

Kit Manufacturing Company

Kittredge, Frank A., 67
436 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Kneipp, Leon F., 48

Knights of Pythias, 25

Kocer, Jerry, 146

Krueger, Leonard A., 392

Kruse, D., 259

Kyler, George R., 166

L

Lacey, John F. (US Representative), 26

Lakota College, 238

Larry Klein Design/Point Zero Design, 247

Lasala, Blase, 328

Layne Consultants, Inc., 275

Lee, Andrew E. (SD Governor), 25

Lehman Caves National Monument, 52, 53, 181, 194

Leonard, George M., 202

Lerch, Bates & Associates, Inc., 246

Lesley, A. F., 50, 51

Lewis, J. Volney, 66, 67, 69, 104

Lewis and Clark Cavern National Monument, 53

Liek, Harry J., 57, 72, 73, 74, 76, 77, 78, 80, 84, 91, 93, 94, 98, 391

Lienau, Walter L. (Walt), 88, 113, 115, 119, 392

Lightning Creek, 58, 59

Linch, Lyle K., 18, 74, 75, 82, 83, 84, 86, 87, 90, 95, 96, 97, 120, 392

Lincoln, NE, 140

Lithograph Canyon, 2, 22, 50, 58, 105, 128, 130, 132, 153, 158, 159, 164, 174, 218, 254, 286, 309, 

310, 335, 354

Lloyd, Mike, 252

Lloyd, James V., 99

Logan, Wilfred D., 140

Lombard, Jess H., 115, 116, 117, 121, 122, 123, 126, 127, 128, 132, 133, 134, 136, 137, 138, 140, 146, 

151, 153, 172, 391

Long, Barbara Bevin, 273

Look, Hal, 152, 157

Loucks, Dean W., 93

Love, Judy, 302

Lujan, Manuel, Jr. (US Representative), 201–2

Luray Caverns, 21, 22

Lutheran Brotherhood, 188

Lytle, Don, 181, 184, 223, 393

M

MAC Construction, 232, 317

MacMillan, Nancy, 274

Madison Aquifer, 2
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 437

Mammoth Cave, 20, 21, 22, 26, 53, 54, 194, 248

Mammoth Cave National Park, 54, 196, 262, 263, 304, 346

Mammoth Cave National Park Association, 54

Martin, Eben Wever (US Representative), 26, 38

Martin, Robert, 146

Martin, Zane, 2, 339–40

Martin and Martin, 310

Martinz, Nancy, 294, 299, 308, 394

Maryland, 120

Masons, 25

Mather, Steven, 53–54, 55

Mattes, Merrill J., 140

Maxwell, James C., 138

McCarty, Ken, 198

McClanahan, Lester F. (Les), 179, 181, 182, 185, 191, 214, 215, 216, 391

McClean, James, 330

McCurdy, Chuck, 158

McDonald, Jesse, 24, 25, 26

McDougall, Roberta, 241–42

McGovern, George (US Senator), 137, 140, 142, 144

McKinley, William (US President), 17, 35

McLaughlin, John S., 103

McLean, Dave, 172

McMaster University, 198

Meinecke, E. P., 68

Menard, Paul, 239–40, 290, 295, 393

Merle, Fred, 391

Merriam, Lawrence C., 92

Michaud, Albert: complains about Forest Service, 55; develops Jewel Cave, 22–24, 44, 45, 47, 52, 

179, 249, 273, 303, 354; exploration of Jewel Cave, 2, 18–19, 22, 29; mining claim to Jewel Cave, 

19, 20, 22, 27–28, 29, 31, 35, 40, 41, 54; moves to British Columbia, Canada, 28, 41; other 

mining claims, 28, 36, 39, 51; pictured, 19, 24; promotion of Jewel Cave, 24; reimbursement for 

Jewel Cave development, 27, 33; reimbursement for Jewel Cave mining claim, 37, 38, 40–41, 50, 

51; relinquishment of Jewel Cave mining claim, 38, 39, 51; studies airflow at Jewel Cave, 8, 32

Michaud, Felix, 16, 18

Michaud, Frank: asks Forest Service to take over Jewel Cave, 47; death, 50; develops Jewel Cave, 22–

24, 44, 45, 47, 52, 179, 249, 273, 303, 354; exploration of Jewel Cave, 2, 18–19, 22, 29; mining 

claim to Jewel Cave, 19, 20, 22, 27–28, 29, 31, 35, 40, 41, 54; offers assistance to Forest Service, 

45; other mining claims, 28, 36, 39, 51; pictured, 19, 24; promotion of Jewel Cave, 24, 28; 

reimbursement for Jewel Cave development, 27, 33; reimbursement for Jewel Cave mining 

claim, 37, 38, 40–41, 50, 51; relinquishment of Jewel Cave mining claim, 38, 39, 51; removes 

materials from Jewel Cave, 41–43, 45, 46; studies airflow at Jewel Cave, 8, 32; works for Forest 

Service, 47

Michaud, Ira, 24, 27, 47, 48–49, 51, 52

Michaud, Mamie (Riley): 28, 48–49, 50, 51, 52, 54

Miller, Keith E., 108, 115, 116, 123, 126, 127, 128, 152, 392
438 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Mineral Palace, 23

mining: in Black Hills, 12, 15, 16, 18, 29; gold, 14, 15–16, 28, 29; iron, 28, 37; jasper, 37, 40; at 

Jewel Cave, 19–20, 22, 27–28, 33–34, 35–41, 43, 47, 50, 51, 52, 122–23, 211, 279; laws regarding, 

202, 203; lithographic limestone, 37; manganese, 28, 32, 37, 40; mica, 39; rights, 203; silver, 28; 

value of minerals, 25, 39, 40, 42, 46

Minneapolis, MN, 60

Minnesota, 117

Minuteman Missile National Historic Site, 298

Missouri River, 11, 12

Mitchell, SD, 27

Mitchell Capital, 27

Modern Woodmen of America, 25

Mojave National Preserve, 289

Montana, 14, 53

Moore, John, 258

Mora, Dave, 198

Morrell, Fred W., 38, 41, 42

Morrison, Don, 294, 320, 393

Mossman, Rick, 306

Motion Control Engineering (MCE), 314

Mott, William Penn, Jr., 225

Mount Rushmore, 5

Mount Rushmore National Memorial: BHAA at, 87, 88; and Black Hills Administrative Group, 240, 

294–96, 321; Black Hills Natural History Association at, 88, 147; attends Climate Friendly Parks 

Workshop, 298; Collection Management Plan, 339–40; creates signs for Jewel Cave NM, 110; 

curatorial facility, 1, 276–77, 280, 339–40, 350; fire protection at, 90, 151–52, 208, 269, 270; law 

enforcement at, 243, 306, 354; maintenance at, 309; and NEKOTA, 240; as part of Wind Cave 

National Park, 77; proposed as part of Black Hills-Great Plains National Park, 75; 

superintendency of, 78; mentioned, 87, 166, 181–82, 239, 280, 308

Mountain Sawmill Company, 92

Mud Springs Road, 50

Muir Woods, 33

Mundt, Karl E. (US Senator), 137, 144

N

National Cave and Karst Management Symposiums, 305

National Cave and Karst Research Institute (NCKRI), 263, 264, 305, 353

National Cave Rescue Commission, 193

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), 333

National Forest Commission, 16

National Geographic, 347

National Historic Preservation Act (Section 106, Section 110), 210, 231, 313, 338

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), 194

National Park Foundation, 348

National Park Reservation Service (NPRS), 346
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 439

National Park Service (NPS): acquires water rights at Jewel Cave from Forest Service, 63; 

administers Carlsbad Caverns National Park, 54; appropriations for, 74, 292; appropriations for 

Jewel Cave, 162, 259, 292, 293; Area Investigation Branch, 104–5; and Black Hills 

Administrative Group, 240, 354; Black Hills Area Office, 75, 77, 78, 87, 354; and Black Hills 

Parks and Forest Association, 301; Branch of Plans and Design, 63, 67, 68; Cave Radiation 

Safety and Occupational Health Guideline, 194–95; and CCC work at Jewel Cave, 64, 65; 

celebrates 200th mile at Jewel Cave, 353; Centennial, 292–93; centralization, 76, 77; Climate 

Change Response Strategy, 298; Climate Friendly Parks Program, 298; consideration of deestablishment of Jewel Cave NM, 72, 93–110; cooperating associations, 301; Courier, 181; 

curation standards, 211–12, 276; Denver Service Center (DSC), 222, 229, 241, 248, 257, 310, 

317; Directive 14, 227; Division of Museums, 172; Division of Natural History, 127, 135; 

Division of Publications, 223; forest management by, 89, 91, 269, 270, 281, 285, 286; Green 

Environmental Management System (GEMS), 298; Green Park Plan, 298; Headquarters

(Washington Office), 96, 102, 103, 104, 117, 120, 121, 218, 346; and Jewel Cave water rights, 93; 

land exchanges, 98, 113, 129, 133, 137, 138, 142–45, 207, 265, 266; Major Acquisition Buying 

Offices (MABOs), 295–96, 315; management of Jewel Cave, 3, 4, 55–58, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72–

93, 99, 100, 101, 110, 111, 123, 124, 126, 134, 136, 138, 144, 149, 150, 154, 164, 165, 173, 177, 

178, 179, 189, 190, 193, 194–98, 200, 205, 208, 209, 210, 226, 228, 229, 232, 233, 242, 248, 249, 

252, 254, 256, 264, 266, 269, 280, 288, 354, 355; Midwest Archeological Center (MWAC), 9, 140, 

338; Midwest Regional Office, 1, 132, 134, 136, 137, 138, 140, 142, 143, 171, 180, 237, 238, 239, 

240, 244, 251, 252, 269, 274, 289, 294, 297, 298, 299, 300, 301, 303, 305, 306, 312, 317, 318, 338; 

Midwest Systems Support Office, 274; Mineral Entry Withdrawal and Mineral Assessment 

Report (1988), 205; Mission 66, 72, 102, 105, 107, 108, 111, 174, 177, 178; National Cave and 

Karst Coordinator, 305; and National Park Approach Road, 59, 60, 61; and NEKOTA, 240, 

295, 354; Northern Great Plains Inventory & Monitoring Network (NGPN), 334–35, 337; Park 

Prescription Program, 303; Park Restoration and Improvement Program (PRIP), 227, 233; 

partnerships, 222, 236, 252, 262–67, 319, 332–24; proposes Black Hills-Great Plains National 

Park, 75, 76; and protection of caves, 204, 261; Recreation Planning Division (Region Two), 76; 

Region Two, 70, 72, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 82, 85, 92, 93, 95, 96, 98, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 

114, 116, 117, 119, 122, 123, 124, 126, 127, 128, 132; reorganization of, 239; replaced by Office 

of National Parks, Buildings, and Reservations, 56; Research Center, 200, 210; resource 

preservation, 256; Rocky Mountain Regional Office, 180, 181, 182–83, 186, 189, 191, 197, 206, 

208–9, 211, 219, 220, 225, 226, 229, 231, 237, 239, 241, 242, 245, 246, 248, 257, 274, 275; 

Servicing Human Resources Offices (SHROs), 295–96; studies hypothetical Black Hills National 

Park, 75; Volunteers in Parks (VIP), 185, 296–97, 303, 326, 354; Western Office of Design and 

Construction (WODC), 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 117, 138–39, 141, 142, 143, 152, 154, 158, 160, 

165, 166, 167–68; and withdrawal of Forest Service land from mineral entry (involvement in), 

123, 143, 205, 264, 325, 332, 355; mentioned, 1

National Park System, 3, 72, 93–111 passim, 178, 235, 262, 291, 343, 350

National Parks Association, 86–87

National Partnership for Reinventing Government, 239

National Register of Historic Places, 209, 273, 337, 338

National Speleological Society (NSS): consulted on managing cave resources, 197, 325; conventions, 

130, 199, 305, 325, 330; exploration of caves, 130, 180, 262; formation of Black Hills Grotto 

encouraged, 87; insurance for cavers discussed with, 121; memorandum of understanding with 
440 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Forest Service, 204; News, 120, 187; Paha Sapa Grotto, 189, 190, 304, 353; protection of caves, 

180, 203; mentioned, 119, 120, 202

Navajo Lands Group, 182

Nebraska, 14, 240, 295

Nebraska National Forests and Grasslands, 188, 243

Neel, H. C., 19, 32–33

Neighbor, Frank, 120

NEKOTA group, 240, 280, 295–96, 354

Nepstad, Jim, 194, 196

Nevada, 52

Nevada National Forest, 53

Nevin, William A., 50, 51, 70, 72

Newcastle, WY, 22, 50, 51, 52, 54, 58, 60, 61, 64, 84, 86, 115, 117, 139, 153, 188, 253, 325, 348

Newcastle Chamber of Commerce, 153, 188, 241, 303

Newcastle Lions Club, 50, 51, 188

New Jersey, 119

New Mexico, 54, 264

New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology, 264

Norbeck, Peter (US Senator), 47, 48, 50, 60, 253

Norfolk and Western Railway, 21

North Dakota, 240, 265, 295

Northern Pacific Railway, 53

Northwest Cave Research Institute (NCRI), 197–98

Northwestern Bell Telephone Company, 155

Nyberg, Philip C., 226

O

O’Bright, Alan, 274

Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), 194

Odd Fellows, 25

O’Dell, Peggy, 238, 250, 252, 261, 262, 266, 274, 288, 289

Ohms, Marc, 262, 328

Ohms, Rene, 2, 262, 290, 305, 322, 323, 325, 327, 330, 348, 353, 393

Ohmstede, Richard, 248

Olson, Rick, 199, 262–63

Olympic National Park, 294, 295

Olympic Peninsula, 33

Omaha, NE, 57, 75, 132, 237, 239

Onyx Cave, 53

Operation of the National Park System (ONPS) funds, 291–92, 397–99

Orcutt, Tina, 288

Oregon, 12, 53

Oregon Caves National Monument, 53, 97, 189, 194

Organic Act, 17

Orr, Joseph L., 78, 84, 99, 392
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 441

Ortega, Ernest W., 182–83, 185, 187, 190, 194, 197, 232, 237, 253, 325, 391

Osage, WY, 50, 51

Osback, Casey, 308

Oshier, Edward H., 158, 159, 160, 161, 163, 167

Ott, Martin C. (Marty), 237, 391

Ozark National Scenic Riverways, 194, 289

P

Pacific Coast, 14

Paha Sapa. See Black Hills.

Paha Sapa Grotto. See National Speleological Society.

Palmer, Art, 187, 193, 198–99, 219, 220–21, 262, 353

Palmer, Peg, 187, 193, 198–99, 219, 220–21, 262

Parker, William H. (US Representative), 31, 32, 33, 36

Pass Creek, 259, 264–67, 271, 355

Pate, Dave, 305

Paulson, Bob, 265, 266, 267

Peck, A. S., 47

Pederson Excavating, 318

Pelczarski, Chris, 304

Pennington County Search and Rescue Team, 193

Perrin, C. E., 51

Peterson, Dave, 52

Pettigrew Amendment, 17

Pflitsch, Andreas, 332, 353

Pierre, SD, 192

Pilcher, Joseph E., 27, 391

Pilcher, Rufus J., 27, 391

Pilger, Henry, 28

Pinchot, Gifford, 32, 33, 35

Platte River, 13

Prairie Dog Spring, 28, 52, 143, 207, 273, 312

Pressler, Larry (US Senator), 245

Price, Overton, 33, 36, 37

Q

Quebec, Canada, 18

Quinn Evans | Architects, 337 

Quintana, Ernest, 301

R

radiolocation, 138–41, 330

railroad, 16, 20, 25, 26

Ramotnik, Cynthia A., 260, 276
442 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Randall, James A., 182, 206, 391

Randolph-Sheppard Act of 1936, 242–43

Rankin, William A., 391

Rapid City, SD, 75, 76, 77, 78, 152, 174, 232, 233, 251, 317, 325

Rapid City Convention and Visitor’s Bureau, 303

Rapid City Journal, 188, 189

Rapid City Rotary Club, 153

Rapid City Visitors Guide, 303

Raver, Buck, 18

Reagan, Ronald (US President), 202

Reder, Theodore, 16

Renz, Larry, 243, 306

Ressler, Patty, 2, 301, 302

Richter, Tom, 301

Riley, Joseph, 18

Riley, Martin, 18

Riley, Smith, 33

Riley, Steve, 183, 392

Robinson, Homer A. (Pete), 116, 392

Rocky Mountain National Park, 180

Rocky Mountains, 33

Ronscavage, John A., 142, 143, 152, 156

Roosevelt, Franklin D. (US President), 56

Roosevelt, Theodore (US President), 26, 31, 33, 34, 35, 37, 53, 54

Rosga, Karen, 238, 241, 274, 278, 279, 287, 290, 296, 341, 344, 346, 393

Round Spring Cave, 194

Ruhr-Universität Bochum, 332

Rural Electrification Administration, 155

Ryan, Patrick J. (P. J.), 118–19, 120, 123

S

Saint Mary’s University of Minnesota, 322

Sanford, John, 18–19, 23, 24

Satrom, Joe, 265, 266

Sausalito, CA, 194

Scheltens, John, 202

Schenk, Gretchen, 305

Schlumberger Well Surveying Corporation, 139

Schnute, Dave, 121, 122, 126, 220

Schoharie County, NY, 22

Schoolhouse Cave, 120

Schrader, F. C., 37, 38, 40

Schulz, Herschel, 183, 184, 188, 192, 218, 229, 392

Schwartz, Bonnie, 294, 299, 394

Schwartz, Margaret, 184
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 443

Scientific American, 22

Scotts Bluff National Monument, 298

Scoyen, E. T., 104, 107

Sears Roebuck, 122

Semingsen, Earl M., 77, 78, 79, 80, 82, 86, 99, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 113, 114–15, 117, 119, 

120, 122, 123, 129, 391

Sequoia National Park, 194

settlement, 12, 15, 17, 26, 29, 31, 32, 35

Sheie, Myrna, 126

Shenandoah Valley, 22

Shenandoah Valley Railroad Company, 21

Shepherd, John S., 79, 392

Sherman, William H., 392

Sheveland, Glenna, 272–73

Sholly, Cameron, 294

Shoshone Cavern National Monument, 53, 97

Sideley, Ray, 18

Sioux National Park (proposed), 201

Siuslaw National Forest, 53

S. J. Groves and Sons Company, 60, 61, 62

Smith, C. E., 31, 36

Smith, Jedediah, 13

Snyder, Anton J., 391

Snyder, Dan, 193

South Dakota, 17, 58, 60, 86, 120, 132, 136, 137, 144, 147, 180, 184, 202, 206, 214, 235, 237, 239, 

240, 241, 249, 265, 266, 267, 271, 295, 313, 327

South Dakota Department of Agriculture, 271

South Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources, 250, 320

South Dakota Department of Game, Fish and Parks, 150

South Dakota Department of Human Services, 306

South Dakota Department of Transportation, 236, 252, 279, 311

South Dakota Department of Tourism, 219, 303, 340

South Dakota Federation of Women’s Clubs, 25

South Dakota Highway Magazine, 135

South Dakota Magazine, 303

South Dakota Mining Company, 24, 25

South Dakota Mining Company v. McDonald, 42, 46, 49

South Dakota Public Broadcasting, 347

South Dakota School of Mines and Technology, 26, 88, 119, 120, 146, 158, 189, 323

South Dakota State Highway Commission, 60

South Dakota State Highway Department, 58, 106, 125, 129, 135, 153, 154–55, 244

South Dakota State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), 231, 338, 339

South Dakota State Legislature, 75

South Dakota Teacher’s Association, 25

Southern Black Hills Tourism Magazine, 302

South Hell Canyon, 95
444 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Spearfish, SD, 44, 154, 318

Split Rock Studios, 318, 350

St. Henry’s Seminary, 138

St. Louis, MO, 27, 28

Stabler, John, 25, 26

Stahl, C. J., 43, 46, 48, 49

State of South Dakota Archeological Research Center, 272

Stellmack, John A., 130

Sternberg Museum of Natural History, 276

Stevens, Edward H., 88

Stevenson, Janice, 281, 283

Stokes, James, 145–46

Stoll, Linda, 282, 288, 289, 295, 391

Story, Isabelle F., 86

Strahan Construction Company, 174

Stratton, A. Clark, 133

Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy, and Transportation Management, 298

Stricklin, Howard B., 57, 70, 72, 96, 97

Student Conservation Association (SCA), 185, 187, 218, 238, 290, 301, 354

Student Temporary Employment Program (STEP), 293

Suess, Todd, 288, 289, 290, 294, 303, 306, 307, 308, 312, 324, 326, 344, 346, 393

Summit Construction Company, 152, 154

Sundance, Wyoming, Commercial Club, 86

Sundry Act, 17, 35

Sundstrom, Linea, 9

Svatos, Lynn, 126

Swartzlow, Carl, 96–97, 98

Swift, Bill, 188

Switzer, Ronald R., 262

Sylvan Lake, 16, 27, 44

Sylvan Lake Hotel, 16

T

Taft, William H., 36, 38, 53

Tashner, Dave, 294, 315, 393

Taylor, Jimmy, 237, 238, 239, 391

The Nature Conservancy (TNC), 265–67, 304, 353, 355

Theodore Roosevelt National Park, 75

Thompson, James B. (Jim), 117, 120, 146, 148, 152, 153, 156, 157, 158, 159, 168–69, 171, 187, 209, 

392

Thompson, Lynn H., 229

Thornton, Jer, 203

Thyssen-Krupp Elevator (TKE), 313, 314, 315

timber: in the Black Hills, 16, 17, 56, 91–92, 218, 222; commercial, 207, 272, 333; forest reserves, 

16–18; and insect infestations, 69, 91, 92, 98, 149–50, 206; at Jewel Cave, 17, 32, 40, 56, 69, 80, 
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 445

89, 91–92, 98, 99, 107, 128, 147, 204, 211, 269, 270, 285, 286, 288, 333; logging, 91–92; managed 

by Forest Service, 56; ponderosa pine, 16, 17, 56, 69, 80, 89, 98, 99, 107, 147, 207, 269, 270, 285, 

286, 288; protection of, 16, 69, 89, 272; salvage, 286

Timpanogos Cave, 194, 304

Tinker, E. W., 49

Todd, Dave, 117, 171, 172, 176, 179, 180, 392

Toll, Roger W., 55–56

Toomey, Rick, 304

tourism: in Black Hills, 16, 23, 27, 31, 47, 49, 58, 84, 108, 222, 241, 273, 302; at caves, 20, 53; for 

Custer, SD, 51; at Jewel Cave, 20–24, 27, 28, 29, 31, 37, 38, 39, 40, 47–52, 54, 56, 58, 70, 80, 83, 

84, 95, 98, 99, 107, 113, 117, 127, 136, 144, 148, 161, 168, 169, 171, 179, 189, 190, 197, 211, 212, 

214, 217, 220, 245, 247, 249, 251, 273, 277, 292, 302, 341–44; at national parks, 72; for 

Newcastle, WY, 51; at Wind Cave, 21, 24, 25, 26, 27, 29, 31, 32, 44, 48

Treaties: of Fort Laramie (1851), 14; of Fort Laramie (1868), 14, 15; Sioux (1877), 15–16

Trexler, Keith, 172

Tucholke, A. E., 62

Twiss, John, 251

Tyers, John, 146

U

University of California, Berkeley, 276

University of California Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 88

University of Colorado, 120

University of Kansas, 146

University of Missouri School of Mines, 138

University of Nebraska, 83

University of Northern Colorado, 258

University of Wyoming, 120, 146, 200, 210

Upton, Robert F., 87, 88

US Army, 15

US Army Corps of Engineers, 166

US Biological Survey, 230, 231

US Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), 243, 270

US Bureau of Land Management (BLM), 123, 150, 200–201, 205, 238, 243, 266, 270, 332–33

US Bureau of Mines, 166

US Bureau of Reclamation (BOR), 101

US Congress: allows NPS to fund roads leading to national parks, 59; appropriations for Jewel Cave, 

47, 48, 57, 69, 73, 80, 101, 162, 225, 229; appropriations for NPS, 74, 292; and changes to Jewel 

Cave NM boundaries, 144–45, 264; changes name of Office of National Parks, Buildings, and 

Reservations back to NPS, 56; Congressional Research Service (CRS), 201; does not establish 

Sioux National Park, 201; establishes Carlsbad Caverns National Park, 54; establishes Mammoth 

Cave National Park, 54; establishes National Cave and Karst Research Institute (NCKRI), 263; 

establishes Wind Cave National Park, 29; formalizes land exchange between NPS and Forest 

Service, 143, 144–45; grants Secretary of the Interior jurisdiction in units of National Park 

System, 235; House of Representatives, 144; House Subcommittee on Surface Transportation, 
446 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

254; passes Federal Cave Resource Protection Act (FCRPA), 201–4, 324; passes Forest Reserve 

Act, 16, 35; passes Sundry Act, 17; petitioned regarding remuneration to Michauds and Cain, 36; 

Senate, 144; Senate Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, 144; South Dakota delegation, 

50, 51, 136, 144; mentioned, 26, 33, 265

US Department of Agriculture: Bureau of Entomology, 69; Bureau of Entomology and Plant 

Quarantine, 91; Bureau of Forestry, 35; Bureau of Public Roads, 58, 59, 60, 61; Division of 

Forestry, 35; and Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy and Program Review Report, 269; 

and law enforcement, 243; and protection of caves, 202

US Department of the Interior: appropriations for Jewel Cave visitor center, 140; approves CusterWind Cave Approach Road, 59, 60; authorized to establish VIP program, 185; and Federal 

Wildland Fire Management Policy and Program Review Report, 269; manages law enforcement 

for NPS, 243; and National Park System, 235; Office of National Parks, Buildings, and 

Reservations, 56; and protection of caves, 202, 203–4; receives report on Wind Cave, 26; 

regulates forests, 17; rewards Jewel Cave NM employee, 223; secretary of, 36; standards for 

cultural resource management specialists, 338; surveys Black Hills, 18; updates mineral 

regulations, 42

US Department of Labor, Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA), 194

US Department of War, 35

US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 194, 226

US Fish and Wildlife Service, 145, 146, 243, 270

US Forest Service: barograph borrowed from, 140; Burned Area Emergency Rehabilitation (BAER), 

285

campgrounds, 106; considers inclusion of Jewel Cave in Black Hills National Forest, 32; 

coordination with, 195, 200, 236, 249, 250, 277, 307; consulted on development in Custer area, 

153; Denver Office, 205; develops Jewel Cave NM, 47, 49; establishes Jewel Cave NM, 31–35; 

forest management by, 69, 90, 91, 150, 151–52, 207, 208, 268, 270, 285; impact of Executive 

Order 6166, 56; and insect infestations, 150; and interpretation, 287, 288; and Jasper Fire, 282, 

283, 285; Jewel Cave master plan discussed with, 105; and Jewel Cave water rights, 93; land 

exchanges, 98, 113, 129, 133, 137, 138, 142–45, 207, 265, 266; land ownership, 3, 92, 128, 136, 

155, 201, 205, 206, 210, 254, 257, 272, 355; and law enforcement, 243; leases land at Jewel Cave 

to JCC, 52; manages Jewel Cave NM, 31, 35–52, 54, 72, 86, 354; manages other caves as national 

monuments, 53, 56; map of Jewel Cave NM, 34, 35; memorandum of understanding with NSS, 

204; and Michaud family, 19, 28, 33, 48–49, 51; and mining, 37, 39, 40, 41, 51, 52, 122–23, 204; 

negotiations with, 98; Operation Outdoors, 107; origins of, 35; partnerships, 222, 229, 237, 244, 

252, 264–67, 271, 304, 319, 332–34, 336; and protection of caves, 202, 204; protection of Jewel 

Cave from vandalism, 35, 41–47, 48; relinquishes water rights at Jewel Cave to NPS, 63; report 

on Jewel Cave, 8; roads, 58; Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, 269; 

withdrawal of land from mineral entry, 123, 128, 143, 205, 255, 264, 325, 332, 355

US Geological Survey (USGS), 37, 120, 138, 259, 265, 266, 286, 304, 323

US National Guard, 252

U.S. Oil and Refining Co., 50

US Public Health Service, 57, 63, 232, 233

US Supreme Court, 16

Utah, 12, 144
A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota 447

V

Vemco, 250

Vento, Bruce (US Representative), 201

Virginia, 20, 21, 22

Virginia Midland Railway, 21

Volunteers in Parks (VIP). See Jewel Cave National Monument; National Park Service.

W

Wakeman, E. E., 51

Warner, J. W., 114

Warren-Lamb Lumber Company, 92

Washington, George (US President), 20

Washington, DC, 27, 56, 87, 93, 140, 346

Washington’s Birthday Reserves, 16–17

Watson, William J., 391

Way, Fred L., 207

Weaver, Adam, 304

Weber, Duane, 271–72

Wegemann, Caroll H., 76, 93

Weichler, Chuck, 295

Weisman, Bruce, 277, 339

Weiss, Jayne, 295, 296, 321, 393

Wells, Wanda, 339

Wergadal, Gerald, 119–20

West Bend, IA, 41

Weston County, WY, 267

West Virginia, 120

westward migration, 12, 14, 279

Westworld Hospital Management, 188

Wheatley, Michelle, 1, 294, 394

White, Will, 130

Wieland, Paul, 192

Wightman, Paul, 138, 139, 141, 190, 191, 330

Wiles, Mike, 1, 192, 193, 194, 196, 197, 205, 220, 238, 239, 251, 252, 255, 256, 257, 258, 260, 261, 

262–63, 264, 266, 274, 277, 278, 285, 286, 290, 304, 305, 306, 316, 317, 322, 323, 324, 325, 327, 

328, 329, 330, 332, 333, 334, 337, 338, 339, 340, 344, 353, 355, 393

Williamson, William (US Representative), 48

Wilson, James, 38

Wilson, Matt, 275

Wind Cave: airflow of, 8; exploration of, 130, 202; features of, 131; federal protection of, 53; 

improved, 31; minerals in, 25, 42; Odd Fellows’ Hall, 25; pictured, 25; promotion of, 26–27; 

recommended as national park, 26; significance to Lakota, 5, 12–13, 18, 29; studied, 22, 26, 194; 

tourism at, 21, 24, 25, 27, 29, 31, 32, 44

Wind Cave Library Association, 87
448 A Small Cave No More: An Administrative History of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota

Wind Cave National Park: BHAA at, 87, 88; and Black Hills Administrative Group, 240, 294–96, 

321; Black Hills Natural History Association at, 88, 147; Black Hills Parks and Forest 

Association at, 301; CCC improvements at, 3, 62, 83; elevators at, 83, 245, 315; established, 24–

27, 29; fire management at, 90, 91, 151–52, 208, 269, 270, 282, 285, 336; hosts Cub Scouts, 348; 

and insect infestations, 149–50; interpretation at, 279; law enforcement at, 243, 306, 307; 

maintenance at, 309; manages Jewel Cave NM, 55, 57, 59, 66, 68, 69, 70, 72, 74, 75, 77, 78, 79, 

83, 84, 85, 90, 93, 96, 99, 101, 102, 104, 105, 107, 109, 110, 113, 114–15, 116, 118, 121, 123, 

145–46, 151, 167, 171, 172, 179, 181–82, 185, 196, 197, 200, 216, 222, 223, 229, 230, 231, 235, 

237, 238, 239, 247, 256, 275, 281, 289, 294, 354; and NEKOTA, 240; NSS at, 304; partnerships, 

336; planning at, 241; proposed as part of Black Hills-Great Plains National Park, 75; proposed

as part of Black Hills National Forest, 26; proposed as part of hypothetical Black Hills National 

Park, 75; resource management at, 258; search and rescue at, 304; tourism at, 31, 48; wildlife at, 

89; mentioned, 1, 54, 73, 83, 87, 108, 111, 117, 119, 221, 242, 271, 288

Wind Cave/Jewel Cave Natural History Association. See Wind Cave Natural History Association.

Wind Cave Natural History Association (WCNHA), 148, 169–70, 186–88, 196, 198, 218, 259, 274

Wirth, Conrad, 114, 123

Wolfe, Elwood K., Jr., 73–74, 80, 88, 89, 95, 392

Wolfe, Shirley, 73–74

Women’s Christian Temperance Union, 25

Wonderful Wind Cave Improvement Company, 25

Woolpert, LLC, 337

World’s Fair, 25, 27

World War II, 72, 74, 81, 82, 95

Worthington, David J., 259–60

Wyoming, 14, 53, 58, 197, 267, 271, 332

Wyoming State Highway Department, 58

Y

Yale University, 130

Yeh and Associates, 310

Yellowstone Fire School, 90

Yellowstone National Park, 26, 33, 55, 73, 144, 180, 211, 219, 239, 294

Yim, David, 294, 299, 308, 394

YMCA, 25

Yosemite Ranger School, 114–15

Youth Conservation Corps (YCC), 218, 223–24, 228, 238, 254, 309, 354

Z

Ziemann, Denny, 285

Zonge International, 310