Everyone’s Cabin in the Woods:

Historic Context for Public Recreation 

Cabins in the Alaska Region 1960 - 1971

K. Nicole Lantz

United States

Department of 

Agriculture

Forest Service

Alaska Region

R10-FR-009

September 2012

Everyone’s Cabin in the Woods:

Historic Context for Public Recreation Cabins in the 

Alaska Region 1960 - 1971*

K. Nicole Lantz

U.S. Forest Service, Department of Agriculture

Alaska Region, Recreation, Lands & Minerals

R10-FR-009, 107 pp. September 2012 

CITATION:

FS-R10--RLM. 2012. Everyone’s Cabin in the Woods: Historic Context for 

Public Recreation Cabins in the Alaska Region 1960-1971. Juneau, Alaska. 

U.S. Forest Service, Alaska Region. Publication R10-FR-009. 107 pages.

*Based on original report written in 2010.

Contents

Purpose and Scope 7

Introduction 7

Research Methodology 9

Administrative Boundaries 10

 The Alaska Region: Region 10 of the Forest Service 10

 Chugach National Forest 11

 Tongass National Forest 13

Temporal Boundaries 15

Historic Context: Developed Recreation and the Forest Service 17

1897-1929 A Need for Recreation Management Arises 17

1930-1945 Recreation Infrastructure Built by the CCC – WWII Shifts Priorities 20

1945-1959 Post War Boom Brings New Focus to Recreation 26

 Dingell – Johnson Act: First Public Recreation Cabins since the CCC 27

 Operation Outdoors 29

 The Outdoor Recreation Resource Review Commission 30

1960-1971 Recreation Gains Administrative Recognition 30

 Multiple Use – Sustained Yield Act 31

 The Alaska Region Establishes a Recreation Cabin Program 31

 The Wilderness Act 36

 The Alaska Region Public Recreation Cabins Program Today 36

Conclusion 38

The National Register Evaluation Process 39

Guidelines for Evaluating and Nominating Properties that Have Achieved Significance 

Within the Past Fifty Years 41

 Historic Context 42

 Scholarly Evaluation 42

 Fragile or Short-Lived Resources 43

 Time 43

 Comparative Evaluation of the Significance of a Property 44

 Associations with Living Persons 44

 Properties in Historic Districts 44

 Justifying the Importance of Properties That Have Achieved Significance in the 

 Past Fifty Years 44

Property Types 45

A-Frame 45

 A-Frame Architectural Information 51

 Building Characteristics that Typify the Period of Significance 51

Pan Abode 54
 Pan Abode Architectural Information 56

 Building Characteristics That Typify the Period of Significance 56

Evaluating Alaska Region Public Recreation Cabins 66

National Register Criteria for Evaluation 66

 Criterion A 66

 Criterion B 67

 Criterion C 67

 Criterion D 68

Integrity 68

 Location 69

 Design 69

 Setting 70

 Materials 70

 Workmanship 71

 Feeling 71

 Association 71

Synthesis 72

Needs Assessment 72

Conclusion 73

References Cited 74

Appendix I: Glossary of Architectural Terms 78

Appendix II: A Brief History of Plywood and Plexiglas 81

Plywood 81

Plexiglas 81

Appendix III: Recreation Cabin Survey Form 82

Appendix IV: Maps and Tables of Cabins by Date and Type 85
Purpose and Scope

Introduction

From 1960-1971, the Forest Service in the Alaska Region expanded a program of public

recreation cabins on the Tongass and the Chugach National Forests. In cooperation with

the Alaska Department of Fish and Game and local volunteer organizations at least 91

cabins were constructed during those eleven years. They were buildings constructed

simply to provide the public access to hunting, fishing and other recreational

opportunities over the vast and remote areas of forest lands in Alaska. In contrast to the

rustic architecture used by the Civilian Conservation Corps during the 1930s, where

large timbers and logs from the local environments were crafted to create a frontier

aesthetic, modern materials and prefabricated structures were used. Not built to last,

these cabins are now in need of repair and replacement.

Historic properties, as defined by National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), are “any

prehistoric or historic district, site, building, structure, or object included in, or eligible

for inclusion on the National Register” (16 U.S.C. Section 470(w)(5)). In order for a

property to be determined eligible it must be evaluated against a set of criteria

established by the National Park Service; keepers of the National Register of Historic

Places.

As a federal agency, the Forest Service is required by the NHPA to inventory and

evaluate their lands for historic properties. Generally, properties at least 50 years old are

given consideration as potential historic properties. At the time of this writing in 2009,

the oldest recreational cabins remaining from the 1960s era of cabin construction are 49

years old. These potentially historic properties are in need of a historic context in which

they can be evaluated. Because these properties are just shy of being 50 years old, they

have not been consistently reviewed as historic properties. However, the National

Register eligibility evaluation process does consider properties less than 50 years old.

Historic context is particularly important when evaluating young properties.

A historic context establishes the framework upon which a pattern of developments

occurred in history. The history of “developed recreation” within the Forest Service is

1
presented as the framework in which the public recreation cabins were constructed in

the Alaska Region. Developed recreation within the Forest Service refers to those areas

designed and constructed to provide convenience to visitors and employees. With this

historic context, background research for NHPA Section 106 reviews of Alaska Region

recreation cabins can be streamlined. The target audience for this report is Forest

Service heritage specialists.

The Alaska Region of the Forest Service consists of the Chugach and the Tongass

National Forests. These two unique and expansive National Forests encompass

21,969,321 acres of forests, shoreline, glaciers, ice fields, tundra and mountain peaks.

The Alaska Region provides a broad range of recreation opportunities where a visitor

will inevitably face inclement weather. Shelter is, at times, much appreciated. There are

currently 206 cabins available for nightly rentals to the public. Cabins are available to

rent through the National Recreation Reservation Service (NRRS) an Internet-based

reservation service. Public recreation cabins are maintained at the district level

throughout the Alaska Region. They are most often located in remote locations on

saltwater beaches, inland lakes, rivers and glacial forelands and have become an

integral part of recreation for residents and visitors in Alaska.

Following the 1930s Civilian Conservation Corps era of three-sided shelter and cabin

construction, a lesser known era of plywood structures known as Dingell-Johnson

cabins were constructed in the 1950s. This was followed by what we know today as the

recreation cabins program. The current program arose in the 1960s encompassing those

earlier cabins and building new ones. At that time, two main cabin property types were

constructed; the A-frame and the Pan Abode. Another type known as Hunter or Wood

Frame was used less frequently. As the cabins program became established, a few

historic cabins not constructed by the Forest Service were incorporated into the

reservation system. This document focuses on the A-frame and Pan Abode.

Evaluation and documentation of Forest Service public recreation cabins, prior to

replacement or decommissioning, has occurred sporadically. In one instance, an

assessment of ineligibility was met with a request for more information by the Alaska

State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO). In a letter dated July 18, 2007 the SHPO

stated that “resources nearing the 50 year mark do not need to meet Criteria

Consideration G.” This decision was in reference to the A-frame building type. SHPO

suggested the Forest Service explore further “the history of this building type.” In

response to this, the Forest Service proposed that the cabins program history, as a

whole, should be further explored. This document is a result of that exploration.

2
Research Methodology

This study was based on primary and secondary resources, personal interviews and

archival information within Forest Service regional and district offices. Journal articles

cited in The United States Forest Service: a Historical Bibliography, 1876-1972 by Gerald 

Ogden were useful. Two important sources for Forest Service administrative history 

include History of the United States Forest Service in Alaska by Lawrence Rakestraw (2002) 

and A History of Outdoor Recreation Development in National Forests, 1891-1942 by W.C. 

weed (1978).

Research was limited to cabins presently in the Forest Service reservation system in the

Alaska Region. A cabin is defined as a completely enclosed structure with a roof and a

door intended for remote recreational activities. In order to limit the scope, three-sided

shelters and structures associated with cabins were not included. These associated

structures include outhouses, wood sheds, meat sheds, etc.

Cabin construction dates were taken from the Forest Service facilities infrastructure

database (Infra). Often, the construction dates in the Infra database are inaccurate.

When the database was populated a date was sometimes estimated and entered for the

date of construction. For many cabins, the “remarks” category of Infra notes when

cabins were replaced or moved.

The author worked out of the Forest Service Regional Office in Juneau. Travel was

limited to a trip to Anchorage in May of 2009 for three days of research on the Chugach

National Forest. While there, the files at the Supervisors office, Glacier Ranger District

office and the Seward Ranger District office at the Kenai Lake Work Center were

reviewed. Cordova Ranger District was not visited. The Yakutat Ranger District office

was visited August 11, 2009 en route to a site visit to the Tanis Mesa duplex A-frame

cabin in the Yakutat Forelands. One site visit was also made to the Turner Lake East

and West Cabins on the Juneau Ranger District.

3
Administrative Boundaries

The Alaska Region: Region 10 of the Forest Service

Under the Department of Agriculture, the Forest Service is divided into nine Regions.1

The Alaska Region is classified as Region 10 and is contained entirely within the State of

Alaska (Figure 1).

National Forest System lands in Alaska total 21,969,321 acres. Two National Forests 

make up the Alaska Region, the Chugach National Forest and the Tongass National 

Forest. They are the two largest National Forests within the National Forest System. 

Only public recreation cabins administered by these two forests were considered. All 

references to ranger districts and their cabins reflect current administrative boundaries.

1

 There were ten regions of the Forest Service until 1965 when Region 7 was eliminated and its forests divided among Regions 8 and 9.

4

Figure 1. Overview of the Alaska Region.
5

Chugach National Forest

Located in South-Central Alaska, The Chugach National Forest is the second largest

forest in the National Forest System. The Forest includes geographic areas of the Kenai

Peninsula, Prince William Sound and the Copper River Delta which are subdivided into

three administrative units: the Glacier (GRD), Seward (SRD) and Cordova (CRD) ranger

districts (Figure 2). Communities located within or near the national forest include

Whittier, Hope, Seward, Cooper Landing, Moose Pass, Tatitlek, Chenega Bay, Cordova,

Anchorage, Valdez, Sterling, Kenai and Soldotna. Ranger District offices are located in

Girdwood, Seward and Cordova.

Relatively few miles of roads exist in relation to the amount of land acres. There are

5,491,580 acres of land on the Chugach National Forest. Within the Forest, there are 97

miles of forest developed roads; approximately 71 miles located on the Seward and

Glacier Ranger Districts and 26 on the Cordova Ranger District. In addition, there are 75

miles of forest highways, including the Hope Highway and the Copper River Highway,

and 100 miles of State highways, including the Seward and Sterling highways within

the Forest. Both State and forest highways are under State jurisdiction. The greatest

road density is on the Kenai Peninsula.

The Kenai Peninsula geographic area of the Chugach National Forest is accessible by

road from Anchorage and accommodates high levels of human use. The Seward,

Sterling and Portage highways contain developed recreation sites and provide access

points for a variety of dispersed recreational activities. This area is managed by the

Seward Ranger District.

The Prince William Sound geographic area is managed primarily to maintain the wild

character of this area and its unique wildlife. Human access is almost exclusively by

boat or aircraft, with the exception of the road-accessed portals of Whittier and Valdez.

Much of the area is established as a Wilderness study area and is managed by the

Glacier Ranger District.

The Copper River Delta lands of the Chugach National Forest are managed primarily

for the conservation of fish and wildlife. Cordova is the population center in this area

and has one road corridor extending west from Cordova to Child’s Glacier. This area is

managed by the Cordova Ranger District (USDA 2002).
6

Figure 2. Chugach National Forest.
7

Tongass National Forest

The Tongass National Forest (Figure 3) is located in Southeast Alaska and extends from

Dixon Entrance in the south to Yakutat in the north; it is bordered on the east by

Canada and on the west by the Gulf of Alaska. The Tongass National Forest extends

approximately 500 miles north to south, broken only by Glacier Bay National Park.

From east to west it spans approximately 120 miles at its widest point.

The 16.8-million acre Tongass National Forest occupies about seven percent of the area

of Alaska. Federal lands comprise about 95 percent of Southeast Alaska, with about 80

percent in the Tongass National Forest (and most of the rest in Glacier Bay National

Park and Preserve). The remaining land is held in State, municipal, Alaska tribal and

corporation, and other private ownerships.

The Tongass includes a narrow mainland strip of steep, rugged mountains and ice

fields, and more than 1,000 offshore islands known as the Alexander Archipelago.

Together, the islands and mainland have nearly 11,000 miles of meandering shoreline,

with numerous bays and coves. A system of seaways separates the many islands and

provides a protected waterway called the Inside Passage. Also included in the Tongass

is the distinctly younger and less understood geological area of the Yakutat forelands.

Most of the area of the Tongass is wild and undeveloped. Approximately 73,000 people

inhabit Southeast Alaska, most living in 32 communities located on island or mainland

coasts. Only 8 of the communities have populations greater than 1,000 persons. Most of

these communities are surrounded by, or adjacent to, National Forest System land.

Three towns are connected to other parts of the mainland by road: Haines and Skagway

to the north and Hyder to the south. The Tongass is divided into 10 Ranger Districts

(Figure 3) with offices located in Yakutat, Juneau, Hoonah, Sitka, Petersburg, Wrangell,

Thorne Bay, Craig and Ketchikan. There are also two National Monuments (Admiralty

Island and Misty Fiords) with offices in Juneau and Ketchikan (USDA 2003).
8

Figure 3. Tongass National Forest.
9

Temporal Boundaries

Temporal boundaries for periods of cabin construction were determined based on

defining historical events at the national and state level. An overview of the history of

developed recreation by time periods is presented in Table 1. Table 1 is based on totals

gleaned from the Forest Service Infrastructure (Infra) database. A look at Table 1 shows

cabin construction within the Alaska Region for recreation was not a priority until 1960.

Not represented in Table 1 is a break in cabin construction between 1969 and 1972 on

the Tongass and between 1971 and 1977 on the Chugach. This break corresponds with

the passage of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) in 1971. ANCSA’s

purpose was to finalize all aboriginal land claims in Alaska. ANCSA established

regional Native Corporations to select for conveyance some 45 million acres of lands

statewide (Case and Voluck 2002). This lead to uncertainty in the Forest Service about

what lands would be under their jurisdiction in the future. Since 1972, public recreation

cabin construction has continued through the present day.

The basic style of the A-frame and Pan Abode continues through the present day. Thus

the break in cabin construction that occurred in 1972 was chosen as a somewhat

arbitrary ending date for the period of significance. Table 1 represents cabins entered

into the Infra database and does not necessarily reflect all cabins present during the

specific time periods. In other words, some cabins torn down over the years may not be

represented in the Infra database.

Table 1. Number of recreation cabins listed in the Infra database and their periods of 

construction.

Time period Chugach Tongass Total

1897-1929 1 0 1

1930-1941 1 6 7

1942-1959 1 2 3

1960-1971 15 76 91

1972-2009 24 80 104

Total 42 164 206
10

The historic Romig-Wright Cabin was constructed in 1938 as a trapper’s cabin. 

It was used under special use permit from 1959-1970 and was added to the 

reservation system in 1972. It was replaced in a nearby location with a Pan Abode 

in 1976 (See Figure 40 and the discussion on early cabins adapted for recreation 

use on pages 12-14).

Figure 4. Historic Romig-Wright Cabin, Chugach National Park, Seward Ranger 

District.
11

Historic Context: Developed Recreation and the

Forest Service

Humans have a long history with what we now manage as National Forests. Hunting,

camping, hiking, fishing, berry picking, wood gathering, etc. are all needs serviced by

the forests since time immemorial. In Alaska it can be difficult to separate the taking of

these resources for living from participating in these activities for recreation. The Alaska

Region constructed the recreation cabins in order to provide safe dispersed recreational

opportunities in remote areas. While campgrounds and visitor centers were also

constructed, the cabins were a unique solution to the growth in popular recreation seen

after World War II (WWII). Therefore an overview of the context of developed

recreation within the Forest Service is provided.

1897-1929 A Need for Recreation Management Arises

In 1897 under the Forest Reserve Act (often referred to as the Organic Act) of June 4,

management of public lands previously set aside as forest reserves became active. In

1905 the management of forest reserves was shifted from the General Land Office to the

Forest Service under the Transfer Act of February 1 (Tweed 1978).

Gifford Pinchot, first chief of the Forest Service from 1905-10, emphasized the word

“service” as an integral part of the mission of the agency. Early on, Pinchot

acknowledged the value of public lands for recreation (Rakestraw 2002). The idea

forests could be managed for multiple uses was spelled out in the first Forest Service

manual known as the “Use Book.” This book guided management practices for timber,

water, pasture, mineral and other forest resources. This was the beginning of the

guiding principle that included recreation and culminated, with much debate, in the

passage of the Multiple Use Sustained Yield Act (MUSY) in 1960 (Quinn 2002).

An article published in a 1910 issue of Collier’s Outdoor America titled Everybody’s

Camping Ground: the National Government Throws Open its Forest Reserves as a Play Field for 

the People, is an early example of how the public was encouraged to use and visit their 

national forests. The article details numerous possibilities for excursions in the western 

country explaining there are no permits needed for transient camping, how wood may 

be taken at will, and that horses may be grazed without permit. The article also reveals 

an early attraction to drive through the forest, telling the reader, “If you prefer, you can 

drive through the lower of these forests in a tented wagon. The roads are as good as 

mountain roads go” (Laut 1910: 20-21).
12

In 1915 Congress passed the Term Permit Act allowing the Forest Service to issue

special use permits for privately owned recreational facilities. The resulting

construction of privately owned but permitted summer homes, hotels, stores and kiosks

became a source of revenue for the forests, which in turn went towards developed

public recreational facilities (Quinn 2002). In Alaska, special use permits for private

recreation cabins and tent platforms were issued. However, the large scale construction

of hotels was planned but never came to fruition in Alaska like it did in the lower 48

states.

The introduction of the mass-produced Ford automobile, and the subsequent growth of

motorized traffic, provided middle class Americans affordable transportation to access

their National Forests. By 1927, millions of Model T Fords had rolled off the assembly

line creating the beginning of environmental impacts that continue to this day. Large

numbers of people drove through to picnic, hike, fish and camp. The litter, trampled

terrain, and haphazard cutting of trees for firewood left behind became an issue for the

Forest Service (Tweed 1978).

Increased use from motorized traffic and camping was a contributing factor to the

Forest Service employing landscape architects. The intent was to design areas that

would control use areas for ease of management. Arthur H. Carhart, recreation engineer

for the Forest Service from 1919-1923, was the first full-time landscape architect

employed by the Forest Service. He designed the first campgrounds specifically

intended for automobile use. But it was not long till he would write “years ago there

could easily be found open country where one could play, picnic, tramp, or camp at

almost any turn of the road. A few years ago by going a small distance camping places,

where nature was still supreme, could be found. But today, with man land-hungry,

these places are fast disappearing” (Carhart 1920).

In 1897 when the Organic Act was passed, Alaska had been a territory of the United

States for 30 years. By then, exploitation of Alaska’s natural resources was well

underway. Federal recognition of fish as a valuable commodity created the first Forest

Reserve in Alaska in 1892, the Afognak Forest and Fish Culture Reserve (Rakestraw

2002: 10). Later, the establishment of the Forest Service brought the designation of the

Alexander Archipelago Forest Reserve in 1902, the Chugach National Forest and the

area east of Ketchikan was designated as the Tongass National Forest 1907. The

incorporation of most of the remaining lands in Southeast Alaska into the Tongass

National Forest was completed in 1909.

Compared to National Forests in the lower 48, outdoor recreation management was

non-existent in Alaska during the period from 1897-1929. Industries such as fish
13

processing, mining and timber, were bringing more Anglo settlers who in turn built

camps and communities. The Forest Service recreation cabin that dates to this time

period, built in 1918, was part of one such community.

The McKinley Trail Cabin is significant as the only

remaining structure in the historic town of Alaganik. It is

also the last intact log cabin along the Copper River and

Northwestern Railway route...It was built during the period

when the railroad was the primary mode of transportation

for the Copper River Delta. The log construction, sphagnum

moss chinking, and V- notching are all unique when

considered in relation to the other cabins in the area, all of

which are more recent, and most of which have aluminum

siding, or are constructed of dimensional lumber...

Stabilization of the cabin was undertaken in 1960 by the

Forest Service, which resulted in extending the useful life of

the building. The major structural components of the

building retain their integrity.

The cabin is about 100 feet from, and historically associated

with, the McKinley Lake Trail (COR-00532). The trail was

the main access route from the railroad to the McKinley Lake

Gold Mining District, which consisted of the McKinley Lake

Mine (COR-00449), the Lucky Strike Mine, the Pioneer Mine,

and the Bear Creek Mine (Buzzell 2001). The prospecting

and development of hard rock mines occurred in the

McKinley Lake Gold Mining District from 1898 to World

War II. The McKinley Lake Mine was reopened in 1944, with

work occurring there until 1960. Once the Copper River and

Northwestern Railroad arrived, the McKinley Lake Trail was

more widely used by people wanting to visit, or work at the

mines. The McKinley Lake Gold Mining District (COR00449) was formed in 1900 by M.J. Heney, but it was never

fully developed, despite numerous attempts over 80 years.

Currently, several hundred people hike up the McKinley

Lake Trail each year to visit McKinley Lake and the mines

(Yarborough 2004: 3-4).
Acquired by the Forest Service in 

1960, the McKinley Lake Trail cabin 

(Figure 5) was used under special use 

permit. The cabin was added to the 

reservation system in 1981. It was 

determined eligible for the National 

Register in 2003 (Yarborough 2004). 

This is one of the four examples in 

the Alaska Region where adaptive 

reuse of a historic structure was used 

for a recreation cabin. The others are 

the Romig-Wright on the Chugach 

National Forest (Figure 4), Greentop 

on the Hoonah Ranger District, and 

the Denver Caboose on the Juneau 

Ranger District, both on the Tongass 

National Forest.

1930-1945 Recreation Infrastructure Built by the CCC – WWII Shifts 

Priorities

The National Forests became inexpensive local retreats during the Great Depression caused by 

the stock market crash of October 29, 1929. High levels of unemployment affected all classes of 

Americans, but especially the working class (Ellison 1942). On March 31, 1933, Congress passed 

the Emergency Conservation Work Act (ECW), the law that created the Civilian Conservation 

Corps (CCC) (Otis, et al. 1986). This program was created to put people to work locally on rural 

conservation and forestry projects, thereby relieving unemployment and increasing infrastructure.

The CCC contributed enormously to the development of public recreation infrastructure. Roads, 

campgrounds and recreation areas were constructed, expanded, or improved in National Forests 

across America and in Alaska. An architectural style known as “Rustic” characterizes the buildings and structures from this time period. This style is characterized by over-sized rough-hewn 

logs and stones that required intensive hard labor to construct. The CCC made this labor available.

Projects by the CCC in Alaska were statewide and included air strips, housing, fire and flood control, demolition, communications, wells, cabins, sanitation, trails, roads, bridges, shooting ranges, 

fences, floats and docks, dams, hatcheries, campgrounds,

14

Figure 5. McKinley Lake Trail Cabin, Chugach National Forest, 

Cordova Ranger District.
trails, shelters, totem pole restoration and archaeology. Unlike in the lower 48 states where the 

U.S. Army administered the CCC, in Alaska the Forest Service was charged with CCC oversight 

and administration.

The CCC contribution to recreation in the 

Alaska Region is seen in Forest Service 

trails, three-sided shelters (Figure 6) and 

wooden skiffs that enhanced fishing and

hunting opportunities on inland lakes 

on both the Chugach and the Tongass. 

However, cabins were only constructed by 

the CCC on the Tongass. Alaska Region 

recreation cabins that predate the CCC 

were added to the reservation system

after 1960.

The CCC era of cabin and threesided

shelter construction was precursor to 

what was to become the public recreation 

cabin program in Alaska. The CCC period 

(1933-1942) is an established period of significance for eligibility determinations to the National 

Register of Historic Places. Generally these structures are eligible under criteria A or C (refer to 

pages 60-62). The five Alaska Region CCC cabins, presented in Table 2, have all been evaluated 

and determined eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (Mobley 1993).

Table 2. Cabins built by the CCC on the Tongass National Forest and their eligibility

determinations

15

2 The Distin and Hasselborg Creek (?) cabins were originally constructed as a three-sided shelter as seen in Figure 6. In the 1950s the Territorial 

Sportsmen Inc. (TSI) closed in the third side to make a cabin of both shelters.

Figure 6. Three Lakes Shelter, Tongass National Forest, 

Petersburg Ranger District.

Cabin Name AHRS # Determination Date District Figure

Distin Lake Cabin SIT-361 Listed 1933 ANM Figure 7

Big Shaheen Cabin SIT-019 Listed 1935 ANM Figure 8

Dan Moller Cabin JUN-927 Eligible 1936 JRD Figure 9

Hasselborg Creek 

Cabin2

SIT-322 Listed 1937 ANM Figure 10

Salmon Lake Cabin CRG-322 Eligible 1940 CRD Figure 11
16

Figure 7. Distin Lake Cabin, Tongass National 

Forest, Admiralty National Monument.

Photo date ca. 1998. This cabin was originally 

a three-sided shelter but was closed in by the 

Territorial Sportsmen in the 1950s.

Historic photo, ca. 1940 courtesy of the 

Alaska State Library PCA3-1-163. This cabin 

was replaced with a Pan Abode in 2010.

Historic photo, 1936. Photo is on file at the 

Juneau Ranger District.

Figure 8. Dan Moller Cabin, Tongass National 

Forest, Juneau Ranger District. 

Figure 9. Big Shaheen Cabin, Tongass National 

Forest, Admiralty National Monument.
17

Figure 10. Salmon Lake Cabin, Tongass National 

Forest, Craig Ranger District.

Figure 11. Hasselborg Creek Cabin, Tongass 

National Forest, Admiralty National Monument. 

Photo ca. 1980. Cabin is constructed entirely 

of cedar shakes.

Photo ca. 2000. This cabin was originally a 

three-sided shelter but was closed in by TSI 

in the 1950s. It has a stone chimney, pictured 

below.
18

Enrollment in the CCC began to wane in 1941 as the economy was beginning to recover 

and the war in Europe was escalating. After the declaration of war by the United States 

on Japan on December 8, 1941, federal projects not directly related to the war heard 

their death knell ring. The CCC was abolished by a joint committee of Congress on July 

1, 1942 (Throop 1979). 

In addition to the CCC, the depression resulted in a response by the federal government 

to create various methods of enticing people to move to Alaska. In 1934 President Roosevelt appointed Earnest Gruening (future Alaska governor) as head of a newly created 

Division of Territories and Island Possessions. One goal of this new division was to 

move close to 1,500 people from the depression-affected regions of the country, particularly those from cold climates, to Alaska where they could start a new life (Borneman 

2004: 312). This resulted in the eventual establishment of an agricultural community in 

South-Central Alaska. Other programs, like fox farm leases in Southeast Alaska, also 

contributed to this growth. Along with agricultural expansion came a change in Alaska’s population, both in number and demographics. As settlers began to have families, 

mining camps and fishing villages evolved into communities with more women and 

children, where infrastructure and planning became more important. This growth had 

an effect on the new Alaskan’s lifestyle activities of work, family and recreation.

The American entry into World War II brought continued construction of roads, bridges, airports and military facilities across the United States. In addition to increased 

infrastructure, the increased production of planes and other equipment brought high 

demands for materials like plywood and Plexiglas. These materials were used in the 

production of airplanes and other support equipment during the war. In the post war 

years, the refinement of these mass-produced materials and technologies had lasting effects on the American economy that included a new market for recreation products.

Construction of the Alaska Highway began on March 8, 1942 by United States soldiers. 

The goal of connecting Alaska to the lower 48 through Canada by road was achieved in 

eight months and twelve days. When completed it was a rutty, winding pioneer road. A 

portion of the military personnel that worked on this road eventually made Alaska their 

home after the war. The State’s growing population now had increased access to Alaska 

and its resources. 

Recognition of the roll the Alaskan Highway would play in tourism and recreation 

for Alaska is apparent in a study published by the National Park Service in 1944. This 

study, entitled Recreation Resources of the Alaska Highway and Other Roads in Alaska, discusses the lure of Alaska’s scenery and wildlife along with its suitability for outdoor 
19

The West Turner Lake Cabin was designed during the CCC but believed 

to be built after the end of the program. The cabin was designed by Linn 

Forrest in 1940. It was determined eligible for the National Register in 

2008 and renovated in 2009. The first photo was taken ca. 1980 and the 

second photo was taken in 2009.

Figure 12. West Turner Lake Cabin, Tongass National Forest, Juneau Ranger 

District, ca. 1980 (above) and 2009 after renovations (below).
20

physical recreation. Maps are provided of major roads developed at that time in Alaska. 

By correctly anticipating the growing industry of tourism, the study called on Alaska to 

begin planning for increases in need and demand for recreation opportunities. 

The effects of both the Great Depression and WWII are multi-faceted in regards to 

Alaska. In the context of the eventual establishment of enhanced recreational facilities 

the effects of both historical events had similar results. Both brought local work to 

Alaska, were important to the development of its infrastructure, and contributed to the 

Territory’s population increase. 

1945-1959 Post War Boom Brings New Focus to Recreation 

Veterans of World War II were given support after the war through government 

sponsored programs like the G.I. Bill. One of the many opportunities offered by this bill 

was a provision for low interest, zero down payment loans for the purchase of a new 

home. These opportunities contributed to the growing prosperity and expansion of the 

middle class during the 1950s. One result from this prosperity was the “democratization 

of the leisure life” which had lasting effects on outdoor recreation in America. 

The industries surrounding plywood, pulpwood and fabricated woods expanded 

during this era and assisted a growing freedom in architectural design with cheap and 

innovative materials. These materials and industry were brought to the new growing 

market of outdoor recreation. Products like prefabricated housing, recreational vehicles 

and other outdoor equipment gave the new highly mobile middle class more comforts 

in the great outdoors.

The last of the non-prefabricated cabins built in the Alaska Region for decades to come 

was on the Chugach, on the Seward Ranger District. The Upper Russian Lake Cabin 

(SEW-00975) (Figure 13) was built in 1951 by the Forest Service, from hand-hewn logs 

as lodging for a Forest Service trail crew. It is a log cabin constructed from local timber 

in the same vein of the Rustic style used by the CCC. After serving as an administrative 

facility, it became part of the public recreation system. It has been determined eligible 

for the National Register and was renovated in 2007. 

The Chugach National Forest did not construct another recreation cabin until 1963. 

That cabin was the Crescent Lake cabin, a Pan Abode structure, on the Seward Ranger 

District and was related to Dingell-Johnson stocking of fish in Crescent Lake.
21

Public land managers and foresters felt the pressure of the growing new population of 

outdoor recreation enthusiasts. Articles in forestry magazines continued to debate the 

burgeoning role of recreation management as a duty of the forester. Awareness was 

brought forth about the inadequate supply of needed infrastructure to accommodate 

the demands of the growing population recreating on public lands. A result of this 

awareness was a demand for Congressional funding to assist land managing agencies to 

develop this infrastructure. 

Dingell – Johnson Act: First Public Recreation Cabins since the CCC

On August 9, 1950, Congress passed the Federal Aid in Sport Fish Restoration Act (16 

U.S.C. 777-777k, 64 Stat. 430). This act was commonly called the Dingell-Johnson Act. 

It provides federal aid to the States for management and restoration of fish having 

“material value in connection with sport or recreation in the marine and/or fresh waters 

of the United States.” Funds from a 10 percent excise tax on certain items of sport 

fishing tackle are permanently appropriated (see P.L. 136, August 31, 1951; 65 Stat. 262) 

to the Secretary of the Interior and apportioned to States on a formula basis for paying 

up to 75 percent of the cost of approved projects. Project activities include acquisition 

and improvement of sport fish habitat, stocking of fish, research into fishery resource 

problems, surveys and inventories of sport fish populations, and acquisition and 

development of access facilities for public recreation (Wildlife Laws 2009). 

Above: Photo after 

2007 renovation.

Right: Historic photo 

from 1951.

Figure 13. Upper Russian Lake Cabin: Chugach: Seward Ranger District.
22

Table 3. Dingle-Johnson Cabins on the Tongass National Forest.

Figure 14. East Turner Lake Dingell-Johnson Cabin, 

Tongass National Forest, Juneau Ranger District.

Figure 15. West Florence Lake Dingell-Johnson 

Cabin, Tongass National Forest, Admiralty National 

Monument.

Figure 16. Red Bay Lake Dingell-Johnson Cabin, Tongass 

National Forest, Thorne Bay Ranger District.

Figure 17. Shelter Island Dingell-Johnson Cabin, 

Tongass National Forest, Juneau Ranger District.

District Cabin Name Date Constructed Current Condition

CRD Red Bay Lake 1953 Demolished

N/A Salmon Creek Dam 1954 Unknown

SRD Maksoutof Lake ~1950 Unknown

JRD Shelter Island ~1955 Still standing/ now on State land

ANM Young Lake ~1956 Demolished

SRD Kook Lake 1956 Demolished

ANM Florence Lake ~1957 Demolished

JRD Windfall Lake (?) ? Unknown

JRD Turner Lake 1958 Demolished
23

In Southeast Alaska on the north Tongass, the Forest Service and the Alaska Department 

of Fish and Game (ADFG) cooperatively joined with a local community organization 

like the Territorial Sportsmen Inc. and constructed plywood cabins with these funds. 

The resulting cabins have come to be referred to as Dingell-Johnson cabins (Figures 

14-17 and Table 3). These cabins brought new meaning to the term “rustic.” Unlike the 

Rustic architectural designs of the CCC era, where local materials were crafted into a 

substantial structure, these cabins were constructed from either 1/8” or 3/8” plywood. 

They were 10’ X 12’ structures with a tar paper and corrugated aluminum roof. They 

had up to two windows and had one door. The cabins contained a wood burning stove, 

bunks, a table, and are reported to originally have had dirt floors. Strictly utilitarian 

structures, the cabins were designed and constructed in the early 1950s by Ed Zigler of 

TSI. Joe Trucano assembled the first of this type that was built at Salmon Creek Dam 

(not Forest Service) in Juneau. From this first effort, the TSI adjusted and refined the 

style (Grummet 1988). 

There were at least 11 of these in use in 1969 on the Ketchikan Area of the Tongass (Beck 

1969). Information is limited on these cabins but it appears they were constructed for 

the most part between 1950 and 1958, and they continued to be used through the 60s, 

70s and 80s and possibly into the 90s. Known cabin locations are included in Table 3. 

No longer present on the reservation system, most have, to date, been destroyed except 

for the Shelter Island cabin and the Maksoutof Lake cabin which is scheduled to be 

removed this year. Information is limited on these cabins because they were torn down 

and replaced over the past 40 years without documentation. They are an interesting 

interim cabin in the recreation cabin’s history. They were built during the same time that 

the now-acknowledged practice of removing “trespass” cabins, which were often native 

smokehouses or fish camps, was common practice by the Forest Service.

Operation Outdoors

Nationally, there was a recorded 92 percent increase in recreational use of the National 

Forests between 1950 and 1957. This placed pressure on deteriorating recreational facilities brought on by neglect and diverted funding during World War II. On July 1, 1957, 

the Forest Service began a 5-year program called “Operation Outdoors” to provide 

sanitation, clean up, and care for existing recreation areas. This program also sought to 

provide new areas in an effort to relieve pressure on overcrowded facilities. “Operation Outdoors” was conceived to run concurrently, and somewhat competitively, with a 

similar program in the National Park Service known as “Mission 66” (Brockman 1959).

One effect of “Operation Outdoors” on recreation facilities was a deliberate departing 

from the nostalgic rustic style to that of modern design. 
24

Following World War II, the context of recreation use and 

architecture in the United States changed again. The post-war 

economic boom created demand for recreation on the national 

forests. It also increased distribution of manufactured and 

finished materials throughout the country. In 1956, the National 

Park Service began “Mission 66,” a 10-year program to upgrade 

its facilities by the agency’s 50th anniversary. The Forest 

Service began a parallel program called “Operation Outdoors” 

in 1957. Designers in both programs consciously departed 

from the nostalgic rustic style and embraced the tenets of the 

international style and modern design. This style included 

simple forms with clean, straight edges; functional design with 

little ornamentation or decoration; and the use of manufactured 

rather than handcrafted materials (USDA 2001: 15).

The Outdoor Recreation Resource Review Commission

In 1959 the Congress authorized a study of outdoor recreation under the authority of 

the Outdoor Recreation Resource Review Commission (ORRRC) Public Law 85-470. 

The Commission studied outdoor recreational needs and resources throughout the 

nation. They developed an inventory of recreational resources that would be required 

in the years 1976 and 2000 (Brockman 1959). Three years of research by the Commission 

resulted in a multitude of recommendations. Their report was published in 1962.

Alaska officially became a state on January 3, 1959. As a new state, one priority was 

to inventory the natural resources available for use. One focus of the Dingell-Johnson 

program had been to inventory inland lakes for Arctic grayling and other sport fish.3

 

With statehood, Alaska could participate even more in the Dingell-Johnson program 

and the Forest Service continued to use its funds for construction of recreation cabins. 

Only now the cabins would be A-Frames and Pan Abodes. 

1960-1971 Recreation Gains Administrative Recognition

During the 1960s, especially in the lower 48, recreational second homes of all kinds were 

becoming increasingly popular. This development grew alongside continued growth in 

road and highway construction, campgrounds and other recreation areas.

3 The Dingell-Johnson Project Report published by the Alaska Division of Sport Fish (1959-1960) is available at the State Historical Library. These 

reports list the lakes surveyed for presence of sport fish. Recommendations were made about stocking certain lakes to provide sport fishing 

opportunities. The list of lakes inventoried reads like a list of current recreational cabin locations.
25

The desire for the American public to reconnect with the outdoors resulted from 

an urban prosperity which, in turn, caused pollution and overcrowding of the 

environments the public wanted to enjoy. This brought forth environmental legislation 

that affected the nation’s outlook and management of natural resources. Among a long 

list of legislative acts that affected public land managing agencies and their relationship 

to the environment, two pieces of legislation were directly related to recreation; the 

Multiple Use – Sustained Yield Act and the Wilderness Act. 

Multiple Use – Sustained Yield Act

The Multiple – Use Sustained Yield Act of 1960 (MUSY) was passed by Congress on 

June 12, 1960. This law authorizes and directs the Secretary of Agriculture to develop 

and administer the renewable resources of timber, range, water, recreation and wildlife 

on the national forests for multiple use and sustained yield of the products and services. 

This is the first law to have the five major uses of national forests contained in one law 

equally, with no use greater than any other.

As an agency that has a long history of putting timber first, the implementation of 

equally providing for all the uses of the forest was a struggle for the Forest Service. 

However, MUSY, the ORRRC, and statehood, combined with the availability and 

acceptance of prefabricated materials, created the directives that lead to the first wave of 

construction of recreation cabins in the Alaska Region between 1960 and 1971.

The Alaska Region Establishes a Recreation Cabin Program

Between 1960 and 1971 the Alaska Region built at least 91 A-frame and Pan Abode 

cabins. Of these, 15 were on the Chugach and 76 were on the Tongass. There was a 

break in cabin construction between 1969 and 1972 on the Tongass and between 1970 

and 1977 on the Chugach. This break corresponds with the passage of the Alaska 

Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) in 19714 . Since then, public recreation cabin 

construction has continued steadily through the present day.

The need was further established, as discussed previously, when in January of 1962 

the results of the Outdoor Recreation Resource Review Commission published their 

findings in a report entitled “Outdoor Recreation for America,” a 250 page document 

that details the growing need for recreation opportunities in Alaska. 

 4 ANCSA’s purpose was to finalize all aboriginal land claims in Alaska. ANCSA established regional Native Corporations to select for conveyance 

some 45 million acres of lands statewide (Case and Voluck 2002). This lead to uncertainty in the Forest Service about what lands would be under 

their jurisdiction in the future.
26

Alaska is a storehouse of recreation opportunities. In this new state, 

with far less than 1 percent of the total national population, are 31 

percent of the lands in the National Parks system, 65 percent of the 

wildlife refuge lands, 64 percent of the public domain and 11 percent 

of the National Forest acreage.

This generous supply gives some indication of the role Alaska could 

play in meeting the recreational demands of the people of the other 

49 states. The new State is entitled to select 102 million acres of land 

from the federal domain during the next 25 years, but this selection 

is not expected to affect the overall supply of recreation resources.

There are difficult problems to be solved before this great potential 

can be realized. Alaska is still remote for most Americans seeking 

outdoor recreation: it takes time and money to get there. The 

prospect is that over the next 40 years, the public will have more of 

both and visit Alaska more. Advances in travel technology will also 

help.

There are also problems in development. The resources are there – 

some of the finest in the world. Hunting and fishing are excellent. 

The scenic grandeur is unsurpassed. But at present there are few 

facilities to serve the public. Without the facilities, the recreationseeking public will not come. Without the public demand, capital 

cannot afford the risk of development. Capital for development of 

recreation potential is thus the prime need (ORRRC 1962: 72-73).

This summary of the situation in regards to Alaska’s recreation potential was very 

accurate. At this point the Tongass had a handful of Dingell-Johnson funded cabins 

available for public recreation; the Chugach had one log cabin. In the midst of this 

established need was the growing popularity and availability of prefabricated 

recreational structures and designs available by mail. 

In September of 1962 the Tongass began constructing both A-frame and Pan Abode 

cabins. In 1963 the Chugach National Forest built its first prefabricated Pan Abode 

style cabin and their first A-frame in 1966. They continued to build at least one cabin a 

year through 1970 using the two different styles of Pan Abode (Figure 18) and A-frame 

(Figure 19). Although a few variants were used on the Tongass, the A-frame and Pan 

Abode became the standards for recreation cabin construction in the Alaska Region. 

The cabins were built with “regular P&M funds allotted for recreational purposes” 

(Beck 1969: 2). P& M funds stood for program and maintenance funds which were 

allotted as a lump sum to programs for their work. This is no longer the system used to 

fund programs or cabin construction and maintenance. 
27

Site selection for cabins was a 

low-tech operation. Reportedly 

the process involved traveling 

to the desired lake or saltwater 

cove, walking and boating 

around the area, and considering 

the options for where to locate a 

cabin (Hennig 2009). According 

to a Recreational Construction 

Handbook for the Ketchikan 

Area5

 , under site selection, 

the handbook lists eight 

considerations for selecting a 

site: access, freshwater, drainage, 

orientation, slope, view, wood 

supply and recreation.

In 1963 the Alaska Marine 

Highway began operating. 

This new system of ferries 

mobilized Southeast Alaskans 

like never before and opened 

up communities to tourism. 

The Forest Service was quick 

to partner with the ferries and 

launched a program to interpret 

the Tongass to passengers. With 

this opportunity recreation 

cabins in Alaska provided a 

unique twist not offered in the 

lower 48. 

5 Publication date unknown but most likely from the 1980s due to the reference to Ketchikan Area and the handwritten pencil name of “Tallerico” 

across the top. Jim Tallerico worked on the Chugach in the 1980s.

Figure 18. Little Shaheen Cabin, Tongass National Forest, Admiralty 

National Monument.

Figure 19. Garnet Ledge Cabin, Tongass National Forest, Wrangell 

Ranger District.
28

If you want to camp – like you‘ve never camped before – try cabin 

camping, Alaska-style, in the scenic magnificence of the 49th state. 

You can drive there via Alaska’s new Marine Highway ferry 

system, but you don’t really need a car. Nor even a tent for that 

matter.

In fact, the U.S. Forest Service has opened close to 100 truly 

remote cabins for campers in America’s largest national forest, 

the Tongass in Southeast Alaska. The cabins are weather-tight, 

equipped with bunks and stoves where only a float plane can 

penetrate in most cases (McClean 1965).

In the lower 48 states, at this time, the construction of campgrounds that catered to the 

family vehicle was on the rise. In Alaska the construction of recreation cabins became 

the alternative that best accommodated the lack of road access particular to Alaska. 

This priority was much more prevalent on the Tongass than the Chugach due to the 

difference in road access between the two forests. The Chugach has more roads closer 

to population centers, especially on the Seward Ranger District, where the majority of 

Chugach cabins and trails are concentrated.

Recommendations made by the ORRRC in 1962 to charge fees for developed recreation 

use were implemented nationwide over time to assist in the maintenance of developed 

recreation sites. The Alaska Region began charging a fee for cabin use in 1965. The 

fee was 5 dollars and reservations were made at the district offices. The importance 

of the new recreation opportunities available was the subject of Alaska Recreation and 

Government Policies published in 1967. This report indicates the cooperative nature of the 

recreation cabins program and the importance it had to the growing industry of tourism 

in Alaska.

Nineteen sixty five marked the end of the first five years of a 

fifteen year building program aimed at improving and upgrading 

the region’s recreational resources. Presently, the Forest Service is 

a major provider of recreational facilities for both Alaskans and 

out-of-state visitors.

The wildlife management responsibilities of the Forest Service 

are based on a Master Memorandum of Understanding with the 

Alaska Department of Fish and Game. The wildlife management 

staff surveys wildlife, including waterfowl, salmon, and brown 

bear and deer. Attempts are made between timber management 

and wildlife management (e.g., the spawning habitat of major 

salmon streams). The Forest Service also conducts winter game 

range surveys, which are used as a basis for current management 

programs. Game is harvested on Forest service land; the agency
29

wants proper harvest level of game stocks in remote areas. 

To solve the problem, the Forest Service has constructed 

seven 2,000-foot airstrips and six cabins in Yakutat (Figure 

20). These have increased hunting and fishing opportunities, 

thus keeping the game population within proper limits. 

Public cabins are maintained in the Stikine Delta waterfowl 

area to keep game stocks within appropriate carrying 

capacities.

The outlying cabin concept, unique to the Alaskan region, 

is a valuable outgrowth of the construction of three-sided 

shelters during the CCC days... (Saroff 1967: 116).

Locating Forest Service cabin use records or surveys has been unsuccessful for the time 

period 1960-1971. A focused search on this topic was limited to the Regional Office and 

the Juneau Ranger District. It is possible that a report like this exists at another district 

office but time constraints have limited the search for such information. 

Figure 20. Tanis Mesa Cabin, Tongass 

National Forest, Yakutat Ranger District.

Left: Airstrip located next to Tanis Mesa 

Cabin.

Left Below: Cabin and associated A-frame 

meat shed photo in 1962.

Below: Cabin in 2009
30

The Wilderness Act

In 1964, Congress passed the Wilderness Act. This legislation, established the National 

Wilderness Preservation System and immediately designated 54 areas (9.1 million 

acres) in 13 states as Wilderness, and directed the Secretaries of the Interior and 

Agriculture to survey their lands for other areas that could be added to the wilderness 

system. To protect these lands in a natural state, the Wilderness Act prohibits many 

activities that would impair the areas’ wilderness character, but does not limit activities 

such as hunting and fishing. Both the original and subsequent acts “grandfathered” 

some activities that pre-dated designation, such as pre-existing irrigation systems, 

hydroelectric dams and other structures. The National Wilderness Preservation System 

now includes 757 areas (109,501,022 acres) in 44 states and Puerto Rico. Of that total 

acreage, about 54 percent is located in Alaska (http://www.wilderness.net/).

Many of the Alaska Region recreation cabins are in designated Wilderness areas. This 

is because Alaska did not establish any Wilderness until the passage of the Alaska 

National Interest Land Conservation Act (ANILCA) in 19806

 . All of the Alaska Region 

established Wilderness is on the Tongass National Forest. The Chugach has one 

Wilderness study area. Among other differences to Wilderness specifications in the 

lower 48 states, ANILCA allowed for the continuation and maintenance of existing 

public recreation cabins within Wilderness (Section 1315(c)) and although there are 

limitations, construction of new cabins can occur (Section 1315(d))7 .

The Alaska Region Public Recreation Cabins Program Today

The public recreation cabins (also known as outlying cabins) in the Forest Service 

are present in only 22 states in the country. Of these, the largest presence of public 

recreation cabins is in the western states. The western states that have Forest Service 

public recreation cabins and the number of available cabins are as follows: Arizona (11), 

Utah (11), Colorado (13), Washington (17), Wyoming (20), Arizona (23), California (23), 

Oregon (48), Idaho (58), Montana (105) and Alaska (206). Many, but not all, of these

6 The passage of ANILCA provided the needed compromise to resolve most of the issues related to the resolution of lands for the State of Alaska 

and aboriginal claims. The Act also provided for the designation of 14 Wilderness areas on the Tongass National Forest. As stated earlier, cabins 

(and shelters) within the Wilderness are allowed to continue and to be maintained. However, there was no allowance for the continued use of 

motorized tools to maintain these facilities. As a consequence, more skill and time may be needed to provide for the upkeep of these facilities. In 

ANILCA, seven Wilderness areas had existing facilities within the designated boundaries (personal communication Tremblay 2009).

7 In 1990 the Tongass Timber Reform Act (TTRA) amended ANILCA and added five new Wilderness areas and expanded another. TTRA added 

one Wilderness that contains cabins within its borders (personal communication Tremblay 2009).
31

available cabins outside of Alaska are accessible by road, have electricity and flush toilets. This 

is not the case in Alaska. Often the rental cabins in the lower 48 were first built as fire lookout 

stations, ranger houses, outposts, or are historic buildings, whose first use was for something 

other than recreation. The exception is Alaska where the public recreation cabins were built 

primarily for the recreating public.

Public recreation cabins in Alaska are generally one room primitive structures that provide 

warming stoves, plywood bunks, tables and benches. At the time of this report, they can be 

reserved for $25 to $45 per night through an online national reservation system at http://www.

recreation.gov/. Cabin permits are issued for noncommercial purposes to anyone 18 years of age 

or older. Any number of persons can occupy the cabin under a single permit although exceptions 

exist in designated Wilderness areas. Use under most permits is limited to 7 days between May 

1 and September 30, and 10 days the rest of the year. An exception to this is made for the cabins 

near the city of Juneau where demand for the cabins is high and use is restricted to a maximum of 

two nights. A permit day begins at 12 noon on the assigned day and ends at 12 noon the following 

day (USDA 2009). The cabins are never locked. Cabins on some road systems are open to the 

public as a warming shelter daily from 10 am - 5 pm except on Prince of Wales Island, Sitka and 

Yakutat. Safety has been a factor in the continued support of the cabins program. It is commonly 

understood that these cabins are available for use in times of need for the general public, as well as 

State and federal agency personnel who do their work in remote locations. 

Recreational cabins are also available from other land managing agencies in Alaska. The Bureau 

of Land Management maintains twelve public recreation cabins; Alaska State Parks have 60 cabins 

and 8 ice huts, the Kodiak National Wildlife Refuge has 7 cabins, and the National Park Service 

has 3 coastal cabins open only during the summer months and 1 year-round cabin. 

The public recreation cabins are a major part of the forest recreation program and recognized as 

a key feature of the Alaska Region’s recreation niche. Overall cabin usage and occupancy remains 

fairly flat, with cabins close to communities or near key fish or wildlife harvest areas being the 

most popular. In 2009 the Tongass National Forest received a total of 8,277 nights reserved for 

their total cabin population8

 (von Rekowski 2010). Highest use is during the summer months 

(May-August) with additional peak usage around areas where hunting and fishing is good in the 

fall and spring. Cost recovery is below total program costs, and public support of current fees is 

good, overall (Hagadorn 2010).

8 Reservation numbers from the Chugach were unavailable.
32

Conclusion

The recreation cabins program in the Alaska Region developed in response to the national growth in popularity of outdoor recreation during the 1950s. Through the 1960s, 

the Alaska Region successfully and cooperatively provided dispersed recreational opportunities that suited the Alaskan environment and public needs. In the past, a rustic 

aesthetic embodied the Forest Service built environment. However, that rustic style 

was time consuming to construct. In order to meet the demands of the ORRRC recommendations and statistics, the Forest Service looked to the availability of prefabricated 

products, and the A-frame and the Pan Abode cabins were the result. 

Both the Pan Abode and the A-frame designs continue to be used to this day. In 2008 

the Ketchikan Ranger District replaced a heavily deteriorated A-frame cabin, the Deer 

Mountain cabin, with another A-frame constructed from locally milled lumber. Kit 

homes like Pan Abode continue to be used although with bigger floor plans and larger 

windows. Recreation cabins have come to be an expected and popular feature on the 

Alaskan landscape. As an exceptionally different opportunity in the world of developed 

recreation within the National Forest System, the question arises; are they exceptionally 

significant to the history of our region?
33

The National Register Evaluation Process

The 1966 National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) requires that federal agencies 

take into consideration the effects of undertakings on properties listed on or eligible 

to the National Register of Historic Places. In order for the effects of an undertaking to 

be considered on a historic property, the property has to first be evaluated. Properties 

being evaluated for eligibility to the National Register are compared against a list 

of established criteria. These criteria are listed in 36 CFR 60, National Register of 

Historic Places. The regulations are worded in a manner that provide for individual 

interpretation for a diverse variety of resources. Generally the minimum age of a 

property considered eligible is 50 years old. The evaluator of a property less than 

50 years old must make a case that the property is of exceptional importance. The 

regulations do not define “exceptional” and emphasize it is a fluid guideline that 

“may be the function of the relative age of a community and its perceptions of old and 

new.” All properties gain meaning inside an “historic context” and the importance of 

considering the “interrelated conditions in which something exists or occurs” cannot be 

overlooked.

The National Register of Historic Places is the official list of districts, sites, buildings, 

structures and objects which have significance in American history, architecture, 

archaeology and culture. The program is administered by the National Park Service and 

the U.S. Department of the Interior. The federal government is assisted by the states, 

each of which has a State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO). The SHPO reviews all 

nominations to the register and is required to respond to findings within 30 days for 

purposes of compliance with the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). With an 

official concurrence from the SHPO, a property can be found eligible for the Register 

and afforded the legal protective considerations. In cases of disagreement between the 

agency and SHPO, the Keeper of the National Register makes the final decision.

Eligibility for inclusion in the Register is, at simplest, a twofold process. The property 

must meet one of four criteria:

A. Are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the 

broad patterns of our history; or

B. Are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or

C. Embody distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of 

construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high 

artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity 

whose components may lack individual distinction; or
34

D. Have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in 

prehistory or history.

And the historic property must possess integrity. There are seven aspects of integrity: 

of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. Integrity in this 

instance is defined as in a state of being unimpaired, undivided, or complete. Integrity 

also means the ability of the property to convey its significance. A historic property may 

not possess all seven aspects of integrity, nor are all seven of equal importance, depending on the type of property. 

An eligible property may be of local, State, or national importance. Often this two-step 

process is cut and dry. However, in some cases the line is not so easily drawn. Therefore, the National Park Service (NPS) has outlined other criteria considerations to assist 

with the process for evaluating a property that falls outside the parameters of properties 

generally not considered eligible.

These seven criteria considerations are:

A. Religious properties

B. Moved properties

C. Birthplaces or graves

D. Cemeteries

E. Reconstructed properties

F. Commemorative properties

G. Properties that have achieved significance within the past 50 years

Criteria consideration G, pertaining to a property attaining importance within the past 

50 years, is relevant for this document. This criterion states explicitly that:

The National Register Criteria for Evaluation exclude properties 

that achieved significance within the last fifty years unless they 

are of exceptional importance. Fifty years is a general estimate of 

the time needed to develop historical perspective and to evaluate significance. This consideration guards against the listing of 

properties of passing contemporary interest and ensures that the 

National Register is a list of truly historic places.

Evaluating a property that is less than 50 years old is a subjective process. Careful attention and consideration must be paid to the guidelines provided under criteria consideration G. To assist this evaluation, refer to the National Register Bulletin titled
35

Guidelines for Evaluating and Nominating Properties that Have Achieved Significance Within 

the Past Fifty Years. This bulletin (# 22) stands currently at its third revision in 1998. This 

bulletin states: 

As of the end of 1994, 2035 properties (out of approximately 

64,000 total listings) had been listed in the National Register under 

Criteria Consideration G. Of these 464 listed properties reflect 

some aspect of the nation’s history since 1950, and 77 of these 

places exclusively reflect some aspect of our history since 1974. 

Many of these properties are recognized for their extraordinary 

role in our nation’s history; however, approximately one third are 

listed for their exceptional importance in community history (NPS 

1998; ii).

The bulletin goes on to summarize how the first edition “guided the evaluation 

of properties from the Depression era and the World War II period,“ but further 

consideration has been given to the next major periods of time such as: the post-World 

War II era which can stretch through the mid-1960s (Civil Rights Movement); the mid1970s (end of the Vietnam War); the early 1980s (the end of the Modern Movement in 

architecture); the late 1980s (end of the Cold War); or some other logical date.

The 1998 bulletin discusses how a growing concern in the preservation community 

resulted in the 1995 conference “Preserving the Recent Past.” This conference was a 

sign of popular and professional commitment to the recognition of the need to preserve 

properties that are significant representations of our recent past. This consideration 

of the recent past stems from the increased pace of development in our present time. 

Historic properties that may have stood the test of time are often torn down before the 

public is given 50 years to reflect on their significance.

Guidelines for Evaluating and Nominating Properties that Have Achieved 

Significance Within the Past Fifty Years

The following topics are presented in Guidelines for Evaluating and Nominating 

Properties that Have Achieved Significance Within the Past Fifty Years bulletin. Each item 

is summarized below with a brief discussion of how the topic relates to the public 

recreation cabins.

• Historic context

• Scholarly evaluation

• Fragile or short-lived resources

• Time
36

• Comparative evaluation of the significance of a property

• Associations with living persons

• Properties in historic districts

• Justifying the importance of properties that have achieved significance in the 

past 50 years

Historic Context

Although all National Register nominations must be understood within their historic 

context, it is of particular importance when nominating a property that is less than 50 

years old. Historic context involves understanding the “time, historical theme, and 

geographical area with which the property is associated.” This context is established 

through research and thoughtful analysis of the place a property holds among the 

“social, political, economic, artistic, physical, architectural, or moral environment that 

accounted for...the resource.” The original and current nature of the property must 

also be considered. This historic context builds the foundation for establishing how the 

property is significant at the local, state or national level. 

The historic context for the Forest Service public recreation cabins program in Alaska 

is the expansion of developed recreation in post WWII America and the growth of a 

leisure culture that demanded it. The context of the cabins also includes the architectural 

developments of prefabricated recreational structures and the continued development 

of inexpensive mass produced building materials. Their period of significance is 

from 1960-1971. This corresponds at the State level with the historic context of Alaska 

statehood and the passage of ANCSA. 

Scholarly Evaluation

If a property is less than 50 years old and has been the subject of scholarly discussion, 

a stronger case may be made for its significance. This discussion may be found in 

“journals of architectural history, social history, landscape architecture, landscaping, 

industrial archeology, and urban development.” Other forms of scholarship, including 

research and analysis presented at conferences may be a source of information. The 

bulletin emphasizes the necessity to distinguish specifically between “popular social 

commentary” and “scholarship.” 

In the case of the A-frame designs, there does exist scholarly research on this design 

type and its place in American architecture. A-Frame by Chad Randl (2004) contains an 

in-depth discussion on the A-frame design. 
37

Fragile or Short-Lived Resources

When considering properties less than 50 years old, “some resources acquire historical 

qualities before the passage of 50 years because they were not built to last that long, 

or, by their nature, are subject to circumstances that destroy their integrity before 

fifty years have elapsed.” Examples of these kinds of buildings are temporary WWII 

structures that survived long after the war, mining structures, early motel or motor 

court complexes, shopping centers, and other roadside buildings. It is important to 

note that the bulletin explicitly states in reference to these types of properties that “one 

may evaluate whether a type or category of resources – as a whole – has faced loss at 

such a rate that relatively young survivors can be viewed as exceptional and historic.” 

However, consideration G also states that “properties that by their nature can last more 

than fifty years cannot be considered exceptionally important because of the fragility of 

the class of resource.” This statement appears to exclude the Forest Service recreation 

cabins from being eligible as fragile or short-lived resources due their nature as being 

able to last more than 50 years.

Time

The intention of the 50 year old designation is a way for evaluators to approach historic 

properties with thoughtful perspective. It is important to remember that it is an 

arbitrary number. The National Register recognizes and acknowledges that time is fluid. 

It was not their intention to allow the 50 year designation to be the Hoover dam in the 

river of time. Since the NHPA was passed in 1966, examinations of properties less than 

50 years old have successfully been argued as exceptional or significant. These include 

“post WWII development projects: the growth of suburban subdivisions, shopping 

malls and commercial strip development; the expansion of educational, recreational, 

and transportation facilities; the Civil Rights movement; the advent of the United States 

space program; the Vietnam War; and the impact of historic preservation on American 

cities, towns and rural areas.” An evaluator must also consider that a property can 

become exceptionally significant not because of the date in which it was constructed but 

because of the time period in which it mattered. Of course, the younger a property is the 

more challenging it is to demonstrate its exceptional importance. 

It is important to remember that there is no set definition of “exceptional importance.” 

Recreation cabins need an interpretation of their “function” in relation to the “relative 

age” of Alaskan historic properties in general. Alaska is a young state. Development 

and growth has always ebbed and flowed with the economic tides. This has influenced 

the temporary nature of much of Alaska’s built environment. If consideration for 

preserving young properties is not given, the possibility exists that in 100 years there 

will be no representative structures left of the State’s official formative years. 
38

Comparative Evaluation of the Significance of a Property

When evaluating a property for exceptional importance, one must establish the 

geographic limits of that property’s context. Exceptional importance can be at the local, 

State, or national level. When a property has importance at the State or local level, it is 

only necessary to compare that property to other similar properties in that locality. 

Forest Service recreation cabins were built from standard designs that were reproduced 

across two distinct areas within the State of Alaska. There are many examples of the 

same building type to compare each individual property with. 

Associations with Living Persons

When considering nominating a property associated with a living person it must be true 

that the living persons “active life in their field of endeavor is over.” These occasions are 

rare and most likely are not applicable when applied to recreation cabins.

Properties in Historic Districts

Besides being eligible on the basis of exceptional importance, a property can also be 

eligible as an “integral part” of a historic district. Historic Districts are contained within 

a definable geographical area. 

Justifying the Importance of Properties That Have Achieved Significance in the Past 

Fifty Years

Properties of recent significance must be clearly and persuasively argued as eligible. 

This justification is highly important to protect the character and respectability 

of a National Register nomination. When justifying exceptional importance “it is 

necessary to identify other properties within the geographical area that reflect the same 

significance or historic associations and to determine which properties best represent 

the historic context in question.” 
Property Types

A-Frame

The A-frame is a simple design that rose 

in popularity during the early 1950s in 

northern California. By 1953 the design 

had been packaged, marketed and sold 

as a prefabricated kit. By the 1960s the 

A-frame had become popular for ski 

lodges and recreational homes. It was 

promoted in popular magazines and 

plan books nationwide for its ease of 

assembly and versatility of use (Randl 

2004). The Alaska Region began using 

this style in 1962. The cabins were 

constructed by volunteers and or Forest 

Service employees from off the shelf lumber, plywood and Plexiglas. The A-frame 

cabins used in the Alaska Region were not ordered by mail. The A-Frame declined in 

popularity nationwide in the 1970s. However, the Forest Service continues to construct 

this style today. One advantage of the design is low maintenance in heavy snow areas.

A-frame construction is based on a triangular shape where rafters or trusses are joined 

at the peak and descend outward to the main floor level. The roof surface ties the rafters 

together (Figure 22). There are only two vertical walls in a true A-frame; the front and

39

Figure 22. A-frame structural detail from Hunter Cabin –‘A’ Frame 1962.

Figure 21. Devil’s Pass Cabin, ChugachNational Forest, 

Seward Ranger District.
40

back which are equilateral triangles. Modifications include placing a dormer in one side 

of the roof to create a room with vertical walls. A search for early Forest Service cabin 

plans revealed six plans pertaining to A-frames:

• Hunter Cabin –‘A’ Frame by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game March 29, 

1962. Drawn by GGC. Located in the Juneau Ranger District flat file (Figures 22 

and 25).

• A Frame Cabin- Preliminary Plans dated and initialed C.T.B., R.F.T., and E.H.S., 

July 2, 1962. Located in the Juneau Regional Office basement flat file (Figure 28).

• Suggested Hunter’s Cabin for cabin special use permittees. June 1963; R-10 

Supplement No. 38; Forest Service Handbook.

• Outlying Cabin plate 29L 2316.29 designed by BA, DS, & ES; drawn by E.H. 

Stone; approved and signed on July 23, 1963. The copy of this plan was mailed to 

the author from Wrangell.

• Chateau for Second Meadow Ski Site Chatham Ranger District Drawn by Ron 

Wood; approved February 2, 1964. This copy has a handwritten note that reads 

“Plate 29L revised and enlarged.” Located at the Juneau Ranger District flat file.

• Outlying Cabin design number 29L designed by BA, DS, & ES in 1963 and 

revised in 1985. The copy of this plan was mailed to the author from Wrangell 

(Figure 27).

Without in-depth research at the district level, it is difficult to say which A-frame was 

the first constructed on the Tongass. On the Chugach it was the Devil’s Pass Cabin built 

in 1966 (Figure 21); demolished and replaced in 2006. Of the seven constructed on the 

Tongass in 1962 (Table 4), the Sportsmen Cabin, Lake Kathleen Cabin, Pybus Bay Cabin 

and the Churchbight Cabin in Gambier Bay were all built by the Territorial Sportsmen 

Inc. on Admiralty Island. These cabins took one weekend and a crew of 15 people to 

construct. They were prefabricated in Juneau by general contractor Lee Morris, then 

disassembled and flown to their site locations, and reassembled by volunteer labor 

(Grummet 1988). 

In Yakutat two distinctly different cabins were constructed; the Tanis Mesa (Figure 

20) and the Harlequin Lake cabins. Built as duplexes, these two A-frame structures 

are actually four cabins. They are accessible by wheeled plane from Yakutat due to 

the presence of a runway maintained by the district cabin crews. The Harlequin Lake 

cabin was decommissioned from the reservation system in 2007. Its remote setting was 

changed when a road and bridge were built during a timber sale in the early 1970s. 

Over the years its connection to the Yakutat road system contributed to unauthorized 

use and vandalism. The Tanis Mesa cabin remains active as a reservation cabin. Though 

not designated Wilderness, it is located in the Yakutat forelands in an extremely pristine
41

and remote area where hunting is the main use. This cabin has an associated A-frame 

meat shed unlike other cabins in the system. 

The Lake Kathleen and Sportsmen cabins were two of the only A-frames constructed 

based on plan Hunter Cabin –‘A’ Frame (Figure 25) published by ADFG in 1962. The 

Sportsman cabin was removed and replaced by the Forest Service 2003. Lake Kathleen 

cabin is still standing and on the reservation system as of the time of this writing. 

One cabin, the Pt. Amargura cabin (Figure 28) on the Craig Ranger District, was built 

based on the Preliminary Plans dated 1962. The Infra database puts its construction date 

at 1963. This cabin was replaced with a new cabin in 2008.

Most remaining A-frame cabins in the Alaska Region appear to have been constructed 

based on Outlying Cabin plate 29L (Figure 27). They have full length windows on the 

front façade and a porch that extends forward and fits just under the extended roofline. 

The Tongass built 41 A-frames during the years 1962 – 1994 (Table 4). The Chugach has 

only 6 A-frame public recreation cabins remaining. From 1967 – 1969 (Table 5) 6 were 

built consecutively with one more was constructed in 1979. 

Figure 23. Trout Lake Cabin historic photo: Chugach National Forest, Seward Ranger 

District.

Photo date ca. 1970. 

Note Styrofoam blocks 

used for the foundation.
42

Figure 24. Lake Kathleen Cabin, Tongass National Forest, 

Admiralty National Monument.

Figure 25. Front façade detail from cabin plan 

Hunter Cabin ‘A’ frame: ADFG: 1962.

Figure 26. East Florence Cabin, Tongass National Forest, 

Admiralty National Monument.

Figure 27. Front façade detail from Outlying Cabin 

Plate 29L 1963.
43

Point Amargura Cabin

Tongass National Forest, Craig Ranger District 

A-Frame built in 1962 

Appears to have been the only cabin to use 

this floor to ceiling corrugated fiberglass as 

depicted in the (above) Preliminary Plans, 

dated 1962.

Figure 28. Point Amargura Cabin, Tongass National Forest, Craig Ranger District.
44

Above: Old Sportsman Cabin built in 1962. Below: New Sportsman Cabin, a Pan 

Abode built in 2007. The process of replacement is depicted in photos. above.

Figure 29. Sportsman Cabin, Tongass National Forest, Admiralty Island National Monument.
45

A-Frame Architectural Information

These exterior descriptions are based on the Outlying Cabin Plan 29L from 1963 (Figure 

27). In some instances a comparison is made between the 29L plan, the Preliminary 

Plan, and the ADFG plan. It is believed that all cabins constructed based on the 

Preliminary Plan (Figure 28) have been destroyed. The 29L cabin plan was revised 

in 1985. The 1985 version alters the placement of the door and windows on the front 

façade to where the door is centered under the peak of the roofline. 

Building Characteristics that Typify the Period of Significance

The overall design and shape using the equilateral triangle is a very important building 

characteristic to the A-frame. Also porches no wider than the overhanging roof, offset 

entries, with windows in the upper half of the entry door, and the use of corrugated 

green or brown aluminum roofing. Details of these characteristic are as follows:

◊ Structural

• Front Façade: An equilateral triangle measuring 16’ on all sides is 

the defining characteristic of this building. The wall is constructed of 

textured plywood and Plexiglas. Full length windows extend from floor 

to ceiling minus a triangular panel of textured plywood at the top. The 

door in the Preliminary and the 29L plan is a 2’8” x 6’8” Dutch door and 

is offset left of center; this is a defining characteristic of this property 

type. However, in practice, the Dutch door style was not always used. 

• Rear Façade: Similar in appearance to the front façade, the rear is also 

constructed of textured plywood and Plexiglas. There is no rear door. 

Windows in the rear extend from floor to ceiling minus a triangularshaped vent door at the top. This vent door is hinged at the bottom and 

opens behind a copper or aluminum fly screen. 

• Side Elevation: Either side elevations of a 29L (1963) A-frame is roofing. 

The roofing is embossed brown or green enameled aluminum. A stove 

pipe extends 1’ above the ridgeline on the left side of the cabin. 

◊ Foundation

• The foundation of the A-frame cabin was originally designed to sit on 

10”x 20” x 2’ 0” Styrofoam logs. There were four 4 x 6 x 20’ floor joists 

running perpendicular to the front façade. The Styrofoam logs were 

placed under these joists in the front, rear and center. A note in the 29L 

plan explains that pressure treated posts or sills may be used in place of 

Styrofoam. “A 6 x 6 in. sq. post will be used, sink 3 ft. into ground.” The 

Styrofoam logs, as foundation, were used in areas where the subsurface 

was moist or unsubstantial.
46

◊ Roof

• The roof creates the side walls and runs the length of the structure. The 

roofing is embossed brown or green enameled aluminum.

◊ Windows

• Windows are present only on the front and rear façade. The windows 

on the front façade are divided into seven panels and extend from the 

first floor to the second. There is a door to the left side of the windows 

on the first floor. The windows, if measured clockwise from top left, on 

first floor are as follows; 1’1⁄4” wide x 2’61⁄2” tall, 2’1⁄4” x 2’61⁄2”, 1’1⁄4” x 

4’1⁄4” and 2’1⁄4” x 4’1⁄4.” On the second floor the windows are two right 

triangles on either side of a rectangle. The center rectangular window 

measures 2’1⁄4” wide x 3’81⁄4” tall. The triangular windows are the same 

height and width as the center rectangular window with their hypotenuse formed by the roof line. The window segments are clear Plexiglas 

panes in the 29L design. 

◊ Doors

• There is one door on the front façade. It is a 2’8” wide by 6’8” Dutch 

door. The door is set off-center to the left. Although various doors configurations were used. The upper portion of the door has a four-paned 

window present. The measurements for the windows in the door are 

not specified in the 29L plans. Many different window configurations 

were used in doors.

◊ Floor

• The sub floor is constructed of 2” x 6” car decking with floor of hd 

screen grid overlay plywood. The plans do not define hd.

◊ Porch

• There is a porch that extends 4’ in front of the door and is covered by an 

extension of the roofing. This feature is another defining characteristic 

of this property type. There was no porch in the Preliminary Plan or in 

the ADFG plan. Extended porches have been added to some cabins over 

time.

◊ Finishes

• Forest Products Lab (F.P.L.) brown stain was required on all exposed 

wood.
47

In regards to the interior, the 29L plans state that “the location and design of bunks, 

counters, and cabinets are optional. All other features are standard.” All other features 

would include the stove, ladder, and loft floor and opening. All plywood used in 

the construction of these cabins was expected to be of exterior or marine grade. 

Modifications to A-frame cabins were generally made by constructing a dormer in one 

of the side façades and do not appear to have occurred until after 1971.

Table 4. Tongass National Forest: A-frame cabins constructed between 1960-1971.

District Cabin Name Year Remarks

ANM Church Bight 1960

ANM Lake Kathleen 1960

ANM Pybus Bay 1960

PRD DeBoer Lake 1962

YRD Harlequin Lake (N/S) 1962 Day Use Only

YRD Tanis Mesa (N/S) 1962

PRD Salt Chuck East 1963/ 

1972

Moved to current site 1972 and greatly 

modified w/side addition

WRD Mallard Slough 1963/ 

1980

Greatly modified w/side addition in 

1980

WRD Mount Flemer 1963

WRD Mount Rynda 1963

WRD Shakes Slough #2 1963

WRD Twin Lakes 1963 Moved to current site in 1985

ANM East Florence 1964

PRD Breiland Slough 1964

PRD Harvey Lake 1964

SIT Goulding Lake 1964

WRD Garnet Ledge 1964 Determined eligible 2010, to be 

replaced

WRD Anan Bay 1965 Determined eligible 2009, replaced in 

2012

WRD Berg Bay 1965 Scheduled to be replaced in 2013

SRD Kook Lake 1966

PRD Devil's Elbow 1967

PRD Castle River 1968/ 

1982

Moved from Petersburg Creek 1982 

and greatly modified w/side addition

PRD Kah Sheets Lake 1969/ 

1989

Partially reconstructed 1989 and 

greatly modified w/side addition
Pan Abode

Pan Abode is a brand 

name for a company 

located in Richmond, 

British Columbia, 

Canada and Renton, 

Washington, United 

States. The company 

opened in 1948 and 

quickly developed a 

reputation for building 

summer homes and 

camp accommodations. 

In 1950 a patent was 

awarded to Pan Abode 

for their “lock joint 

corner system” design. 

Using western red cedar 

from their own timber 

stands, they mill the 

logs in their own mills. 

The cedar log is milled so that no log contains the heart center or core of the tree. This 

reduces cracking and splitting by 95 percent (Pan Abode 2009).

Known in the recreational facilities handbook as design No. 29B, Pan Abode cabins 

typify Forest Service public recreation use cabins. Their uniform construction and ease 

of assembly made them popular with Forest Service personnel as a cabin to assemble 

quickly in the field (personal communication with Steve Hennig 2009). On the Tongass 

District Cabin Name Year Remarks 

GRD Shrode Lake 1967/ 

2008

Major modifications 2008

GRD Pigot Bay 1967/ 

2008

Major modifications 2008

SRD Trout Lake 1968 Determined not eligible 2010, to be 

replaced

CRD Hook Point 1969

Table 5. Chugach National Forest: A-frame cabins constructed between 1960-1971

Figure 30. East Creek Cabin,Chugach National Forest, Seward Ranger District,

ca. 1966.

48
National Forest, the Ketchikan Ranger District constructed Pan Abode cabins 

exclusively. 

The design that was contracted to Pan Abode by the Forest Service has had slight 

variations over the past 47 years. Overall the appearance of a Pan Abode is very distinct 

as a type. In particular the “lock joint corner system” is a distinguishing feature in 

the overall design. The Tongass National Forest constructed 46 Pan Abode cabins 

between 1960 and 1971. The Chugach National Forest constructed 10 Pan Abode cabins 

during this same time period. Most of these are still in use today although a few have 

been replaced or decommissioned. A list of these cabins and their construction dates 

according to the Infra database are located in Tables 6 and 7. 

Three cabin plans for the Outlying Cabin 29B were located during this study. These 

plans are all housed in the flat file found in the basement of the Regional Office federal 

building in Juneau. No plan makes any claim to being associated with Pan-Abode. 

• Outlying Cabin Plate 29B drawn by E.H. Stone and approved by Richard 

W. Wilke on July 23, 1963. Cabin dimensions in this plan are 12’ x 14’ with 

an arch on the side elevation porch overhang. No porch floor is drawn.

• Outlying Cabin design number 29B-1 drawn by Ron Wood and approved 

on April 27, 1964. Cabin dimensions in this plan are 12’ x12’ plan with no 

porch overhang or porch.

• Outlying Cabin design number 29B drawn by W.G. Ferguson in April 

of 1984 and approved in December of 1985. This plan differs from the 

earlier plan by having a door on both the front and rear elevations. There 

is the same arched porch overhang as in the 1964 plan, but an L-shaped 

porch that wraps around the left side of the structure is shown. The 

window placement also differs in this plan. Although outside the period 

of significance, mention is made of this plan to assist field reviewers in 

distinguishing cabin designs. 

49
Figure 31. Artist rendering of recreation cabin.

Pan Abode Architectural Information

These exterior descriptions are based on the Outlying Cabin Plate 29B (1963). This plan 

does not specifically state that it is Pan Abode; however, the drawing is consistent with 

standing Pan Abode structures and depicts the “lock joint corner system.”

Pan Abode cabins can have one of three basic rectangular footprints depending on the 

plan they were constructed from; 14’ x 12’, 12’ x 12’ or 12.9’ x 14’. They have one main 

floor, with four complete walls, one door and generally at least four windows. The walls 

are constructed of cedar logs that arrive pre-cut. 

Building Characteristics That Typify the Period of Significance 

For the Pan Abode cabin, the use of the precut interlocking cedar logs is a very 

important building characteristic. Also, the offset front door entry, either no porch or 

one no wider than the roof overhang, the use of corrugated green or brown aluminum 

roofing, and single windows on each elevation. Details of these characteristics are as 

follows:

 ◊ Structural

• Front Façade: It has one door and one window; the door is usually on the 

left side and the window is on the right. The front façade measures 13’-11⁄2” 

across in cabins that follow the 29B plan. Also distinctive to the 29B plan is a 

decorative use of the corner joint system that creates a line next to the door,

50
However, this was not always used. A fascia covers the purlins. There is a 

small louvered vent in the gable just below the roof line.

• Rear Façade: Similar in appearance to the front façade but has one centered 

window and no door. The rear façade has the same small louvered vent in 

the gable just below the roof line. In the 29B plan the rear façade measures 12’ 

across. Also visible are the lock and corner joint system. 

• Side Elevation: Depending on the plan, the side elevation may have a “jog” 

in the wall. This is created by a small wall on the interior of the building that 

creates an archway separating the bunk bed area. One window is present on 

each side elevation. Particular to the 29B plan is the arch that cantilevers the 

roof out, creating a covered porch.

◊ Foundation

• Materials have varied over the years including wood pilings, concrete pier 

blocks, and sometimes Styrofoam blocking. These were spaced three to four 

feet apart.

• Floor joist system consisted of 4” x 6” girders spaced three to four feet. 

◊ Roof

• Roofing is embossed brown or green enameled aluminum.

◊ Windows

• The one window on the front façade is 3’ 6” above the lowest sill log and is 

3’ tall. No measurement is given as to the width of the window. The plan 

indicates that the window is a two paned sliding window. Photos from early 

cabins depict a window with a wooden frame. The rear window is exactly 

the same as the front. On the side façades there was one window generally 

on both sides at the same height as the windows on the front façade. The side 

façade window does not open. It has three panes of glass stacked horizontally. 

◊ Doors

• One door on the front façade is present. The plans do not indicate the 

measurement of the door.

◊ Floor

• Floor decking was predominately composed of plywood; however, car 

decking was sometimes used.

51
◊ Porch

• Porch decking is not indicated in the plan drawings. Based on early 

photos, it appears cabin porches were built subsequent to initial 

construction.

◊ Finishes

• Forest Products Lab (F.P.L.) stain was required on all exposed wood.

52
Top: Outlying Cabin Plate 29B 1963: Front elevation detail and floor plan. 2 x 14 x 131⁄2, not 

including porch. Has a jog in the side wall where the floor cantilevers out over the foundation 

allowing the front half of the floor plan to be larger than the rear.

Middle: Outlying Cabin Plate 29B1 1964: Side elevation detail 12 x 12; no porch in design. 

Floor plan is rectangular with no jog as in the 29B plan.

Figure 32. Pan Abode: Comparison of plan types, front façade and floor plan.

Bottom: Outlying Cabin design number 29-B 1985: Front elevation detail and floor plan 

12’9” x 14’ detail.

53
Top: Outlying Cabin Plate 29B 1963

Side elevation detail.

12’ x 14’ x 13’ 1⁄2” not including porch.

Has a jog in the side wall where the floor 

cantilevers out over the foundation allowing 

the front half of the floor plan to be larger 

than the rear.

No stovepipe in drawing, however, in other 

details, it is in the front of the cabin by the 

front door.

Middle: Outlying Cabin Plate 29B1 

1964

Side elevation detail.

12’ X 12’ no porch in design.

Floor plan is rectangular with no jog as in 

the 29B plan.

Also stove is in the front of cabin near door.

Bottom: Outlying Cabin design 

number 29-B 1985

Side elevation detail.

12’9” x 14’ detail.

Figure 33. Pan Abode: Comparison of plan types, side façade.

54
55

District Cabin Name Date Remarks 

ANM Lake Alexander 1960

ANM Little Shaheen 1960

ANM Jim’s Lake 1962

KMRD Red Alders 1962

WRD Sergief Island 1962

WRD Shakes Slough #1 1962

CRD Black Bear Lake 1963/ 

1979

Moved in 1979 and major 

modifications made in 1999

KMRD Jordan Lake 1963 Large covered deck added

TBRD Barnes Lake 1963 Large covered deck added

WRD Koknuk 1963

KMRD Big Goat 1964 Safety use only

CRD Josephine Lake 1964

KMRD Checats 1964

KMRD Plenty Cutthroat 1964

KMRD Wilson Narrows 1964 Large covered deck added

TBRD Staney Creek 1964 Large covered deck added

KMRD Beaver 1965 Reconstructed in 2001

KMRD Ella Narrows 1965

KMRD Hugh Smith 1965

TBRD Honker Lake 1965 Large covered deck added

TBRD Sarkar Lake 1965/ 

1990

Moved in 1990, large covered deck 

added

TBRD Sweetwater Lake 1965 Large covered deck added

WRD Marten Lake 1965 None

WRD Virginia Lake 1965 Reconstructed in 1996 - fully 

accessible, very large addition

SRD Plotnikof Lake 1966

SRD White Sulphur Springs 1966 Determined eligible 2011, to be 

replaced

TBRD Karta Lake 1966

CRD Kegan Creek 1967 Large covered deck added

KMRD Heckman Lake 1967 Large covered deck added

KMRD McDonald Lake 1967 Large covered deck added

KMRD Reflection Lake 1967

KMRD Winstanley Lake 1967

SRD Sitkoh Lake West 1967

TBRD Shipley Bay 1967 Large covered deck added

KMRD Rainbow Lake 1968

TBRD Salmon Bay Lake 1969 New deck

Table 6. Tongass National Forest: Pan Abode cabins constructed between 1960-1971.
56

Table 7. Chugach National Forest: Pan Abode cabins constructed between 1960-1971

District Cabin Name Date Remarks 

SRD Crescent Lake 1963

SRD Upper Paradise 1964 Covered arctic entrance added 1994

SRD East Creek 1965

SRD Swan Lake 1966

CRD Log Jam Bay 1970

CRD Double Bay 1970 Was previously located at Anderson 

Bay

SRD Caribou Creek 1970

Figure 34. Upper Paradise Cabin, Chugach National Forest, Seward Ranger District.
57

Figure 35. Honker Lake Cabin, Tongass 

National Forest, Thorne Bay Ranger 

District.

Figure 36. Virginia Lake Cabin, 

Tongass National Forest, Wrangell 

Ranger District.

Figure 37. Karta Lake Cabin, Tongass 

National Forest, Thorne Bay Ranger 

District.
58

Figure 38. Tiedman’s Slough Cabin, Chugach National 

Forest, Cordova Ranger District.

Figure 39. Caribou Creek Cabin, Chugach National 

Forest, Seward Ranger District.

Figure 40. Romig Cabin, Chugach National Forest, Seward 

Ranger District.

Figure 41. East Creek Cabin, Chugach National 

Forest, Seward Ranger District.
59

Figure 42. Swan Lake Cabin, Chugach National Forest, Seward Ranger District.
60

Evaluating Alaska Region Public Recreation Cabins

A public recreation cabin will most likely be eligible under criteria A or C. As always 

the integrity of a property is part of determining eligibility as a historic property. There 

were multiple properties constructed from the same standard design, also necessitating 

evaluation of a cabin in comparison with others of the same type. The tables included in 

the property type section are provided to assist in establishing which cabins may retain 

enough integrity to be eligible. 

Why consider these buildings? Because they were a large-scale continuation of a national effort to provide developed recreation opportunities to the public and are a unique 

manifestation of that movement in the Alaska Region between 1960 and 1971. 

National Register Criteria for Evaluation

Criterion A

To meet criterion A, an eligible property must be “associated with events that have 

made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our nation’s history.” This significance can be at the local, state or national importance. 

The development of a Forest Service recreational built environment is a broad pattern 

of our national history. This is reflected in the properties constructed by the CCC and 

the acknowledgement that they are National Register eligible properties. The Period 

of Significance for the CCC, however, has a clearly definable time period with a beginning and an end marked by specific legislation that allowed for the program’s existence. 

While the Alaska Region cabins exist within a similar broad historical context of developed recreation, their period of significance is less definable. The beginning is easy, 

1960, when the first cabins were built. The end date of 1971 is an arbitrary ending date 

based on political events outside the context of developed recreation; that of ANCSA 

and land ownership questions particular to Alaska. Cabin construction resumed again 

after a short break and has continued through today using the same or similar building 

designs originating in the 1960s. There was a fervor surrounding recreation in American 

culture during the 1960s that is particularly related to the post WWII effects of American prosperity. In the 1960s recreation became a national pastime for a growing middle 

class. The ability for the public to have adequate, comfortable amenities became a concern and responsibility of land managing agencies: federal, State and municipal. Having 

recreational opportunities for the public became entwined in the economic growth of a 

particular state or region. This relationship continues and has evolved into an important 

piece of Alaska’s economy. 
61

In particular, the A-frame design can immediately evoke the feeling of the 1960s even 

though its design use has spanned all successive decades. The period between 1960 

and 1971 was the first initial push to provide dispersed developed recreation cabins 

in the Alaska Region. The cabins represent Alaska’s reaction to this national recreation 

movement making them more likely to be eligible at the State or local level. At present, 

the cabins dating from this time period are not 50 years old, although a few are close, 

which makes it challenging to demonstrate their exceptional importance. This document clearly identifies other properties within the State that reflect the same significance 

and historic associations for comparative purposes. The following section discusses the 

aspects of integrity as they pertain to the public recreation cabins. Because of the youth 

and multiplicity of these cabins, it is necessary to be stringent on the integrity assessments as they pertain to particular properties. 

Criterion B

To meet criterion B, an eligible property must be “associated with the lives of persons 

significant in our past.” It is unlikely that any of the Forest Service built public recreation cabins, of the A-frame and Pan-abode variety, could meet this criterion. However, 

it is necessary to explore this option and acknowledge if it does or does not pertain to a 

particular cabin.

Criterion C

To meet criterion C, an eligible property must “embody distinctive characteristics of a 

type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that 

possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity 

whose components may lack individual distinction.”

A property eligible under this criterion must meet one of these listed elements. Of these 

elements in criterion C, recreation cabins “embody distinctive characteristics of a type, 

period, or method of construction” this element refers to “the way in which a property 

was conceived, designed, or fabricated by a people or culture in past periods of history.” Between 1960 and 1971 there was a push by the Forest Service to build recreation 

cabins in the Alaska Region. The resulting public recreation cabins represent the Forest 

Service’s acceptance of a shift from rustic hand-hewn architecture to the use of modern 

materials and the prefabrication industry (see pg. 26). This was an official acceptance 

and is stated in the United States Forest Service Built Environment Guide (USDA 2001). 

This criterion could apply to either an A-frame or a Pan Abode cabin within the context 

of the Forest Service built environment for recreation.

Modern materials and the prefabrication industry are seen in the use of plywood and 

Plexiglas in the A-frame cabins and the prefabricated kit design of the Pan Abode.
62

Ironically while these do represent a shift in the method of construction by the Forest 

Service, these materials have become so common that it is very difficult to view their 

use as a contributing factor to exceptional importance. These properties all relate to each 

other by their function, dates of construction, choice of materials and technology. An 

exceptionally important example would have to possess all seven aspects of integrity. 

Thus we can “guard against the listing of properties of passing contemporary interests” 

as stated in the National Register Bulletin #15 under Criterion Consideration G. 

Consideration has been given that the cabins program, as a whole, represents a “significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction.” 

This would qualify them for consideration as a district. As a district, it could be said the 

system of cabins constructed by the Alaska Region “possesses a significant concentration, linkage, or continuity of buildings united historically or aesthetically by plan or 

physical development.” The cabins represent “one principle activity” that are an “arrangement of functionally related properties.” However, a district is excluded from 

being eligible if its definable geographic boundary is the “limits of current parcels of 

ownership, management or planning boundaries.” Due the fact that the geographical 

boundaries of the recreation cabins are defined by those of a federal land managing 

agency, the recreation cabins are not eligible as a district with definable geographic 

boundaries. 

Criterion D

To meet criterion D, an eligible property must “have yielded, or may be likely to yield, 

information important in prehistory or history.” It is very unlikely that any Forest Service built public recreation cabin will meet this criterion. 

Integrity

Integrity is the ability of a property to convey its significance. As stated previously, to 

be eligible a historic property must possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, 

workmanship, feeling and association. Integrity in this regard is defined as in a state of being unimpaired, undivided, or complete. A historic property may not possess all seven 

aspects of integrity, nor are all seven of equal importance, depending on the type of 

property. However, the younger the property the more of these it should possess. Until 

these properties are much older, they should possess all seven aspects of integrity. The 

following definitions are taken from National Register bulletins. 
Location

Location is the place where the 

historic property was constructed. 

Integrity of location is very important 

in conveying the significance of the 

Alaska Region’s recreation cabins. 

These recreation cabins would not 

convey their significance if they 

were anywhere but a location 

that provided solitude in the wild 

Alaskan environment. Therefore, any 

changes in the location that alter the 

experience originally intended when 

the cabin was originally constructed 

can degrade a cabin’s integrity. An 

example of this would be moving the 

cabin to an urban or populated area. 

However, moving a cabin from one 

lake to another would not necessarily 

degrade its integrity.

Design

Design is the combination of 

elements that create the form, 

plan, space, structure and style of 

a property. Integrity of design is 

a highly important consideration 

when evaluating a Forest Service 

public recreation cabin. Many kinds 

of repairs and alterations have 

occurred to these properties over the 

years. Because of the multiplicity of 

properties constructed from the same set of plans, it is necessary to identify which 

cabins represent an unaltered representation of their original design. In the case 

of A-frame cabins most, if not all, of the very early designs have been demolished. 

Continued and needed maintenance stands to be a threat to the original integrity of 

structures that are left as roofs, floors, windows, doors, etc. are replaced and porches 

expanded. In order for a public recreation cabin to be eligible, it must retain a high 

percentage of its original design or have repairs done in-kind with the original design.

63

Figure 43. Paradise Lake Cabin, Chugach National Forest, 

Seward Ranger District Example of location and setting.

Figure 44. Crow Pass Cabin, Chugach National Forest, Glacier 

Ranger District, ca. 1970.
The Pan Abode structures are more likely 

to withstand the test of time due to their 

construction of cedar. However, many 

alterations have occurred to these building 

types also; extensive covered porches and 

extended decks were not part of the original 

designs. In order to justify that these 

structures are eligible, it would have to be 

demonstrated that they are of exceptional 

importance due to being a rare example 

of a cabin that maintains its original 

design integrity, and compared with other 

properties of its same kind, it is a rare 

example.

Setting

Setting is the physical environment of 

a historic property (Figures 43 and 

44). The setting of these cabins plays a 

very important role in their historical 

significance, because the setting was 

the main reason for the placement and 

construction of the cabin. A public 

recreation cabin function is directly tied 

to its setting, so it follows that changes in 

these settings would impair the ability for 

the property to convey its significance. 

Changes in setting can include the 

construction of roads to access the cabin, 

logging or even natural changes to the 

environment that occurred after the 

property was constructed.

Materials

Materials are the physical elements from which the building was constructed. The 

construction materials dating from the period of its historic significance must be present 

and intact. If these materials have been removed or replaced, not in-kind, then the 

property’s integrity of materials is degraded. This would include changes to the exterior 

siding, roofing materials, doors, windows, etc. of public recreation cabins (Figure 45). At 

this point in the lifespan of these cabins, continued replacement of materials is

64

Figure 45. Hook Point Cabin, Chugach National Forest, 

Cordova Ranger District.

Above and below are the same cabin, photo dates 

unknown. 

Notice the door has been changed from the original. 

This is an example of degraded integrity of materials.
65

foreseeable as necessary due to the nature of the cabin construction, especially in regards to A-frame cabins. If the replacements are done in-kind then this would not affect 

the cabin’s integrity.

Workmanship

Workmanship is the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given period in history and prehistory. This pertains to a technology of a craft 

which in the case of a historic structure would generally include tooling, carving, painting, graining, turning and joinery. The before mentioned workmanship is not present in 

the recreation cabins. These cabins were constructed from standard designs intended to 

be assembled by seasonal and or volunteer crews supervised by a permanent employee. 

The workmanship represented would be of that nature; simple. This type of workmanship is most likely going to be present in these cabins. 

Feeling

Feeling is the ability for a property to evoke a sense of the historical time period in 

which it was constructed. The A-frame is an iconic pop culture design from the 1960s. 

However the Forest Service continued to use this design well into the present as seen 

in the Deer Mountain Cabin completed in 2008 on the Ketchikan Ranger District. While 

the A-frame is very capable of evoking the feeling of the 1960s, it is very difficult to 

ascertain the ability for the Pan Abode to evoke a sense of their historical time period. 

This is due to the continued use of the design over the decades beyond the period of 

significance. Because of this, feeling would become a less important aspect of integrity 

contributing to the property’s ability to convey its significance. 

Association

Association links a historic event or person with a historic property. A property must be 

the place where the event occurred, or where a significant person was associated. This 

type of association could only be determined for a public recreation cabin on a case-bycase evaluation. 
66

Synthesis

Precedence is limited in reviewing these types of properties for eligibility to the 

National Register and there is much resistance to even doing so. In developing this 

historic context, it became apparent that the earliest examples of the A-frame cabins 

in the recreation cabins program are quickly disappearing, without systematic 

documentation. There are currently 27 A-frame cabins still in use in the Alaska Region. 

These remaining A-frame cabins have, on occasion, been modified or have had original 

materials replaced, yet still maintain their basic design. This is also the case in regards 

to the Pan Abode cabins. Consistently it has been brought to the attention of the 

author that these structures were not built to last and were intended to be torn down 

and replaced as maintenance and use dictated. “There is nothing special about their 

construction” they say. While this may be true, it does not exclude them from review 

under the National Historic Preservation Act. 

What the public wants from these cabins is changing. In the early days of the DingellJohnson cabins, a rustic, basic structure that provided just enough shelter from the 

weather was sufficient. Attitudes toward recreation have changed over the years. The 

public wants more interior natural light with ample covered deck space outside. This 

has led to additions and modifications that may not be in-kind with the historic design 

of a building. 

Some public recreation cabins have retained their integrity of location, setting, design 

and materials. The development of the recreational built environment is a broad 

pattern of our national history. The Forest Service did make an intentional shift from 

rustic architecture to the use of modern materials. This switch, therefore, represents a 

distinctive characteristic of a type, period and method of construction. The difficult part 

of the equation is an individual cabin standing alone in the woods may not have the 

ability to convey its significance. 

Further field review is needed to identify which public use cabins are possibly 

exceptionally important examples of their property type. In order for an evaluator to 

make this determination, they must have a way to compare the individual property 

they are reviewing against all properties of the same type. 

Needs Assessment 

Quality photo documentation of the public recreation cabins needs to be emphasized. 

In the course of this research photographs were compiled with some effort. These 

photos are useful when comparing similar property types. Presently photographs are 

scattered across districts and sometimes their quality is poor. Shots of all façades do not
67

exist. Standards for how photographs of cabins are taken should be followed so the 

visual historic record of these structures is maintained. This is not to suggest that 

HABS/HAER9

 standards be implemented, just that a better job needs to be done. 

Photographs of angles on all elevations, clean uncluttered views of cabins, and all 

aspects of each façade would be ideal. Understandably, the practical ability for this 

achievement is impaired by terrain and vegetation restrictions. But admittedly, the 

standard has gone down. 

Further examination of properties will identify which properties maintain a high level 

of integrity. From this information, perhaps a representative sample could be actively 

preserved and interpreted to the public as an example of the recreational cabin history 

in the Alaska Region. A web based interpretive format may be well-suited to this 

situation. In cases where cabins are determined to be beyond repair, mitigation through 

documentation could suffice. A recreation cabin survey form has been included in the 

appendix to assist field reviewers with assessments. 

Conclusion

The public recreation cabins have provided nearly 50 years of enjoyment on public 

lands in Alaska. Their locations and settings are spectacular, offering a basic comforting 

retreat from all kinds of weather. Their exceptional importance rests more in what they 

provide than in how they are constructed. When these cabins were first constructed, 

outdoor equipment was heavy and cumbersome to carry; fuel was inexpensive. The 

cost of maintaining some cabins far exceeds the use many cabins currently receive from 

the public today. However, they have now become part of the Forest Service’s historic 

built environment and should be recorded and preserved, if not-on-the ground then 

through documentation. 

9

Historic American Buildings Survey/Historic American Engineering Record: a very detail-oriented system of measured drawings, large format 

photographs, and written histories managed by the Library of Congress.
68

References Cited

Alaska Division of Sport Fish 

1959-1960 Annual Report of Progress/Dingell-Johnson Project Report, vol.1-11. The 

Division: Juneau.

Beck, Paul

1969 Recreation Report. Unpublished document. United States Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service. Regional Office: Juneau.

 

Borneman, Walter R.

2004 Alaska: Saga of a Bold Land. Harper Collins.

Brockman, Frank C

1959 Recreational Use of Wild Lands. New York: McGraw Hill.

Buzzell, Rolfe 

2001 Cultural Resources Evaluation of the McKinley Lake Mine Site, Near Cordova, Alaska, 

1999. Alaska: Office of History and Archaeology, Division of Parks and Outdoor 

Recreation, Alaska Department of Natural Resources. 

Carhart, Arthur

1920 Recreation in the Forests. American Forestry. May 20:268-272.

Case, David S. and David A. Voluck

2002 Alaska Natives and American Laws. University of Alaska Press: Fairbanks.

Ellison, Lincoln

1942 Trends of Forest Recreation in the United States. Journal of Forestry.

Grummet, Karleen Alstead

1988 Territorial Sportsmen, Inc. 1945-1988 A Chronological History. Unpublished. On file 

at the Juneau Ranger District Office: Juneau. 

Hagadorn, Neil

2010 Personal communication with the author.

Hennig, Steve

2009 Personal communication with the author.
69

Laut, Agnes C.

1910 Everybody’s Camping Ground: The National Government Throws Open its 

Forest Reserves as a Play-Field for the People. Collier’s Outdoor America. 

January.

McClean, Herbert, E.

1965 Jet Age Camping. American Forests. July, vol. 71:16-17.

Mobley, Charles M.

1993 Documenting the Civilian Conservation Corps Canoe Route, Admiralty National 

Monument, Tongass National Forest, Alaska. Report prepared by Charles M. 

Mobley & Associates under Purchase Order #43-0114-2-0304 for Admiralty Island 

National Monument, USDA Forest Service: Juneau.

Ogden, Gerald.

1976 The United States Forest Service: A Historical Bibliography, 1876-1972. Agricultural 

History Center. University of California, Davis.

Otis, Alison T., William D. Honey, Thomas C. Hogg, Kimberley K. Larkin

1986 The Forest Service and the Civilian Conservation Corps: 1933-1942. FS-395. 

United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 

Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission. 

1962 Outdoor Recreation for America. A Report to the President and to the Congress. 

Washington D.C. 

Pan Abode

2009 http://www.panabodeloghomes.com/about.htm, accessed July 3, 2009. 

Quinn, Tom

2002 Public Lands and Private Recreation Enterprise: Policy Issues from a Historical 

Perspective, USDA Forest Service General Technical Report.

Rakestraw, Lawrence

2002 A History of the United States Forest Service in Alaska, USDA Forest Service, Alaska 

Region.

Randl, Chad

2004 A-Frame. New York: Princeton Architectural Press.
70

Tallerico, Jim

 ca.1980 Chugach National Forest Cabin Plan. Unpublished USDA Forest Service: 

Anchorage.

Tremblay, Bill

2009 Personal communication with the author.

Throop, Elizabeth Gail

1979 Utterly Visionary and Chimerical: A Federal Response to the Depression. 

An Examination of Civilian Conservation Corps Construction on National 

Forest System Lands in the Pacific Northwest. Master’s Thesis. Portland State 

University: Portland

Tweed, W.C.

1978 A History of Outdoor Recreation Development in National Forests, 1891-1942. USDA 

Forest Service.

United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service

2001 The Built Environment Image Guide: For the National Forests and Grasslands.

http://www.fs.fed.us/recreation/programs/beig/01_frontmatter.pdf, accessed July 

16, 2009

2002 Revised Land and Resource Management Plan: Chugach National Forest. USDA, 

Forest Service, Regional Office, Juneau.

2003 Tongass Land Management Plan Revision: Final Supplemental Environmental 

Impact Statement: Roadless Area Evaluation for Wilderness Recommendations. 

USDA, Forest Service, Regional Office, Juneau.

2009 Tongass National Forest Recreation Cabins. http://www.fs.fed.us/r10/tongass/

cabins/cabins.shtml, accessed July 19, 2012 

United States Department of the Interior, National Park Service

1991 How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation. National Register 

Bulletin #15, National Park Service.

1998 Guidelines for Evaluating and Nominating Properties that Have Achieved 

Significance Within the Past Fifty Years. National Register Bulletin #22, National 

Park Service.
71

von Rekowski, Hans J.

2010 Email correspondence with author January 5, 2010.

Saroff, Jerome Ronald

1967 Alaska Recreation and Government Policies. Federal Field Committee for 

Development Planning in Alaska: Anchorage.

Wildlife Laws

2009 http://www.bio.txstate.edu/~rsimpson/techniques/law.html, accessed July 19, 

2012. 

Yarborough, Linda

2004 Determination of Eligibility for the McKinley Trail Cabin (COR-462) and related 

Cabin Dump (COR-178), on the Chugach National Forest, Cordova Ranger 

District. United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Regional Office: 

Juneau.
72

Appendix I: Glossary of Architectural Terms

Arris – Sharp edge where two surfaces meet at an angle.

Articulation – Articulation is the manner or method of jointing parts such that each part 

is clear and distinct in relation to the others, even though joined.

Batten – See “Board and Batten.” A small board or strip of wood used for various building purposes, as to cover joints between boards, supports, shingles, or roofing tiles, or 

provide a base for lathing.

Board and Batten – Siding consisting of wide boards or plywood sheets set vertically 

whose joints are covered by narrow strips of wood (battens) over joints or cracks.

Baluster – The post supporting a handrail.

Balustrade – Railing at a stairway, porch or roof.

Bargeboard – Decorative boards located at the end of a gable.

Battered Wall – Wall leaning inward from its base rather than outward.

Cantilever – Projecting overhang.

Casement Window – Window hinged on the side that opens like a door.

Clapboard – Long thin overlapping wooden boards placed horizontally on the outside 

of a building.

Coping – Top course of a wall.

Cornice – A horizontal molded projection at the top of a building or wall.

Dimension Stone – Large blocks of stone used in foundations.

Dormer Window – Window that projects from a sloping roof.

Double-Hung Window – Window with two sashes sliding up and down.

Eave – Lowest projecting part of a sloped roof.

Façade – Exterior side of a building, usually the front.
73

Fascia – Flat vertical board used to hide the ends of roof rafters.

Fenestration – Design and placement of windows.

Gable – Upper triangular portion of a wall between the edges of a roof.

Gable Roof – Shaped in an upside-down “V.”

Gambrel Roof – Double-pitched with end walls pointed at top.

Hipped Roof – Slopes upward from all four sides.

Imbrication – Overlapping of shingles or tiles.

Jamb – Sidepiece on doors and windows.

Jerkinhead – Gable roof with hipped end; also called hipped gable.

Jutty – Upper story projecting beyond the one below; also called jetty.

Lintel – Horizontal structural member that spans an opening.

Lites – Individual panes of glass.

Lug Sill – One that extends beyond the bottom of a window.

Mullion – Vertical member separating two or more windows.

Muntin – Vertical or horizontal divisions between lites in a window or door.

Mutule – Block under the soffit of a cornice.

Rubble – Undressed broken stone used in construction.

Rusticated – Stonework with beveled or angled edges.

Sash – Frame in which the glass panes or a window are set.

Sill – Bottom member of a window or door.

Soffit – Underside of an eave, lintel or other horizontal element.
74

Spindle – Turned vertical wooden element used in stair railings and porch trim.

Stoop – Small porch leading to entrance of a house.

Transom – Small window above a door.

Uncoursed Masonry – Not set in layers; no continuous horizontal joints
75

Appendix II: A Brief History of Plywood and Plexiglas

Because the cabins in Alaska could not have been constructed so quickly and inexpensively without the advent of plywood and Plexiglas, a brief discussion of these modern 

materials deserves attention.

Plywood

In 1905 Gustav Carlson had the idea to laminate wood panels from a variety of Pacific 

Northwest softwoods. Glue was spread with paint brushes and house jacks were used 

as presses. Using this process several panels were made and resulted in a product called 

“3-ply veneer work.” The small wooden box factory, Portland Manufacturing Company, 

was ready to present this product at the World’s Fair. This early form of plywood was 

well-received by the public. By 1907, Portland Manufacturing was able to produce 420 

panels a day due to a mechanized glue spreader and a sectional hand press. The new 

product was limited to indoor uses due to the fact that the adhesive used was not waterproof. In 1934, a chemist at Harbor Plywood Corporation, Dr. James Nevin, developed a 

fully waterproof adhesive that opened a new market of outdoor uses for plywood. 

Prior to WWII, the growing industrial market for plywood had been on the rise. During the War plywood was used to construct PT boats, assault ships, airplanes, barracks, 

military buildings, shipping crates, footlockers and countless other military applications 

(http://www.apawood.org/level_b.cfm?content=srv_med_new_bkgd_plycen).

Plexiglas

The acrylic resins that are used in Plexiglas had their beginning in 1931. Transparent 

sheets of acrylic were used during WWII as bullet resistant windshields in warplanes. 

The manipulative nature of the material coupled with its strength and minimal weight 

has made it a successful and desired product in construction industry. Plexiglas is a 

trademark name for a product that is now the standard for use as windows, skylights, 

safety glazing, electrical and chemical applications 

(http://www.rplastics.com/plexhistory.html).
76 76 

Appendix III: Recreation Cabin Survey Form

Recreation Cabin Survey Form

Cabin Name Year 

Constructed

Surveyors 

Name(s) Date Design No.

Location: Is the cabin in its original location (salt water, mountain lake)?

Comments:

Design: Is the original design still easily seen and is not subordinate to added building 

elements (expanded decks/porches)?

Comments:

Setting: Has the setting (physical environment) changed (logging, roads, etc.)?

Comments:

Materials: Are most of the original materials still present (Plexiglas, Dutch doors, 

siding)?

Comments:

Feeling: Does cabin evoke sense of historical time period in which it was constructed 

(1960 – 1971)? 

Comments:

Yes No

 

Yes No

 

Yes No

 

Yes No

 

Yes No

 

Appendix III: Recreation Cabin Survey Form
77

Association: Is the cabin associated with a historic event or person at the local or State 

level?

Yes No Comments:

 
78

78 

Physical Description

Features Material Dimensions Condition Changes In Kind

Yes No

Roof

Walls

Windows

Door

Chimney & 

Heating

Porch

Foundation

Interior 

Layout

Additions

Other
79

Appendix IV: Maps and Tables of Cabins by Date and Type
80
81

CNF: Cordova Ranger District (CRD) - All cabins as of 2011Cabin Name Date Type RemarksMcKinley Trail 1916 Log Major rehabilitation completed in 2010.Hook Point 1969 A-frame New door.Beach River 1969 HunterDouble Bay 1969 Pan Abode Cabin was previously located at Anderson Bay, moved to Double Bay in 1969, moved again 250 feet in 2001.Log Jam Bay 1970 Pan Abode Major maintenance done in 1984.Tiedeman Slough 1970 Pan Abode May have been built in 1967. New roof.Nellie Martin River 1979 Pan Abode May have been built in the mid-1960s. New roof and deck.McKinley Lake 1984 Hunter May have been built in 1966, but major changes in 1970, 1983, and 1988. Vertical board exterior. Very poor condition.Jack Bay 1985 Pan Abode Old Sawmill Bay Cabin, moved in 1985. Interior refurbished in 2008. New roof and deck. May have been built in the mid-1960s. Port Chalmers 1986 Pan Abode Cabin moved in 1988 from Eyak River. New enlarged windows. May have been built in 1964.Softuk Bar 1988 Pan Abode Cabin moved in 1988 from Canoe Pass. New roof and deck. May have been built in the mid-1960s. Shelter Bay 1990 Pan AbodePower Creek 1991 Pan AbodeGreen Island 1995 Pan Abode Replaced original cabin built in 1966, but 1,000 feet from old location, also built with accessible design.San Juan Bay 2004 Pan Abode Replaced original cabin built in 1971 that burned in 1988.Martin Lake 2010 Pan Abode 1963 Pan Abode burned and a new cabin was built in 2010.
82
83

CNF: Glacier Ranger District (GRD) - All cabins as of 2011Cabin Name Date Type RemarksPigot Bay 1967 A-frame Reconstructed with different design and materials in 2008. Not known if original cabin was removed and replaced or reconstructed.Shrode Lake 1967 A-frame Reconstructed with different design and materials in 2008. Not known if original cabin was removed and replaced or reconstructed.Coghill Lake 1979 A-frame Built with 29L 1963 A-frame plan.Paulson Bay 1982 LogSouth Culross 1982 Log Removed.Harrison Lagoon 1991 Pan AbodeGoose Bay 2009 Log New cabin built to replace the South Culross Cabin.Crow Peak 2011 A-frame New A-frame replaced the Crow Pass Cabin built in 1969. Used the same design as the Pigot Bay and Shrode Lake Cabins.
84
85

CNF: Seward Ranger District (SRD) - All cabins as of 2011Cabin Name Date Type InformationUpper Russian Lake 1951 Log Cabin rehabilitated with in-kind materials in 2007.Crescent Lake 1963 Pan Abode New deck and door.Upper Paradise Lake 1964 Pan Abode New windows, arctic entrance added in 1994.East Creek 1965 Pan Abode New deck and door.Swan Lake 1966 Pan Abode New door, roof, and window trim.Caribou Creek 1970 Pan Abode New deck, door, roof, windows and trim in 2009.Aspen Flats 1977 Pan Abode New door, roof, and window trim.West Swan Lake 1977 Pan Abode New door, windows and trim. May have been built in 1966.Lower Paradise Lake 1978 Pan Abode New door, roof, and window trim.Resurrection River 1985 Pan AbodeBarber 1986 LogCrescent Saddle 1990 Pan AbodeDale Clemens 1991 Wood Frame Recently renovated.Juneau Lake 1998 Pan Abode Original cabin burned to the ground in 1997. Replaced with a Pan Abode in 1998.Devil’s Pass 2006 Pan Abode Original A-frame cabin built in 1966 replaced with a Pan Abode in 2006.Romig 2006 Pan Abode 1976 Pan Abode replaced with new Pan Abode in 2006.Fox Creek 2009 Pan Abode 1985 Pan Abode replaced with new Pan Abode in 2009.Trout Lake 2011 Log 1966 A-frame replaced with 2-story log cabin in 2011.
86
87

TNF: Yakutat Ranger District (YRD) - All cabins as of 2011Cabin Name Date Type InformationHarlequin Lake (North) 1962 A-frame North and South cabins are one building with a shared wall, no windows.Harlequin Lake (South) 1962 A-frame North and South cabins are one building with a shared wall, no windows.Tanis Mesa (North) 1962 A-frame North and South cabins are one building with a shared wall, no windows.Tanis Mesa (South) 1962 A-frame North and South cabins are one building with a shared wall, no windows.Alsek River 1963 HunterLower Dangerous River 1966 Hunter Reconstructed in 1983.Italio River 1973 A-frame Built with 29L 1963 A-frame design.Middle Dangerous River 1974 Pan AbodeSquare Lake 1974 Pan AbodeSituk Lake 1977 Pan AbodeEagle 1993 Pan AbodeRaven 1993 Pan Abode
88
89

TNF: Juneau Ranger District (JRD) - All cabins as of 2011Cabin Name Date Type InformationWest Turner Lake 1941 LogEast Turner Lake 1972 Pan AbodeLaughton Glacier 1972 Pan AbodeKatzehin River 1981 Unknown Not on cabin reservation system, used for emergencies only. Haines and Skagway residents tend to use and maintain the cabin. John Muir 1981 LogPeterson Lake 1985 Pan AbodeEagle Glacier 1991 Log Cabin kit was manufactured by Lodge Logs of Boise, Idaho.WP&YR Denver Caboose 1993 CabooseBerner's Bay 1994 Pan AbodeTaku Glacier 1996 Pan Abode Fully accessible cabin.Windfall Lake 1998 Pan Abode Manufacturer: Lindal Cedar Homes, FS Design.Dan Moller 2010 Log Original vertical log cabin built in 1936 was replaced with 2-story log cabin in 2010.

Notice the Juneau Ranger District did not construct any cabins during the 1960s. This is possibly because all recreation funding went to the construction of the Mendenhall Glacier Visitor Center at that time. Early plans for the visitor center reveal a large complex with a hotel and golf course. This idea never came to be.
90
91

TNF: Admiralty National Monument (ANM) - All cabins as of 2011Cabin Name Date Type InformationDistin Lake 1933 Shake Enclosed CCC trail shelter. Listed on the National Register of Historic Places on 11/2/1995.Big Shaheen 1935 Log Built by CCC. Listed on the National Register of Historic Places on 11/2/1995.Hasselborg Creek 1937 CCC Enclosed CCC trail shelter. Listed on the National Register of Historic Places on 11/2/1995.Church Bight 1960 A-frameLake Alexander 1960 Pan AbodeLake Kathleen 1960 A-frame May be the only A-frame remaining with original 1963 design.Little Shaheen 1960 Pan AbodePybus Bay 1960 A-frameJim’s Lake 1962 Pan Abode Deck and foundation replaced in 2003.East Florence Lake 1964 A-frameNorth Young Lake 1977 Pan AbodeSouth Young Lake 1981 Pan AbodeAdmiralty Cove 1983 Pan AbodeSportsman Lake 2003 Hunter This cabin replaced an A-frame built in 1962.
92
93

TNF: Sitka Ranger District (SRD) - All cabins as of 2011Cabin Name Date Style InformationGoulding Lake 1964 A-frame New door and roof.White Sulphur Springs 1966 Pan AbodeKook Lake 1966 A-frame There was a Dingle Johnson cabin on this lake. New deck, door, and roof.Plotnikof Lake 1966 Pan Abode New roof.Sitkoh Lake West 1967 Pan Abode Deck and roof replaced in 2009.Avoss Lake 1974 A-frame Built using 29L 1963 A-frame design. New deck, door, and roof.Baranof Lake 1974 Pan Abode New deck and roof.Davidof Lake 1974 A-frame Built using 29L 1963 A-frame design.Redoubt Lake 1974 A-frame Built using 29L 1963 A-frame design. Shake porch roof added.Sitkoh Lake East 1974 Pan Abode New deck and roof.Lake Eva 1978 Pan AbodeSuloia Lake 1984 Pan Abode Unique craftsmanship shown in deck railing.Brent’s Beach 1985 Pan Abode This cabin was originally an A-frame. It was replaced in 1985 with a Pan Abode.Allan Point 1990 Pan Abode 2-story Pan Abode built by local residents.Moser Island 1991 Pan Abode Built by volunteers.Samsing Cove 1991 Log The existing cabin was built and donated to USFS by Roger and Judy Sudnikovich in 1991.Sevenfathom Bay 1991 A-frame Built by volunteers.Shelikof 1991 A-frame (modified) Large side addition.Appleton Cove 1992 Pan AbodeNorth Beach 1993 A-frame Built by Coast Guard employees and volunteers led by Kermit Whittemore.Piper Island 1994 A-frame (modified) Built by Coast Guard volunteers and Sitka residents. Large side addition.Kanga Bay 1998 Pan AbodeSalmon Lake 1999 Pan AbodeFred's Creek 2003 Pan Abode Original A-frame built in 1974 was removed in 2003. A 2-story Pan Abode.Starrigavan Creek 2007 Log This cabin replaces existing campsite 6 in the campground. Barrier free.Greentop (Hoonah RD) 1945 Log A 2-story log cabin built by a private individual. 
94
95

TNF: Petersburg Ranger District (PRD) All cabins as of 2011Cabin Date Style InformationDeBoer Lake 1962 A-frame Unique design. No longer on the reservation system. Scheduled for removal in 2012.Salt Chuck East 1963 A-frame (modified) Moved to current site in 1972 and modified with side addition, front elevation has 1985 design, rear elevation has 1963 design.Breiland Slough 1964 A-frameHarvey Lake 1964 A-frameBig John Bay 1965 Hunter 1965 is approximate date. The site of this cabin originally housed a duck hunting cabin belonging to a local Petersburg family, the Goldsteins.Kah Sheets Bay 1965 Hunter In 1940s CCC built a shelter in the area. In 1965 the shelter was removed and this cabin was built.Spurt Cove 1965 Hunter Was moved from Spurt Lake in 1982, refurbished in 2001. New board and batten siding and covered porch in 2011-2012. Estimated construction date.Beecher Pass 1966 Hunter Moved from Fair Island in 1979, due to selection of Fair Island by the State; added 2 skylights in 2006 and covered and extended porch in 2008. Castle Flats 1966 Hunter Was originally built by a group of sportsmen in the 1940s. In 1966 the original structure was replaced with a single level, hunter style cabin. Devil's Elbow 1967 A-framePortage Bay 1967 Hunter

Was originally a Forest Service administrative cabin used for timber sales in North Kupreonof Island. It was converted to recreation cabin in 1985. New board and batten siding in 2012.

Towers Arm 1967 HunterCastle River 1968 A-frame (modified) Cabin moved from Petersburg Creek in 1982; reconstructed and enlarged with side addition, main entry moved to side, front elevation totally changed.Kah Sheets Lake 1969 A-frame (modified) Partially reconstructed 1989, large side addition and covered side deck added.Cascade Creek 1978 Hunter Covered porch and added 2 skylights in 2007.Ravens Roost 1979 Custom Cabin was designed to allow access through a door in the loft during periods of deep winter snow.Kadake Bay 1983 Hunter

The original cabin at this site was built ca. 1954 by local Petersburg fishermen who later donated it to the Forest Service. Cabin is planned for removal and replacement with a Pan Abode in 2012.

West Point 1994 A-frame Barrier free.Petersburg Lake 2003 Pan Abode Moved to current site in 1972. Cabin originally built in 1962, replaced with a new cabin in 2003.Swan Lake 2005 A-frame This cabin constructed July 2005, replacing an A-frame constructed in 1967.
96
97

TNF: Wrangell Ranger District (WRD) - All cabins as of 2010Cabin Name Date Style InformationSergief Island 1962 Pan AbodeShakes Slough #1 1962 Pan AbodeKoknuk 1963 Pan AbodeMount Flemer 1963 A-frameMount Rynda 1963 A-frameShakes Slough #2 1963 A-frameTwin Lakes 1963 A-frame Cabin was cut in half and moved from Twin Lakes in 1985, and was moved again in 2006 due to river erosion.Garnet Ledge 1964 A-frameAnan Bay 1965 A-frameAnan Lake 1965 Hunter Shutters added to cover windows due to bear damage. Work done in 2004.Berg Bay 1965 A-frameMarten Lake 1965 Pan AbodeVirginia Lake 1965 Pan Abode Cabin and site was reconstructed in 1996 to upgrade it to fully accessible, with large side addition.Gut Island #2 1967 HunterEagle Lake 1968 HunterMallard Slough 1968 A-frame (modified) Large side addition constructed in 1983; entry still on gable end.Harding River 1978 HunterBinkley Slough 1979 HunterLittle Dry Island 1980 A-frame (modified) Large side addition with side entry.Gut Island #1 1982 HunterFrosty Bay 1992 HunterSteamer Bay 1993 A-frame (modified) Large side addition with side entry. Barrier free.Middle Ridge 2009 Log Barrier free.
98
99

TNF: Ketchikan Ranger District (KRD) - All cabins as of 2011Cabin Name Date Type InformationJordan Lake 1963 Pan Abode Large covered deck added.Plenty Cutthroat 1964 Pan Abode Extended deck.Heckman Lake 1967 Pan Abode Extended deck.Blind Pass 1975 Pan AbodePatching Lake 1975 Pan AbodeFish Creek 1978 Pan AbodePhocena Bay 1985 Pan Abode Cabin originally built as Naha Cabin in 1973. Moved to current location at Phocena Bay in 1985. Southeast Heckman 1997 Pan Abode Barrier free.Deer Mountain 2008 A-frame Not on NRRS system (not on map). Replaced A-frame built 1962.
100
101

TNF: Misty Fiords National Monument (MFNM) - All cabins as of 2011Cabin name Date Type InformationRed Alders 1962 Pan Abode This was the site of a Dingle Johnson cabin built in the 1950s.Big Goat 1964 Pan Abode Not on NRRS system.Wilson Narrows 1964 Pan Abode Large deck added.Checats Lake 1964 Pan AbodeBeaver Camp 1965 Pan Abode Reconstructed in 2001.Ella Narrows 1965 Pan Abode Door replaced.Hugh Smith 1965 Pan AbodeMcDonald Lake 1967 Pan Abode Large covered deck added. New door.Reflection Lake 1967 Pan AbodeWinstanley Lake 1967 Pan AbodeRainbow Lake 1968 Pan Abode Not on NRRS system.Winstanley Island 1972 HunterAlava Bay 1974 Pan Abode Reconstructed in 2002 by district employees. New foundation, roof, skylights, interior furnishing, exterior stain and access trail to outhouse. Bakewell 1974 Pan AbodeAnchor Pass 1975 Pan AbodeWilson View 1977 Pan AbodeHelm Bay 1978 Pan Abode Three room cabin. Cabin reconstructed in 2002 by contract with Oregon Woods.Humpback Lake 1979 Pan AbodeManzanita Lake 1979 Pan AbodeHelm Creek 1985 Pan Abode
102
103

TNF: Craig (CRD) and Thorne Bay Ranger District (TBRD) - All cabins as of 2011Cabin Name Date Type RemarksSalmon Lake 1940 Shake CCC cabin with structural issues. Post and beam structure with shake siding. Rehabilitated in 1995.Control Lake 1960 Pan Abode

Outside of cabin painted by YCC crew in 2006. New roof, interior flooring, ext. doors, propane heater, fire ring and windows installed in 2008. Former Ranger District office.

Black Bear Lake 1963 Pan Abode Cabin was relocated in 1979. Side entry design with large open deck added 1999. New roof and skylight.Barnes Lake 1963 Pan Abode Large covered deck added. New roof and skylights 1995.McGilvery Creek 1964 Pan Abode Poor cabin structural integrity. Not on NRRS (not on map). Josephine Lake 1964 Pan Abode Replaced roof skylights 2000; replaced deck 2003.Staney Creek 1964 Pan Abode Foundation/porch replaced 2002. Side entry. Large covered deck added 2008. Roof has 1 skylight.Sarkar Lake 1965 Pan Abode Cabin moved > 1 mile 1990. New large covered deck 2001.Honker Lake 1965 Pan Abode Large covered deck added and large skylights.Sweetwater Lake 1965 Pan Abode Large covered deck added. New roof 1997. 1 large skylight. Moved back 15 feet.Karta Lake 1966 Pan Abode Wilderness cabin, very popular for fishing. Large skylights.Kegan Creek 1967 Pan Abode Foundation and deck replaced 2001. Located next to Kegan Cove Cabin. Large covered deck added. Large skylights.Shipley Bay 1967 Pan Abode Large covered deck added. 1992. Roof replaced 2004.Salmon Bay Lake 1969 Pan Abode New deck, roof with skylights 2004. Setting altered by nearby logging.Troller's Cove 1986 Pan Abode New wood stove 2007.Karta River 1990 Pan Abode This cabin was originally constructed in 1968 and replaced in 1990.Red Bay Lake 1998 Pan Abode This cabin was originally constructed in 1953. It was relocated and replaced in 1998. It is a 2-story loft style cabin.Twelvemile 2007 Pan Abode Mitigation for Recreation Opportunities lost due to Black Bear Hydroelectric. $200,000.00 provided by AP&T.Point Amargura 2008 Pan Abode Constructed in 2008. 2-story. Replaced unique A-frame cabin originally built in 1963.Kegan Cove 2010 Pan Abode Replaced Pan Abode built in 1979.

USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.

Forest Service Alaska Region

Recreation, Lands & Minerals

709 W. Ninth Street

Juneau, Alaska 99801

(907) 586-8806 or TTY 711+(907) 586-8806

http://www.fs.usda.gov/r10/recreation