Backcountry Building Development
IntroductionOlympic National Park includes more than 875,000 acres of designated wilderness. A network of trails penetrates the backcountry, providing access for both hikers and park personnel. This area also contains scattered buildings and structures that represent more than a century of Euroamerican use of this rugged area. The trails and buildings illustrate federal management of the park lands, both by the U.S. Forest Service and the National Park Service. A smaller number of buildings depict private development for either recreation or farming/subsistence.
Olympic Forest Reserve/Olympic National Forest
Federal management of lands on the Olympic Peninsula began in February 1897 when President Grover Cleveland set aside 21 million acres of forest lands just before leaving office. These "midnight reserves" included more than 2 million acres that became the Olympic Forest Reserve, formally established on March 1, 1898. After considerable opposition, both locally and within Congress, President William McKinley reduced the reserve twice. It contained just over 1 million acres by July 1901. Forest reserves were managed initially by the General Land Office, under the Department of the Interior. Administration moved to the Bureau of Forestry within the Department of Agriculture in 1905. Within a few months, the Bureau was renamed the U.S. Forest Service, and two years later the forest reserves were labeled national forests. 1
Even just a million acres of forest presented early managers with a daunting task of protecting and administering a virtual wilderness. Foresters tackled similar situations nationwide by building trails, and such work was one of the regular duties of the rangers. During the 1900 fiscal year, rangers in the nation's forest reserves cleared 2,250 miles of old trails and 1,095 miles of new ones, and blazed another 1,396 miles of new routes. "The opening of trails is considered one of the most important features of patrol work, as it makes possible the reaching of forest fires in the shortest possible time," noted the official report for that year. Another $300,000 had been appropriated for trail building nationwide during the 1901 fiscal year. 2
It took several years for the Olympic Forest Reserve to hit its stride with trail building. Much of the problem stemmed from incompetent and occasionally dishonest supervisors, as well as a ranger staff that was totally inadequate for the large land area. As one later supervisor wrote, the most notable features of some of his predecessors were "the degree they were disliked by the natives and their short tenure." 3 In addition to staffing problems, an inspector with the General Land Office in 1903 noted that the rugged and remote topography "makes proper patrol absolutely impossible at present." 4 The primary problem was a near total lack of trails, with access restricted to the outer edge of the reserve. The positive side of this limited access, the inspector suggested, was that both timber trespass and human-caused fires were confined to this small accessible area. The Olympic Forest Reserve needed more trails, he concluded, but it would need more funding to reach this goal. 5
With meager funding and mostly seasonal staff, trail building on the Olympic Forest Reserve was initially slow. Work began in 1904 on a general system of trails, but part of each season was spent reopening old trails that were blocked with downed timber. There was no overall plan at first and most trails were built for specific needs, such as the 1905 trail to Sol Duc Hot Springs to accommodate the resort and its patrons. Outside groups, like the Seattle Mountaineers, helped with particular routes that they wanted to use. For example, this well-known recreational group helped open the Elwha River trail in 1907, the year they took sixty-five men and women into the Olympics for a month-long outing. By the end of 1908, ranger Chris Morgenroth reported that the Forest Service had both cleared and built "a good many miles of good horse trails and roads." 6 The first systematic plan for trails in the forest was promoted by Forest Supervisor Raymond E. Benedict in 1909. His idea was to develop a system of trails to encircle the forest, mostly on boundary lines, but rugged topography and poor design doomed this plan from the start. 7
Impact of the 1910 Fires
During the summer of 1910, when the Forest Service was still a relatively new agency, devastating fires burned more than 2.5 million acres of forest in the northern Rockies, mostly in Idaho and Montana. Seventy-eight government firefighters died, along with a much smaller number of civilians. These fires so traumatized both the agency and its personnel that fire fighting became the Forest Service's number one priority for more than half a century. Some Forest Service personnel recognized as early as 1934 that this emphasis on stopping all fires was not effective. Despite this, agency officials redoubled their efforts that year with what became known as the 10 a.m. policy that pushed crews to extinguish all reported fires by 10 a.m. the next day. Memories of the 1910 fires shaped management practices as long as veterans from that fire season remained in the Forest Service. 8
One of these 1910 veterans, Parish S. Lovejoy, came to the Olympic National Forest in 1911 when he replaced Benedict as supervisor. Although his tenure was brief, he had clear ideas about both fire and trails that he passed on to his successor in 1912. Lovejoy disagreed with the prevailing opinion that the forests of the Olympic Peninsula were not at great risk for fire. "The moss in the tops makes each tree a Roman candle," Lovejoy wrote. "I have been told that I am a fire crank. I was in Montana in 1910." 9
Lovejoy believed that the prevailing dismissive attitude toward fire had led to a lack of planning for this possibility on the Olympic National Forest. His ideas to expand the trail and telephone systems and supplement them with tool caches mirrored those of the post-1910 Forest Service. "My general plan is about so," he wrote in 1912.
Trails and trails and trails all looping into one another and into roads so as to allow cross cuts.
All main trails and roads, and bye and bye all trails and roads paralleled with phone lines. Patrol boxes not farther than 5
miles apart on the phone lines. Boxes and lots of tools at or near the patrol tel stations. Houses and sheds and shelters along
the trails where they will serve to shelter crews and patrolmen and all traveling officers and where the tools in the boxes
can be concentrated winters and protected. Think this very important. We have made a fair start to the shelters this season
and the boys have the idea and will develop it if encouraged. Then lots of guards and as nearly as possible regular beats
and times, morning tests of the phone lines, specific arrangements for repair in case of trouble. Then lookouts. 10
In general, subsequent supervisors of the Olympic National Forest followed much of Lovejoy's general plan over the next three decades. As funding permitted, they expanded the trail and telephone system to provide better protection for all parts of the forest. These were supplemented with lookouts and fire patrols to provide an early detection system. Despite the "fair start" to shelter construction in 1912, such structures were probably few and far between until a massive influx of funding in the 1930s.
Recreation in the National Forests
The 1910 fires made forest protection a priority for the Forest Service, and plans such a those proposed by Lovejoy were intended to further this mission. During this time, however, another forest use was quietly increasing. Recreation had been considered an unofficial "use" of national forest lands from the beginning since nearby residents fished, hiked, and camped in the local woods. Legislation in 1899 expanded potential use by allowing construction of public resorts at mineral springs, such as Olympic and Soleduck hot springs. Over the next several years, federal regulations expanded to include other forms of recreation such as camping or trips for pleasure. The Forest Service began issuing permits for hotels, sanitariums, and summer cabins in 1905, harbingers of the agency's increasing interest in recreation during the early twentieth century. 11
There were other factors besides changing federal regulations that stimulated the growth of recreation on national forest lands. The back-to-nature movement of the late 1800s and early 1900s introduced Americans to the benefits of the natural world, which was seen as an antidote to everything negative about city life, from its perceived artificiality to the poverty of slums. Intellectuals saw wilderness as a potential substitute for the lost American frontier, a place where wrestling with primitive conditions could develop individualism and independence. Early twentieth century Progressives believed that fresh air encouraged healthful physical activity that led to sharp minds and high morals. These prevailing philosophies fostered the growth of urban parks and a variety of outdoor activities, such as bird watching, in cities. Parents enrolled their children in Boy Scouts and Campfire Girls, and many contributed to Fresh Air funds to send underprivileged children to summer camps. Many families escaped the cities altogether and went camping, believing in the healthful benefits of fresh air as well as the associated exercise. This sport was popular throughout the United States in the early 1900s. 12
Two other factors combined in the early twentieth century to increase summer tourism and place greater recreation demands on the national forests. First, the amount of vacation time gradually increased for American workers. Between 1900 and 1920, the average work week dropped from 60.1 hours to 49.4 hours, but it did not reach a standard 40 hours until mandated by the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938. Second, automobile ownership increased rapidly, from one car for every 9,499 people in 1900 to one for every 13 people in 1920. By then, cars were no longer seen as a luxury but rather as a necessity. Americans expanded their automobile travel as roads increased and improved. When the onset of World War I curtailed European travel, auto tourism blossomed in the United States, boosted by the See America First campaign. 13
As Americans took to both the outdoors and the open road, they increased their use of public lands. This was expected in the case of national parks, which were established in part to encourage outdoor recreation. But it was new for the Forest Service and the agency was slow to respond. Early visitors did not seem to expect any amenities in the national forests, only the opportunity to enjoy the outdoors. An article in Collier's Magazine in 1910 bragged that just a short drive from Seattle "will take you right into the heart of the most primitive forests and wild mountains in the United States - Mount Rainier, the Olympics, the Snoqualmie Forests . . . where you may climb or fish or scrabble over the eternal snows, with the delicious consciousness that most of the forest has never heard a lumberman's ax." 14 In his 1912 annual report, Chief Forester Henry S. Graves noted increased recreational use of the national forests, with particular demand for permits for hotels, cabins, and summer camps. During fiscal year 1913, 1.5 million "pleasure seekers" visited the forests, with the majority only day visitors. These numbers had doubled by 1917, however, when an estimated 3 million visitors spent an average of two and a half days in the forests. 15
When the National Park Service was established in 1916, its emphasis on recreation added pressure on the Forest Service to expand recreational opportunities on the national forests. Tension between the two agencies stemmed from a long-held antagonism between the Forest Service and those who favored the creation of national parks, due primarily to the loss of thousands of square miles of forests that had been taken for national parks. In northwestern Washington alone, Mount Rainier National Park was carved out of the forest reserve in 1899, and ten years later, Mount Olympus National Monument was established in the heart of the Olympic National Forest. 16
To help balance this competition with the National Park Service, the Forest Service hired Frank A. Waugh in 1917 to assess recreational use of the national forests throughout the country. Waugh, a professor of landscape architecture at Massachusetts Agriculture College in Amherst, spent five months doing field work and visiting all forest districts. He recommended trails and roads built to standard specifications to encourage simple forms of recreation, such as hiking or driving. For tourists wanting to stay longer in one spot, Waugh noted the need for campgrounds with good water, sanitation, wood supply, and fireplaces. He stressed that recreation was a valid use of the national forests. To prove this point, he took the 1917 visitor estimates and placed a value of ten cents per hour on a total of 75 million recreational hours, arriving at a value of $7.5 million, "a pretty penny." He concluded that [emphasis his] "the recreational use of the National Forests has a very substantial commercial value, and that recreation stands clearly as one of the major Forest utilities." 17
Recreation in the Olympic National Forest
Tourists and back-to-nature enthusiasts did not wait for the Forest Service to jump on the recreation band wagon. Instead, thousands of hikers and campers visited forests in the Pacific Northwest in the early 1900s. For instance, on the Olympic National Forest, Ranger Chris Morgenroth reported 5,000 visitors in 1908 and expected this number to rise to 7,000 within a year. One year later, the Forest Service counted 45,000 recreational visitors in the entire North Pacific District. The Regional Forester asked Theodore Rixon to design recreation plans for the increasingly popular Lake Crescent and Lake Quinault areas in 1910. Rixon and his crew laid out public campgrounds and groups of summer home sites to accommodate both horse and boat travel.
After Chief Forester Graves toured parts of the Mount Olympus National Monument in 1914, he recommended returning the south half to the Olympic National Forest and retaining the north half as a potential national park. These boundary changes were confirmed the following year. Although the monument was greatly reduced in size, Graves recognized that it had great recreation potential and urged that it "be protected, fostered, and developed." 19 To meet this goal, he asked Forest Supervisor R. L. Fromme to report on any road and trail projects that would be needed to open and develop the monument "particularly in the interests of recreation and . . . also for increased fire protection and administrative efficiency . . . ." 20
Fromme's work during the 1915 field season showed that the Olympic National Forest had taken only "a small step . . . toward accomplishing any net work [sic] or unified system of trails." At that time, only the Soleduck-Hoh trail was suitable for horse travel and even part of that was dubious, with "one rather makeshift section of three miles possessing 107 switchbacks and excessively steep pitches." Most of the trail construction to that point had been for administrative and protection needs in high liability areas along the periphery. Despite this slow start, Fromme developed an extensive plan to complete the trailsystem. Most of the twenty-six trails he described, both existing and proposed, were for protection purposes, with recreation or scenic qualities as an added benefit. One exception was the seven-mile Glacier Creek trail. Fromme noted that while it offered protection, "its most urgent demand at this time is from mountaineers and sight seers, as it will make easily accessible the grandest scenery in the Forest and Mt. Olympus itself." He urged that this project be given priority to please the public. Graves appreciated the report but noted that the projected high costs would block its implementation. He asked Fromme to restrict improvements to administrative needs; the recreational ideas would remain on paper to counter any push to turn the monument into a national park. 21
Post-World War I Recreation Development in the National Forests
Recreational use of the national forests increased dramatically following World War I as travelers with cars, money, and leisure time set out to explore the country. This led the Forest Service to hire the first "recreational engineers, in 1919." Within two years, the agency ranked outdoor recreation as one of the major uses of the national forests. 22
In response to this increased interest, Congress appropriated the first money for recreational developments in FY1923. Officials justified it under forest protection, specifically sanitation and fire prevention, so the $10,000 appropriation went for construction of toilets, fireplaces, and similar simple structures. Congress raised the Forest Service's recreation appropriation to $37,631 in FY1925 to cover campground development, and this amount topped $52,000 five years later. With 110 forests nationwide to divide this pot of money, each got only a modest amount so development was minimal. Most of what could be classed as recreation development was carried out by the rangers as part of their regular duties and included digging outhouses and garbage pits, developing springs, and building simple rock fireplaces at popular camping spots. 23
The federal government's interest in outdoor recreation was stimulated when President Calvin Coolidge urged the development of a national policy. His call led to the first National Conference on Outdoor Recreation, held in Washington, D.C., in May 1924. One outcome was an inventory of outdoor recreation resources that was used to help guide planning nationwide. The Forest Service took part in a survey of recreational resources on federal lands. This conference met annually through 1929. 24
Recreation Development in the Olympic National Forest, 1920-1930
As outdoor recreation was gaining favor within federal agencies, the ideas of wilderness and wilderness recreation also picked up momentum through the writings of Aldo Leopold, Robert Marshall, and others. These were not just abstract concepts in places like the Pacific Northwest. In that region, the Forest Service had hired Fred W. Cleator in 1919 for its newly created recreation office to serve as a recreation examiner for the North Pacific District. He helped develop plans during the 1920s for a wide variety of projects, including limited recreational development of backcountry areas. Such developments fit with wilderness concepts of minimal visitor facilities in places designated as wilderness. 25
During the early 1920s, Cleator completed recreation plans for both Lake Crescent and Lake Quinault. Assistant Forester L. F. Kneipp sent Cleator's first report to Frank Waugh, who found it "a very good and sensible report." Waugh then went on to muse about the "highly pioneer character" of developments such as this, an early phase of recreation development that would soon be replaced by more intensive development." This whole recreation problem is one on which we are making some very crude beginnings," Waugh wrote. " We ought to recognize the experimental and temporary character of our work and not be too cock-sure that everything we do today will last for a hundred years." Kneipp was unfazed by Waugh's speculations and noted very practically that there was no need to worry about the next stage of recreation until they got through the first one. 26
The recreation plans for these two lakes provided an important start for automobile-based recreation in the Olympic National Forest. The Forest Service expanded opportunities for auto tourism during the 1920s by building roads both to popular tourist destinations like the Elwha River and Sol Duc Hot Springs and around the perimeter of the peninsula; this latter road was finally completed in 1931. While some people wanted even more roads, especially through the rugged interior of the backcountry, such massive projects failed for lack of adequate funding and interest. 27
The backcountry also attracted others who saw its primitive state as a benefit to the local tourist economy. In 1925, a group of businessmen from Hoquiam investigated the idea of building simple chalets in the Olympic Mountains to provide shelter for hikers and horseback riders. They spent five days that summer along the North Fork trail to Low Divide, returning along the Skyline Trail. Their recommendations to the Hoquiam Chamber of Commerce called for improving access with horse trails but not roads which, they maintained, would not be "in harmony with the type of development that such a splendid scenic region should have." To aid the average traveler, they recommended using trained guides with sufficient saddle and pack horses. They also identified the need for simple shelters or chalets at several locations to accommodate travelers. Other individuals and groups, such as the Seattle Mountaineers, met with Forest Service officials about this time to discuss the possibility of setting aside some of the backcountry as a Primitive Area. The formation of the Olympic Development League stemmed from this interest in opening the backcountry up to tourists. 28
As increasing numbers of visitors found enjoyment in the wide variety of recreation opportunities in both the Olympic National Forest and the Mount Olympus National Monument, Fred Cleator started work on an overall management plan for both areas. He spent most of August and early September 1927 in the field, accompanied part of the time by Olympic National Forest Supervisor H. L. Plumb; guide and packer Elvin Olson; and W. C. Mumaw, president of the Olympic Development League. The reconnaissance was interrupted twice by fires, and both times Cleator left the pack trip to join the fire lines, even on August 10 when he noted in his field diary, "Celebrated birthday by going out on fire line." In the first of several separate forays into the interior, Cleator and his companions went up the East Fork Quinault and Graves Creek to Sundown Pass and Sundown Lake before being called out on the first fire. A few days later, the men resumed their travels up the Duckabush and West Creek to Diamond Meadows and Anderson Pass before backtracking to Dosemeadows and over Hayden Pass to the junction of Hayes and Elwha rivers. From there they continued to Low Divide before leaving for the second fire. A follow-up trip into Low Divide included side trips to Martins Park and Queets Basin. Cleator moved then to the northern access and looked over the Lake Mills reservoir, Sol Duc Hot Springs, and Bogachiel Park, followed by a quick survey of the Hoh, Bogachiel, and Soleduck divides. His last journey to Blue Glacier "was a great trip," he noted. 29
This extensive field survey led to the development of the Recreation Atlas and accompanying map for the Olympic National Forest, better known as the Cleator Plan. Even though Cleator spent more than a month doing field work, he was unable to reach all parts of the rugged interior. His plan and map cover the whole area, however, showing that he gathered information and ideas from others, including the Olympic Development League, who knew the backcountry well. Cleator later described the report as "a classification of recreation values and a coordinated plan of management of these recreation assets along with the utility values of the entire Olympic National Forest." He saw it as establishing "a well balanced system for handling the extremely important and sharply defined multiple uses which were crystalizing [sic] in the Peninsula, and becoming a subject of great public interest." 30
Cleator proposed some road construction in his plan. He saw the potential for two routes through the interior, one bisecting the area north-south along the North Fork Quinault and Elwha rivers, and the other dividing it roughly east-west along the East Fork Quinault and Dosewallips rivers. Of the two, Cleator favored the east-west route but he admitted that it would be expensive and "would be inimical to the generally accepted wilderness idea of the high Olympics as a whole . . . ." Cleator believed that it was more important from a forest protection standpoint to build stub roads into every major valley to move tourists rapidly through the commercially valuable timber, thus avoiding fire. 31
There were many trails crisscrossing the interior of the Olympic National Forest by the late 1920s, but Cleator looked at combining both existing and proposed trails into a more coordinated recreational system. Being a practical forester as well as a recreation specialist, he believed that recreational use "should interfere very little, if any, with the accepted road and trail program, since we have here types of use that will fit quite satisfactorily with whatever transportation system is considered administratively desirable." 32
In his plan, Cleator delineated thirteen geographic units with potential recreation use in the Olympic National Forest. Because he had already done a great deal of work on this forest, nearly half of these units had existing recreation plans on file, even though little or no development had started. Cleator divided the vast interior region into two areas, the proposed Mt. Olympus Snow Peaks Recreation Area and the Olympic Primitive Area. This latter area, which was labeled on the map as the Olympic Wilderness Area, lay south and east of the East Fork Quinault River. Cleator plans called for this to be a true wilderness area as defined by the wilderness standards of the period. The Primitive Area would have only minimal administrative improvements including only trails, telephone lines, and lookouts for forest protection. The only buildings would be a few necessary rough shelters. 33
The Mt. Olympus Snow Peaks Recreation Area was designed for more extensive development. Although this was a rugged and dangerous area, given to severe storms, Cleator also saw it as "a most wonderfully attractive scenic playground." To ensure the safety and comfort of those who would use this landscape, Cleator proposed establishing both trail depots and safety stations, whose functions appear to overlap. The former were to be a commercial operation, either at the end of a stub road or at an intermediate location. They would include one or more permanent buildings to provide travelers with prepared meals and comfortable, clean accommodations. Safety stations were to be located in the interior, about one-day's travel apart. They would be run by guides who would provide meals and beds in "a permanent building of a rustic nature . . . ." Cleator expected some of these eventually to develop into more substantial chalet operations. At the time, there was one chalet at Low Divide and another proposed along the East Fork Quinault. 34 Although the network of more elaborate trail depots and safety stations did not develop as envisioned by Cleator, the Forest Service built the first documented simple backcountry trail shelters in 1928. Such construction picked up considerably in the early 1930s, and by 1935 many of Cleator's proposed sites became locations of Forest Service trail shelters. 35
These simple shelters had been built on other national forests since the 1910s. Parish S. Lovejoy wrote that his crews had "made a fair start to the shelters" on the Olympic National Forest in 1912 but he did not specify locations or style. Other forests in both Oregon and Washington were using small, three-sided Adirondack shelters at least by 1916. Initially, such shelters were built for administrative purposes. Trail crews used them while working to maintain both trails and telephone lines, and packers stopped there when hauling supplies to fire lookouts. Shelters were next to trails and usually adjacent to both a meadow and water supply to ensure feed for pack stock. Quite naturally, such shelters also were used by hikers and equestrians, especially on the west side of the Cascades where wet weather was common. When describing the system of trail shelters in the Olympic National Forest, Cleator wrote that they "were frankly intended to be a dual-purpose development," serving both trail crews and fire patrols as well as "the red-blooded fisherman and wilderness seeker." 36
Private Development in the Olympic National Forest
Much of Cleator's plan for recreational development of the designated areas of the Olympic National Forest depended on private investment. This was already evident at the hot springs and around the major lakes where summer cabin sites and resorts had been increasing since 1915. Up to that date, special use permits were granted on a year-to-year basis, and many people were reluctant to invest much money and effort into a potentially temporary arrangement. The Term Permit Act of 1915 allowed for longer leases and thus encouraged greater investment in cabins and resorts. In addition to the lake developments, a few hardy souls built summer cabins along the Elwha River, accessible only by foot along the well-used trail. To guide the development of summer homes in the national forests, in 1918 the Washington Office published Waugh's manual, Landscape Engineering in the National Forest. In it, he recommended large lots, from one-half to one acre each, to avoid crowding which, he claimed, "inevitably tends to shabbier building." 37
Business interests in the Gray's Harbor communities wanted to promote tourist travel into the interior of the Olympics by the mid-1920s. The Hoquiam Chamber of Commerce, among others, looked into a system of chalets to provide accommodations in the backcountry. After a five-day trip in 1925, the Chalet Committee recommended a medium-sized chalet at Low Divide; either a chalet or shelter at the head of the planned trail up the East Fork Quinault; and other shelters at regular intervals for use in case of bad weather. Two private companies organized within a short time to undertake such developments, working with Forest Service officials for proper permits and approval. The Olympic Chalet Company had plans for three chalets and a string of twelve shelter camps, but they built only one of each. Crews finished the rustic log chalet at Low Divide in 1927 and added other cabins and a bathhouse over the next few years. They also constructed a shelter at Nine-Mile Post on the North Fork Quinault trail. The company hit hard times in the Depression and dissolved in 1936, and the chalet and cabins were destroyed by an avalanche in 1944. The other company, the Olympic Recreation Company, had more modest goals and greater success. They completed the Graves Creek Inn in 1930, another rustic log building. They followed it one year later with the larger log building known as the Enchanted Valley Chalet. The company sold the lodge to the National Park Service in 1939, ending large private operations in the Olympic interior. 38
Recreation Development in the Olympic National Forest, 1930-1933
Outdoor recreation continued to grow during the 1920s, a trend with major consequences for the Forest Service. In just over twenty years, recreational use of the national forests skyrocketed from approximately 400,000 in 1910 to just under 32.3 million in 1931. The Forester's Annual Report that year noted, "This heavy and increasing use continually emphasizes the need for better and extensive improvement of the national forest public camp grounds." The onset of the Depression changed the prospects for recreation development, initially for the worse. Despite a 38 percent increase in recreation use in just 1929, funding for recreation on the national forests decreased by 25 percent in FY1932-1933. 39
By the early 1930s, the Olympic National Forest was poised for an expansion in outdoor recreation. It was one of the few forests nationwide that emphasized outdoor recreation, ranking it second among the four traditional forest uses (timber, watershed protection, grazing, and recreation). More than 75,000 visitors came to the Olympic National Forest in 1931, a big increase over earlier numbers but far below both Mount Rainier (176,159 visitors) and Mount Hood (686,352 visitors) national forests. 40
Forest Supervisor H. L. Plumb wrote out a list of the forest's "most urgent recreational needs" in March 1932. Much of his emphasis was on improved sanitation (outhouses and garbage pits) for both automobile camps and for more remote trailside camps. The increasing number of hikers into the backcountry required special consideration. "Due to the frequency of inclement weather, it is rather imperative that some form of shelter be provided," Plumb wrote. "Numerous shelters, built in connection with trail construction and maintenance, are heavily used by the public, but many shelters are needed for purely recreational use where trail maintenance shelters are not needed." He hoped that the Olympic National Forest could start meeting this demand during the fiscal year. Such shelters were not just for the convenience of hikers but also for fire protection. Plumb noted that campers built "bark or bough wickiups along the trail . . . which are in themselves excellent fire traps." 41
Plumb's attached list of specific recreation needs was broken down by district. The larger auto camps called for more improvements while the backcountry ones needed only Wallowa toilets, garbage pits, and sometimes an "ice can stove." Plumb noted that such stoves should be installed both at existing shelters and where new ones were planned. He listed only two specific shelters (Lena Lake in the Hoodsport District and Seven Mile in the Port Angeles District) and he listed five sites that needed shelters (Rainbow Camp and Honeymoon Meadows in the Quilcene District and Winslow Springs, Chicago Camp, and Elwha Basin in the Elwha District). These shelters were projected to cost $75 each. Plumb also noted other places just by name, suggesting that they were popular camping sites where future shelters might be located; all needed some form of sanitation and/or ice can stoves. These included Duckabush, Nine Stream, Brown's Point, and Upper Lena Lake in the Hoodsport District; Ten Mile Camp, Deer Park, Camp Colonel, Diamond Meadows, Doseforks, and Dosemeadows in the Quilcene District; Baltimore, Bankers, Cat Creek, Crackerville, Krause Bottom, and Heather Park in the Elwha District; Hoh Lake, Heart Lake, Mosquito Creek, Blue Glacier, Soleduck Falls, Bogachiel Park, Mink Lake, and Deer Lake in the Port Angeles District; and Wolf Bar, Francis Creek, Sixteen Mile, Graves Creek, O'Neil Creek, and West Fork Humptulips in the Quinault District. 42
It is not clear how much progress the Olympic National Forest made on its recreation plans during FY1933. Regional Forester C. J. Buck notified Plumb in mid-July 1932 that his request for $1,317 had been approved for a total of just $350. Buck endorsed improvements at the high camps that fit the limited allotment. One month later, he was able to increase the funds by $600 from the Emergency Relief fund for recreation improvements. Buck specified that one-third of it was to be spent on trail shelters for the high Olympics. 43
Supervisor Plumb made another list of the forest's most important needs for outdoor recreation in March 1933. Once again, recreational shelters were "urgently needed" in the backcountry which was "used extensively for recreational purposes." Plumb hoped there would be emergency relief funds for four shelters: Cold Springs on the Skyline-Queets Trail; High Divide on the Soleduck; and at both Elkhorn and Elwha Basin on the Elwha District. Each of these shelters would cost $100 since they needed to be substantial enough to withstand heavy snows. He mentioned two existing shelters not listed one year earlier, one at Elk Lake Camp on Jefferson Creek and another at Soleduck Falls. Plumb also recommended construction of more Wallowa toilets at various camping sites including Blackwood Lake, Deer Lake, Elk Lake, Olympus, and Hoh Lake on the Port Angeles District; Boulder Lake on the Elwha District; Deer Park, Cedar Springs, and Three Forks on the Quilcene District; and Moonshine Flats, Tschletshy Creek, Campbell's Bottom, O'Neil Creek, Enchanted Valley, Bob Creek, Graves Creek Basin, Promise Creek, and Low Divide Camp on the Quilcene District. 44
Recreation Development in the Olympic National Forest, 1933-1938
The election of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt in November 1932 marked the start of a decade of major recreation development on public lands. The country was in dire economic straits when Roosevelt took the oath of office on March 4, 1933. There were 13 million Americans out of work then, with unemployment especially high among young people: 25 percent of those between the ages of fifteen and twenty-four were unemployed in 1932 and another 29 percent had only part-time work. These young Americans stood little chance of finding work since they had neither experience nor skills. An avid conservationist, President Roosevelt also was concerned with the degraded condition of the nation's forests and rangelands. Just over a month after taking office, Roosevelt signed an executive order to create one of the most popular of the New Deal programs, the Civilian Conservation Corps. As one historian wrote, with the CCC, the president "brought together two wasted resources, the young men and the land, in an attempt to save both." 45
The CCC operated under the jurisdiction of four cooperating departments. The Department of Labor selected applicants; the War Department operated the camps; and the Departments of Agriculture and the Interior directed the work projects. Those eligible for enrollment included unmarried men between the ages of eighteen and twenty-five. The initial authorization for 250,000 men was supplemented by another 25,000 Local Experienced Men (LEMs); by the time the program ended, 2.5 million men had joined. Enrollee pay came to $30 per month, although each man was required to send $25 home to his dependent family members. Close to 300,000 families benefited from these CCC checks from 1933-1935, with an additional ripple effect spreading to nearly 3 million families. 46
During Roosevelt's presidency, the Forest Service greatly increased the number of recreational facilities and expanded their scope. This work was made possible by the availability of CCC labor and the increase in public works funding, leading to what one historian described as a decade of "frenzied activity " in recreation development. Much of the initial work dealt with the extensive backlog of projects from years of low budgets. The agency supported the importance of outdoor recreation with the establishment of a new Division of Recreation and Lands in the Washington Office in 1935. Less than two years later, the new office was providing local forests with standardized plans for both recreational developments and forest buildings. Recreational facilities expanded from simple campgrounds to more elaborate complexes containing a variety of buildings from bathhouses to playgrounds to amphitheaters to serve the "sharply mounting tide of recreationists." 47
CCC camps in western Washington fell under the jurisdiction of Fort Lewis in Tacoma. The first enrollees arrived there on May 2, 1933, and soon were dispatched to camps. Four of the first ten camps were on the Olympic Peninsula at Humptulips, Lake Cushman, Quilcene, and Elwha; within a few weeks, three more were added at Snider, Slab Camp, and the Bogachiel-Hoh. Much of the CCC work nationwide focused on both forest health and fire prevention. Crews of young men pulled ribes plants as part of a mostly futile effort to eradicate blister rust in white pine forests. Other CCC enrollees built trails, roads, telephone lines, and lookouts to facilitate the Forest Service's increased emphasis on fighting fires after the disastrous 1934 fire season. In the Pacific Northwest, the Forest Service's primary needs were in transportation and communication. The agency set CCC crews to work on trails, roads, and telephone lines throughout the region. After taking a year and a half to bring the backlog under control, they were ready to start what Cleator termed a "scientific recreation development program." CCC crews installed sanitary toilets, water systems, camp tables and stoves, rustic bath houses, and community kitchens in auto camps and picnic areas. More remote areas benefited from improved trails, trail signs, garbage pits, and "strong, rustic mountain shelters." A December 1934 report on Camp Elwha, F-17, listed recreation projects as the primary focus. Progress had been slow, however, because "everyone was in the dark about the methods at first." Nonetheless, the men had been building recreation trails, clearing camp sites, and constructing combination fireplace/stoves for these camps. The following year this camp did extensive improvements at both Elwha and Altair campgrounds nearby.
By the end of 1936, the results of CCC work on the Olympic National Forest were impressive. Prior to 1933, the forest had spent a total of $11,566.87 on recreation improvements. In just four years, from 1933 to 1936, such spending soared to $109,360.22. People looking for recreation on the forest had 390 miles of roads and 925 miles of trails for access. They could stay in one of the twenty-six auto camps, with accommodations for approximately 2,000 at any one time, or in one of fifty trail camps, with accommodations for 1,000. Visitor counts, evidently done in 1936, showed concentrations at resorts, campgrounds, and shelters. The statistics showed heavier use along the Hood Canal, leading one forest official to conclude that visitors preferred areas that had been logged to areas of virgin timber like that found on the west side of the peninsula. In fact, he suggested, "the thick virgin timber . . . soon becomes monotonous because of the 'shut in' and depressed feeling it produces." 49
The Forest Service promoted its recreational improvement in a 1936 brochure on the Hood Canal Recreation Area in the southeastern part of the Olympic National Forest. It not only described trails but also places to camp. Some of these had shelters which, the brochure noted, were "especially convenient during inclement weather." These buildings were "open-front log structures constructed along forest trails in the back country. They were built primarily for the use of forest workers, but when not occupied, their use by forest visitors is permitted and encouraged." Such shelters could be found at Intermount Campground, Camp Comfort, Church Creek, and Camp Harps in the South Skokomish-Wynoochee area; Spider Lake, Neby Camp, Upper Satsop Lake, and Satsop River on the way to Wynoochee Guard Station; near the end of Big Creek Road and at Flapjack Lakes in the North Fork Skokomish area; and Five Mile and Ten Mile on the Duckabush River trail. 50
Mount Olympus National Monument, 1933-1938
Just as the Olympic National Forest was poised to greatly expand its recreational opportunities, jurisdiction for Mount Olympus National Monument was transferred to the National Park Service as part of a larger reorganization of the government. The transfer of nearly 300,000 acres, completed on June 10, 1933, was a bitter pill for the Forest Service to swallow, and hard feelings persisted for many years. In 1936, Fred Cleator claimed that the transfer disrupted twenty years of recreation planning by his agency. "Under the chaotic conditions which now prevail," he wrote, "long time constructive recreation planning is pretty much at a standstill in the Olympics, awaiting the 'will of the people'". Cleator and most others in the local Forest Service actively opposed formation of a national park, right up to the end. 51
The National Park Service did not take over the actual administration of Mount Olympus National Monument until February 1934. At that time, Owen A. Tomlinson served as the superintendent for both the monument and for Mount Rainier National Park. Preston P. Macy handled the day-to-day administration and was appointed custodian for the monument in the fall of 1935. 52
To help the new administrators see both the lay of the land and the existing improvements (roads, trails, and structures), Macy organized a tour of the monument in May 1934. David H. Madsen, head of the National Park Service's Wildlife Division, and George A. Grant, the chief photographer for the agency, accompanied Macy. They issued an initial report in late July which described the spectacular scenery, forests, and wildlife. They also noted that much of the area was inaccessible due to the poor trail system that included about 150 miles trails that were only second or third class, "wholly unsuited for the purposes of a National Park or a National Monument." In a dig at their rival agency, they noted that the National Park Service had given the Forest Service $2,000 to clear trails for the season, but as of late July many of the trails remained unopened and others were "unsatisfactory for public use." A proposed budget requested funds for staff positions as well as money for improving trails and building two patrol cabins ($1,500 each) and three "Shelter Cabins" ($350 each). 53
After his first full season in the field, Macy and his coauthors issued an updated version of the above report. In addition to the descriptions of scenery and wildlife, they noted that the Forest Service had given special use permits for two privately run chalets as well as four summer homes. While these were grandfathered in, the men agreed with the almost universal opinion that the monument "should remain free from the development of roads, hotels, etc. That adequate trails and shelters for the convenience of the public should be provided, but the area should for all time remain as nearly as possible in its primitive condition." 54
As Macy roamed the monument to assess its needs, he noted shelters and other buildings. He compiled a list in August 1934 that included seven shelters (four on the Elwha, two on the Upper Sol Duc, and one on the Hoh). All measured ten feet square and were in good condition. These shelters were popular with hikers, and Macy noted that most of them along the Elwha had been filled during the month. In late December 1934, Macy submitted an extensive list of proposed projects to use public works funding. It included camp sites and shelters at Hoh Lake, Blue Glacier, Low Divide, Elwha Basin, Baltimore Camp, Enchanted Valley, Little Elkhorn, Dosemeadows, and Cold Springs; patrol cabins at Hoh River, Low Divide, Enchanted Valley, Hee Hee Creek, Honeymoon Meadows, Kirks Lake, and Home Sweet Home; and barns at Olympus Guard Station, Enchanted Valley, Dosemeadows, and Honeymoon Meadows. All of these projects were disapproved in December 1935. 55
The backcountry shelters took a beating during the winter of 1934-1935. Macy reported in May 1935 that one had washed away in high waters, another had collapsed under the snow, and a third was hit by a tree. The list grew the next month with news that the Lower Sol Duc Park shelter was lost in an avalanche. He later found that the Seven Mile shelter on the Sol Duc River had nearly collapsed during the winter, but he hoped to be able to salvage enough material to rebuild it. The winter had been hard on trails as well but despite the damage, Macy found heavy recreational use of the monument. On his trips through the area in August, he found the shelters filled almost every night, with the overflow crowd camping nearby. "The need for additional shelters is very apparent," he noted, "but it takes more than a lack of shelters to keep the lovers of the wilderness at home." Many of the existing shelters also needed improved sanitation facilities. Some were equipped with a Forest Service portable toilet, described by Macy as having "neither roof or sides and in almost no case is there a door to a toilet. These conditions will be remedied as fast as possible", he promised. "The strange part of it is that no one complains about it." 56
Macy provided a detailed itemized list of buildings in the monument in August 1935, giving dimensions, age, water source, sanitation facilities, and location. He listed the following twelve shelters by district:
Duckabush, 14 x 14 feet, 9 years old 
Diamond Meadow, 14 x 14 feet, 6 years old 
Camp Baltimore, 14 x 16 feet, 2 years old 
Camp Little Elkhorn, 14 x 16 feet, 2 years old 
Elkhorn Ranger Station, 14 x 16 feet, 2 years old 
Hayes River Camp, 14 x 16 feet, 4 years old 
Chicago Camp, 14 x 16 feet, 4 years old 
North Fork of the Quinault District
Sixteen Mile, 14 x 16 feet, 5 years old 
Sol Duc Park, 14 x 16 feet, 4 years old 
Sol Duc Crossing, 14 x 16 feet, 3 years old , badly damaged
Elk Lake, 8 x 10 feet, 8 years old 
Olympus shelter/wood shed, 14 x 32 feet, 3 years old . 57
In addition to the shelters, Macy also provided the same detailed information on other buildings he found within the monument boundaries. Administrative structures included the Elkhorn Ranger Station (new station, old station, and horse barn); Hayes River cabin; Olympus Ranger Station (new station, old station, and the combined wood shed/shelter described above). There were also two fire lookouts, one at Bogachiel Peak and the other at Dodger Point. Two private companies had developments in the monument. The Olympic Recreation Company owned the Enchanted Valley Chalet and a smaller cabin at the same site, while the Olympic Chalet Company had a log hotel, four shake cabins, and a bath house at Low Divide. Private individuals owned summer homes, including Mr. Drum, Judge Remann, H. H. Botten, and Dr. Ball. In addition, one cabin was simply labeled as the June Creek cabin, with uncertain origins. Several months later, in February 1936, Macy also listed a ranger station at Dosemeadows which apparently was just a small cabin. 58
Before the end of the 1935 season, Macy's crews had added four new shelters. These were located at the Elwha-Quinault (Low) Divide, Home Sweet Home, Honeymoon Meadows, and Hayes River. Since there was already a shelter at Hayes River, it is not clear if this was in a slightly different location or if it replaced the existing one. These new shelters were larger than those built by the Forest Service, measuring 14 x 18 feet. But like the earlier ones, they were designed for a dual purpose, to shelter Park Service trail crews as well as recreational visitors. The staff concentrated on improving sanitation at the shelters during the 1936 season, adding outhouses and providing chlorinated lime for use in both the outhouses and garbage pits. 59
Olympic National Park, 1938-1941
The many years of park advocacy finally paid off when President Roosevelt signed a bill on June 29, 1938, to create Olympic National Park. Macy's responsibility increased with nearly double the acreage (634,000 acres) as well as additional access roads, hundreds of miles of trails, and a variety of buildings, including many trailside shelters. The first order of business was a survey of the new park in July 1938 to provide the basis for a management plan to guide development. Members of the team from the National Park Service included Acting Superintendent Macy; Owen A. Tomlinson, Superintendent of Mount Rainier National Park; David Madsen, Supervisor of Fish Resources; E. Lowell Sumner, Regional Wildlife Technician; and E. A. Davidson, Regional Landscape Architect. They were joined by Harold L. Ickes, Secretary of the Interior, and Irving Brant, Representative of the Secretary and well-known conservationist. 60
The management guidelines developed by this distinguished group emphasized preservation of wilderness. This wilderness policy was to guide - and limit - all new improvements, a new concept for the National Park Service at the time. Road construction would be minimal, with emphasis instead on an extensive system of trails. Since visitors would be traveling by foot or horse, the new park required additional shelters, with the more popular camping areas needing either larger shelters or multiple smaller ones. "Very careful planning should go into the design of trailside shelters," the group advised, "so that they may be most practical and efficient types, yet give no impression of sophistication. Use of native materials which may be obtained at the site is, of course, most desirable." The group recommended providing bunks in the shelters to prevent users from cutting boughs from nearby trees. A few months later, Ickes elaborated on this policy in a talk in Seattle. "It is our intention to build overnight trail shelters for hikers and horseback parties," he said, "but those who want all the comforts of home, including facilities for reading while taking a bath, will have to look for them in the communities that encircle this park at the base of the mountains." 61
Macy supplemented his limited budget with help from three popular New Deal programs, the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC), the Public Works Administration (PWA), and the Works Progress Administration (WPA). (While the first two programs benefited projects around the park, WPA work was concentrated at park headquarters.) The CCC had been actively working in the adjoining Olympic National Forest since 1933 but had not extended its projects into the boundaries of the national monument. When the federal government tried to reduce the number of CCC camps in March 1938, it listed Camp Elwha among those to be closed. The Forest Service was ready to abandon the camp but protests from the local chamber of commerce, as well as interest from the newly formed national park, facilitated a transfer of the camp from one agency to the other. The National Park Service took over the camp on December 1, 1938 and changed the number from FS-17 to NP-1 (later NP-9). Olympic National Park was given a second CCC camp in August 1940. NP-10 was located at the Norwood Guard Station near Lake Quinault. Crews from both camps worked on road and trail construction; maintenance of telephone lines; installation of water and sanitation systems; and construction and landscaping of campgrounds, shelters, patrol cabins, and administration buildings. 62
The National Industrial Recovery Act of 1933, written to benefit the construction industry, established the Public Works Administration (PWA). Most PWA money funded public buildings, such as schools and courthouses, but some money was designated for more modest buildings, roads and bridges, or even acquisition of privately owned lands. Soon after its establishment, Olympic National Park got its first PWA allotment of $205,500, which included $115,000 for construction projects such as the large public buildings at the park headquarters as well as a fire lookout, patrol cabins, trailside shelters, outhouses, and communication systems. The remaining $90,500 went for trail construction. 63
Assistant Landscape Architect Max Walliser began work as the park's Resident Architect on August 29, 1938, with a primary focus on plans for the new headquarters. He also found time to draw up plans for several types of patrol cabins, shelters, and outhouses. CCC enrollees built two outhouses of the approved design that fall, both at Soleduck Falls. Macy noted that this was the beginning of a program to improve sanitation throughout the park, something he had been advocating for years. Crews also selected sites for new trailside shelters, but they were not able build any before snowfall ended the 1938 construction season. Instead, CCC laborers from Camp Elwha split shakes and cut timbers for the fire lookout, patrol cabins, and shelters, and they prepared the materials for packing into remote sites once the weather improved. 64
During the summer and fall of 1939, CCC crews constructed two new shelters and nearly finished a third one before bad weather set in. Thirty-one enrollees from Camp Elwha set up a side camp that summer at the Eagle Guard Station and lived there while they worked on projects in the area, including the Soleduck Falls shelter. It was a new design (OLY-2003-B) for a shelter, more elaborate than the simple Adirondack-style buildings scattered around the park. The T-shaped log shelter was built in the rustic style so popular with both the National Park Service and the Forest Service of this period. The same plan was used in the other two shelters at Moose Lake and Hoh Lake. 65
Following the completion of these three buildings, no other shelters were built in Olympic National Park until after World War II. Most of the new construction from 1940-1941 was concentrated at park headquarters both on buildings and landscaping. Smaller projects around the park included patrol cabins and outhouses; utilities; communication systems, both telephone and radio; and trail construction. One of the larger projects was a new winter sports area at Deer Park, constructed by a small CCC crew stationed there in a side camp. During this same period, the park acquired more than 187,000 additional acres from the Forest Service, bringing in trails and roads, auto camps, guard stations, shelters, and other buildings, "all of which," Macy noted, "require time and attention in bringing them up to National Park Service standards." 66
Olympic National Park during World War II, December 1941- August 1945
The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, brought the United States into World War II. On the west coast, fears of a full-scale Japanese invasion spurred the development of a coastal defense system, especially on the vulnerable Olympic Peninsula which bordered the crucial Strait of Juan de Fuca and provided a barrier for the Puget Sound shipyards at Bremerton and ports at Seattle and Tacoma. The Army, Navy, and Coast Guard all mobilized in defense of this strategic region during the war. Initial actions included reactivating aging defensive facilities, installing anti-aircraft weapons, and stationing troops along the coast. 67
Olympic National Park and its staff immediately plunged into the war effort. CCC crews working on the new park headquarters were shifted to building a new airfield, and the park loaned both materials and equipment for the project. Landscape Architect Frederick Leissler was detailed to advise the military on "natural arrangements for camouflage of gun emplacements." 68
The park's largest role in the war effort, however, was with the Aircraft Warning System (AWS). The U.S. Army established this program early in 1942 with observation posts in remote mountains and coastal areas not covered by conventional radar. Pairs of specially trained civilians, often a married couple, staffed these posts around the clock. They noted any aircraft sighted and transmitted information about these flights with "flash" messages over telephone and radio. In addition to cooperating with the Army, the Park Service worked with the Forest Service, which served as the coordinating agency for the AWS. 69
Because of their location on the Olympic Peninsula, both the Olympic National Park and the adjacent Olympic National Forest contained sites considered strategic for the air surveillance work. In fact, during several years preceding the war, the park had been cooperating with the military by conducting airplane observation tests and thus was prepared to continue such work. The tests had located a number of useful observation posts within the park which provided unobstructed views of the ocean and the strait. Just one month into the war effort, park staff at the Deer Park lookout were reporting plane sightings to the Army. 70
Following the organization of the AWS early in 1942, the staff at Olympic National Park worked long hours to establish a network of lookouts in the park. Rangers and other staff had to haul supplies to the remote outposts, keep telephone lines and radios repaired, and monitor flash messages. By late March, the park had three lookouts staffed for defense purposes and expected to have another five locations chosen soon. Macy reported that six men had spent two days hauling supplies to Hurricane Lookout, using toboggans to cross more than three miles of snow. Another eight men had to carry four hundred pounds of supplies to the other lookouts. He recognized that maintaining these posts would be difficult. Park rangers spent much of their time during the fall of 1942 supplying the AWS stations in the park and maintaining both the trails and telephone lines to the stations. The strain on the staff only worsened as the war continued and rangers were called into the military, leaving the park shorthanded. 71
Initially, AWS stations were established at existing structures. The first ones to be staffed were the fire lookouts at Hurricane Ridge, Deer Park, and Dodger Point. The list later expanded to include the chalets in Enchanted Valley and Low Divide as well as Elkhorn Guard Station. Since there were not enough existing structures to provide full coverage, the park constructed several new lookouts and associated access routes. For instance, in mid-September, park staff began to build a new trail to Pyramid Peak to facilitate transportation of supplies to the site. Joe Sherman did most of the construction at the site but did not complete the lookout until late in the fall, shortly after a temporary post, housed in a tent, was destroyed in a severe windstorm in early November. Sherman and his wife then operated the AWS station. By the end of 1942, there were thirteen such AWS stations operating within the park, including other new ones at Warkum Point, Indian Pass, and Geodetic Hill. Communications expanded in 1943 with the addition of a UHF radio system. The lookouts continued to note planes and send flashes until the AWS program was abruptly disbanded on June 1, 1944. The park then converted many of the outposts to fire lookouts for the remainder of the season. 72
The life of a wartime lookout was a challenging one of isolation, cramped quarters, and continuous duties. Mary and Leath Johnson served initially as relief observers, working about two weeks at an AWS post to give the permanent staff a respite; they later worked on a more long-term basis at posts within the park. Mary recalled substituting for the legendary Herb and Lois Crisler who were stationed at Hurricane Ridge. Lois asked that Mary bring a permanent wave kit with her so that she could get a perm before returning to visit friends in town. Mary also remembered that the two people stationed at Elkhorn had such a bad case of cabin fever that they were no longer speaking to each other and had divided the cabin with a chalk mark down the center of the floor. 73
In addition to the AWS, the military operated a second defense system along the west coast. A few months after the United States entered World War II, the U.S. Coast Guard, under the command of the Navy in the 13th Naval District, established an extensive system of lookouts along the coast of Washington and Oregon. By late April 1942, the system included twenty-six lookout stations and another thirteen lifeboat stations staffed by both military personnel and civilian volunteers who watched for suspicious activity and regularly patrolled the remote coastal beaches using guard dogs. 74
During the war, there were three centers of Coast Guard operations either within or near the boundaries of Olympic National Park. The primary base was the Ozette Lake Coast Guard Station which took over for the Army there in September 1942. Beach patrols covered the area from Shi Shi Beach to Cape Johnson, working from outposts located at Seafield, Cape Alava, Sand Point, Wink Trail, Yellow Banks, Township Trail, Allen Trail, Lone Tree Rock, and Cape Johnson. These were supplemented by three lookouts at Cape Alava, Eagle Point, and the mouth of Starbuck Creek. Farther south, the Coast Guard also operated Beach Patrol Stations at La Push and Kalaloch. As the perceived threat from invasion declined, beach patrols were reduced. All patrols at Lake Ozette were discontinued by the end of March 1944. 75
Olympic National Park during the Postwar Years, 1945-1955
The end of World War II in August 1945 brought new challenges to Olympic National Park. There was a backlog of maintenance and construction projects, work that had been postponed when the wartime staff was stretched thin with the demands of servicing the AWS stations. Tourist visits began a steady rise while budgets remained stagnant. It was a dilemma shared by parks throughout the country.
Despite these constraints, Olympic National Park launched a major push during this period to improve accommodations for backcountry travelers. Park staff constructed fresh garbage pits and pit toilets in many locations, part of the routine maintenance often done by trail crews. Then in 1949, they began an ambitious program to build shelters. Park construction and maintenance crews completed five new shelters (two at Lake Angeles, two at Glacier Meadows, and one at Seven Lakes Basin) that year and left a sixth (Sol Duc Park) partially done. Nine more followed in 1951, making a total of fifteen in just three years. The latter group included two in the Elwha Valley, two at Heart Lake, and one each at Mary's Falls, Canyon Camp, Stony Point, Camp Wilder, and Seven Lakes Basin. In addition, crews restored three other shelters in the Elwha drainage. 76
Having two shelters in one location was a new idea for the park. Some of the prewar shelters, like the one built at Anderson Pass, were considerably larger than the earlier 14 x 14 footprint. Such large shelters sacrificed some privacy in an effort to fit in larger numbers of hikers. After the war, the move to pairs of smaller shelters served to accommodate large numbers without compromising on privacy. The new arrangement proved popular with hikers. 77
One of the key personnel involved in shelter construction during this period was Dan Landers, an experienced woodsman from Vashon Island. "Anything you needed," Jack Nattinger later remembered, such as "carpenter work, why you send Dan up there and he would do it." Landers was a temporary employee until the early 1950s when he was hired on a permanent status. Nattinger also recalled that these shelters were all small, "something like the first USFS shelter" but with four bunks. 78
Olympic National Park experimented unsuccessfully with metal roofs on shelters in the postwar years. Metal was considered a practical solution both for shedding snow and preventing vandalism; visitors frequently used shakes from shelters to start campfires. Crews hauled long pieces of metal to distant shelters for the roof upgrades. This innovation was a failure, however. Jack Nattinger recalled that the Upper Soleduck shelter had a metal roof that leaked "like a sieve." Park crews were replacing these metal roofs with shakes by 1958. They completed this work on the shelters at Elkhorn, Canyon Camp, Mary's Falls, and Lower Cameron that fall, and during the next winter, they split more than two thousand shakes to continue repairs in 1959. 79
Olympic National Park and Mission 66, 1955-1966
The period of stagnant budgets for the National Park Service ended in the mid-1950s with the launch of an ambitious program to upgrade accommodations at parks nationwide. Named Mission 66, the effort was to culminate in 1966 on the 50th anniversary of the National Park Service. Fred J. Overly, who had replaced Preston Macy as superintendent at Olympic National Park in September 1951, used the Mission 66 program to further his vision of the park as a playground for visitors, moving away from the original emphasis on wilderness. Visitation to the park increased greatly during the 1950s, rising from just over 400,000 visitors in 1950 to nearly 1.2 million in 1958. 80
While Overly's monthly narrative reports are strangely devoid of any mention of shelter construction, such work continued during his administration. Jack Nattinger recalled that Jack Broadbent, the first permanent field ranger in the Elwha District, wanted to orient new shelters toward a view, and he took responsibility for laying out the sites before Dan Landers erected the building. In a report in 1954, Overly recommended new trails, bridges, and shelters in the backcountry. Such work presented "problems in logistics and design," however, since "native materials must be used in shelters and pit toilets where practical." At that time, just one shelter was under construction at Graves Creek (Project B-187), for a cost of $909.69. 81
Once Mission 66 got underway, construction funding increased for various projects within Olympic National Park. By February 1958, five new trailside shelters had been built since the fall of 1951; it is unclear whether or not these were actually completed before Mission 66 began. One month later, in March 1958, Overly laid out plans for the coming season. Park staff was preparing a project construction proposal to repair existing shelters using day labor, for a cost of $6,000. Of the seventy-five shelters then in the park, fifty-three dated from the Forest Service period. "Needed repairs consist of new roofs, straightening, replacing foundations, shakes, logs and bunks and constructing new privies and garbage pits," noted Overly. "No plans or additional supervision would be required." At the same time, the superintendent proposed Project B-195 to construct four new trailside shelters for a total of $6,000. This was part of the much larger project, included in the Master Plan, to build a total of thirty such shelters. These first four were to be built by day labor using standard plan NP-Oly-2191. 82
Increasing use of the backcountry by the late 1950s evidently led the park to request a report on the situation. The Back Country Study Committee, chaired by Ray W. Murphy, completed a preliminary report by January 1959, which was printed one year later. Backcountry visits nearly doubled from 1953 to 1959, rising from 27,657 to 49,061. The committee found that by the late 1950s, 90 percent of these visitors were hikers, with only 10 percent arriving on horseback. The huge increase in use had led to a degradation of the backcountry, with many unauthorized camps, toilets, and trash dumps. Chief Ranger Stanley McComas recognized that the park's protection of the backcountry had been "inadequate" up to that point, but he stressed that his staff had increased coverage and visitor contacts during the 1958 season. He noted that more money and staff would be needed to adequately address the situation. 83
The report made a series of recommendations to address the deteriorating backcountry campsites. These included additional campsites with water, sanitation, and wood supply; more shelters, especially in heavily used areas; new patrol cabins and additional backcountry staff to increase protection; and an upgrade and expansion of the telephone system for added visitor safety. It also included specific suggestions to guide the park in locating and building additional shelters in the backcountry. The report stipulated that no new shelters should be constructed within five miles of a road since closer locations were vulnerable to vandalism. New shelters should be concentrated in areas of heavy use to help control damage at such sites. Shelters should be spaced an easy day's walk apart. They were meant to "be used solely as havens during times of inclement weather, not . . . as required facilities for each overnight stop." They did not need to be larger than the standard four-bunk size. 84
Chief Ranger McComas generally agreed with the committee's recommendations. He believed that construction of patrol cabins was an important step because it would enable rangers to increase patrols. Trail maintenance crews would also be able to use such cabins, freeing up shelters for visitor use only. The parks Mission 66 plans called for just six such patrol cabins, but the committee recommended a total of eight. Nonetheless, these were considered low priority for the Mission 66 program. 85
By the late 1950s, the overworked park staff got seasonal assistance from the Student Conservation Program, later known as the Student Conservation Association (SCA). The nationwide program began in 1957 under Mission 66 as a way to supplement regular park staff as well as provide work experience for the student volunteers. At Olympic National Park, under the supervision of Jack Dolstad, two groups of boys put in three hundred person-days in 1959, much of it in the back country. Work there included construction of a shelter with four bunks, digging garbage pits, building toilets, clearing trails, and splitting one thousand shakes to reroof the Enchanted Valley Chalet. 86
Shelter construction continued in Olympic National Park through 1971. Although Superintendent Overly had alluded to plans for thirty new shelters, far fewer were built. The SCA continued to build one or two shelters each year. These included two at Sand Point in 1960; one at Low Divide in 1961; one at Mosquito Creek in 1962; and one final one at Scott's Creek on the coast in August 1963. The park hired outside labor in 1963 to build eight more shelters: one each at Olympus, Elwha Basin, Mink Lake, and Nine Stream on the North Fork Skokomish, and two each at Elk Lake and the North Fork Quinault trail. Seven more that were planned for the 1964 season were never built. 87
Passage of the Wilderness Act in 1964 essentially ended construction of new shelters in Olympic National Park. By 1966, Superintendent Bennett Gale recommended three roadless areas within the park as wilderness, including more than 770,000 acres in the backcountry. Nonetheless, both SCA and park crews continued to maintain and rebuild these shelters each season through the 1960s. In addition, the Youth Conservation Corps (YCC), another volunteer program, helped construct Toleak Point shelter in 1971. This was the last new shelter built in the park. 88
After 1970 management of park shelters changed dramatically. Between 1970 and 1975, park staff burned down forty-five of approximately ninety shelters under the belief that the shelters created damage by focusing visitation and were not needed in potential wilderness. The review of the issue did not take into account that visitation was increasing greatly as a side effect of the baby-boom generation coming of age.
There was direction in the 1974 Olympic Wilderness EIS to remove some shelters and to retain other for emergency use. This policy was echoed in the 1976 general management plan. But when the 1976 backcountry management plan listed only twelve shelters to be retained, the public objected to this level of removal. There was the threat of lawsuits that the park was not adhering to the Wilderness EIS and to the park GMP. It also was clear that the park had no objective criteria for which shelters to retain and which ones to remove. After a number of public meetings the park produced a criteria statement for shelter management. Twenty-two shelters were selected to remain in the park. This list was reviewed yearly up through the mid-1980s.
In 1988 Congress designated 870,000 acres, amounting to 95 percent of Olympic National Park, as wilderness. After that, the park staff seemed to return to the earlier process of removing the shelters without reference to the either the retention criteria or to the list of shelters to retained. During this period, maintenance of the shelters also was reduced. As a result, three shelters collapsed in 1998. The repair strategy called for replacement shelters built off site according to specifications and then airlifted into place. This was done to reduce impacts to wilderness values. This raised concern with wilderness advocacy groups and resulted in a lawsuit enjoining the park from flying in the replacement structures. The judge denied the plaintiffs request for $90,000 in attorney fees and then made the following observation:
This report is a historic structures report to implement part of the Olympic National Park 2008 GMP.
1 Harold K. Steen, The U.S. Forest Service: A History (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1991), 26-36, 324-325; Hal K. Rothman, American Eden: The Administrative History of Olympic National Park (National Park Service, 2005, final draft), 30-33.
2 Report of the Department of the Interior, for Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1900.
3 P.S.L. [Parish S. Lovejoy], rough draft of memo to [R.L.] Fromme, 1912, Record Group (RG) 95, Records of the U.S. Forest Service, Olympic National Forest, History Files ca. 1899-1990, box 8, R. L. Fromme Papers, file: Correspondence, National Archives - Pacific Northwest Region (NA-PNR), 1.
4 Forest Inspector to the Secretary of the Interior, February 26, 1903, Record Group (RG) 95, Records of the U.S. Forest Service, Regional Office files, box 3, file: Olympic Forest Reserve - Inspection, 1903, National Archives - Pacific Northwest Region (NA-PNR), 2, as quoted in David Louter, "The Forest before the Park: The Historic Context of the Trail System of Olympic National Park, 1898-1938", draft, 3.
5 Louter, "The Forest before the Park," 3-4.
6 Chris L. Morgenroth, "The Olympic National Forest and immediate surroundings," December 1908, RG 95, Olympic National Forest, History Files ca. 1899-1900, box 3, file: Olympic National Forest History, NA-PNR, 10.
7 Ibid., 9-11; Louter, "The Forest before the Park," 7-9; Gail H. E. Evans, Historic Resource Study, Olympic National Park, Washington (Seattle: National Park Service, Pacific Northwest Region, 1983), 234.
8 Stephen J. Pyne, Year of the Fires: The Story of the Great Fires of 1910 (New York: Penguin Books, 2001), 201, 215, 256-268.
9 Lovejoy, Memo for Fromme, 13-14.
10 Ibid., 14.
11 William C. Tweed, A History of Outdoor Recreation Development in National Forests, 1891-1942 (Clemson, SC: Clemson University, Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Management, ca. 1978), 1-2; Elizabeth Gail Throop, "Recreation Development in the National Forests in Oregon and Washington, 1905-1945" (unpublished ms, 1996), 2.
12 Nancy F. Renk, "Off to the Lakes: Summer Tourism in Northern Idaho, 1883-1940" (M.A. thesis, University of Idaho, 1992), 57-62.
13 Ibid., 71-72, 100, 109-110.
14 Agnes C. Laut, "Everybody's Camping Ground," Collier's Magazine, 13 August 1910, 21.
15 Tweed, A History of Outdoor Recreation Development, 2-3; Frank A. Waugh, Recreation Uses on the National Forests (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1918), 24.
16 Tweed, A History of Outdoor Recreation Development, 5.
17 Waugh, Recreation Uses, 5-8, 24-26; Throop, "Recreation Development in the National Forests," 5.
18 Morgenroth, "The Olympic National Forest," 22-23; Tweed, A History of Outdoor Recreation Development, 3; Fred W. Cleator, "Recreational Facilities of the Olympic National Forest and Forest"
19 Louter, "The Forest before the Park," 17-18. Service Plan of Development," (University of Washington) Forest Club Quarterly 10 (Winter 1936-1937), 5.
20 R. L. Fromme, Forest Supervisor, to District Forester, Portland, 7 December 1915, RG 95, Olympic National Forest, History Files ca. 1899-1990, box 8 R. L. Fromme Papers, file: Correspondence, NA-PNR, 1.
21 Ibid., with quotations from 5, 4, and 14; Louter, "The Forest before the Park," 21.
22 Tweed, A History of Outdoor Recreation Development, 8, 10-11; Steen, The U.S. Forest Service, 154; Chief Forester, as quoted in Kenneth O. Maughan, Recreational Development in the National Forests, Technical Publication No. 45, Bulletin of the New York State College of Forestry at Syracuse University, 7 (May 1934), 24.
23 Maughan, Recreational Development, 25; Throop, "Recreation Development in the National Forests," 6-7, 22, 62.
24 Steen, The U.S. Forest Service, 154-155.
25 Hal K. Rothman, American Eden: The Administrative History of Olympic National Park, final draft (National Park Service, 2005), 58; Tweed, A History of Outdoor Recreation Development, 5, 8, 10-11; Louter, "The Forest before the Park," 24.
26 Cleator, "Recreational Facilities of the Olympic National Forest," 6; Louter, "The Forest before the Park," 24; L. F. Kneipp, Assistant Forester, to Mr. Cecil, District Forester, 1 May 1922, RG 95, Historical Collection ca. 1902-1985, box 58, file: U-Plans - Olympic, Recreation-Lake Crescent Area [1919-1931], NA-PNR, 1-2.
27 Gail H. E. Evans, Historic Resource Study, Olympic National Park, Washington (Seattle: National Park Service, Pacific Northwest Region, 1983), 206, 221.
28 Frank H. Lamb et al., "Report of the Chalet Committee to the Hoquiam Chamber of Commerce," 25 September 1925, RG 95, Historical Collection ca. 1902-1985, box 67, file: L-Recreation - Olympic [1925-1937], 2 of 2, NA-PNR, 1-4; Cleator, "Recreational Facilities of the Olympic National Forest," 6.
29 F. W. Cleator, "Field Diary and Travel Record, Aug. 1 to Aug. 31, 1927and Sept. 2 to Oct. 18, 1927, RG 95, Historical Collection, ca. 1902-1985, box 38, NA-PNR.
30 Cleator, "Recreational Facilities of the Olympic National Forest," 6-7.
31 F. W. Cleator, Recreation Atlas, Olympic National Forest, 25 May 1929, RG 95, Olympic National Forest, map case 5, NA-PNR, 2.
33 Ibid., 3.
34 Ibid., 2-3.
35 F. W. Cleator, "Olympic Forest Recreation Plan From Field Survey, Aug - Sept. 1927," map dated 1 February 1928, RG 95, Olympic National Forest, map case 5, NA-PNR; U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, "Olympic National Forest, Washington," map dated 1935, Olympic National Park Archives, map case 1.04.
36 Tweed, A History of Outdoor Recreation Development, 9; Throop, "Recreation Development in the National Forests," 59-60; Lovejoy, Memo for Fromme, 14; Cleator, "Recreational Facilities of the Olympic National Forest," 7.
37 Throop, "Recreation Development in the National Forests," 41-42.
38 Lamb et al., "Report of the Chalet Committee," 4; Evans, Historic Resource Study, 291-303.
39 Kenneth O. Maughan, Recreational Development in the National Forests, Technical Publication No. 45, Bulletin of the New York State College of Forestry at Syracuse University 7 (May 1934), 23-26; Throop, "Recreation Development in the National Forests in Oregon and Washington", 7.
40 Maughan, Recreational Development, table following 36, table following 146.
41 H. L. Plumb, Forest Supervisor, Olympia, to Regional Forester, Portland, 14 March 1932, RG 95, Historical Collection ca. 1902-1985, box 67, file: L-Recreation-Olympic [1925-1937], 1 of 2, NA-PNR, 1.
42 Ibid., 4-6.
43 C. J. Buck, Regional Forester, to Forest Supervisor, Olympia, 19 July 1932, RG 95, Historical Collection ca. 1902-1985, box 67, file: L-Recreation-Olympic [1925-1937], 1 of 2, NA-PNR, 2; C. J. Buck, Regional Forester, to Forest Supervisor, Olympic, 23 August 1932, RG 95, Historical Collection ca. 1902-1985, box 67, file: L-Recreation-Olympic [1925-1937], 1 of 2, NA-PNR, 1.
44 H. L. Plumb, Forest Supervisor, Olympia, to Regional Forester, Portland, 14 March 1933, , RG 95, Historical Collection ca. 1902-1985, box 67, file: L-Recreation-Olympic [1925-1937], 1 of 2, NA-PNR, 1-4.
45 Executive Order #6101 established the agency officially known as Emergency Conservation Work, which quickly became known by the name supplied by Roosevelt, the Civilian Conservation Corps. John A. Salmond, The Civilian Conservation Corps, 1933-1942: A New Deal Case Study (Durham: Duke University Press, 1967), 3-4; Throop, "Recreation Development in the National Forests," 12-13.
46 Neal McMaster Nelson, "An Historical Inquiry into the Civilian Conservation Corps Movement with Special Reference to the Ninth Corps Area" (Master's thesis, University of Idaho, 1938), 1-47.
47 Tweed, A History of Outdoor Recreation Development, 16-20; Steen, The U.S. Forest Service, 199-209; Throop, "Recreation Development in the National Forests," 8-10.
48 Evans, Historic Resource Study, 334-339; F. W. Cleator, "Recreation Work of the U.S. Forest Service In the Pacific Northwest," 14 March 1936, RG 95, Historical Collection ca. 1902-1985, box 56, file: L-Recreation 1936, NA-PNR, 2-3; A. E. Glover, North Pacific Region General Inspection Report for CCC Work Camp Elwha, F-17, 18 December 1934, RG 95, Historical Collection ca. 1902-1985, box 58, file: U-Inspection-Olympic [1933-1938], NA-PNR, 1-9.
49 [J. R. Bruckart, Forest Supervisor], Olympic, 17 February 1937, RG 95, Olympic National Forest, box 5, file: L/LP-Land Acquisitions and Boundaries, Olympic, Mt. Olympus National Monument, 1938, NA-PNR, 2; Memorandum to accompany Recreational Map (Item #9), Olympia, 1 February 1937, RG 95, Olympic National Forest, box 5, file: L/LP-Land Acquisitions and Boundaries, Olympic, Mt. Olympus National Monument, 1938, NA-PNR.
50 U.S. Forest Service, Department of Agriculture, Olympic National Forest, "Hood Canal Recreation Area," Washington Guide No. 18, 1936, RG 95, Olympic National Forest, box 5, file: L/LP-Land Acquisitions and Boundaries, Olympic, Mt. Olympus National Monument, 1938, NA-PNR.
51 Cleator, "Recreational Facilities of the Olympic National Forest", 7-8.
52 Rothman, American Eden, 64, 89.
53 Preston P. Macy, George A. Grant, and David H. Madsen, Primary Report on Mt. Olympus National Monument, 28 July 1934, Preston P. Macy Papers, Accession No. 3211, box 1, file 32, University of Washington Libraries, Special Collections Division, 3, 6.
54 [Preston P. Macy, George A. Grant, and David H. Madsen], Preliminary Report on Mt. Olympus National Monument, 5 October 1934, Accession No. OLYM-438, Administration Files, Catalog No. OLYM-18414, box 1 file 8: 1936-1948, History, Olympic National Park Archives, 7.
55 Macys measurement of 10 x 10 for the shelters appears to be an estimate since his itemized list one year later listed all the shelters as either 14 x 14, the standard Forest Service design, or 14 x 16. Preston P. Macy, Narrative Report [hereafter called Superintendent's Narrative Report], 2 September 1934, 5-6, Accession No. OLYM-420, Catalog No. OLYM-18242, box 1, file: 1, 1934, Olympic National Park
56 Archives; Jacilee Wray, Statement of Historic Context for USFS/ONP Historic Landscapes, 1898-1942, draft, 5 September 1996, Appendix, 11.
This toilet design was known within the Forest Service as a Wallowa toilet. Superintendent's Narrative Report, 4 May 1935, 3, 3 June 1935, 1-2, 1 August 1935, 4, 1 September 1935, 5, Accession No. OLYM-420, Catalog No. OLYM-18242, box 1, file: 2, 1935, Olympic National Park Archives.
57 Preston P. Macy, Acting Custodian, to Marlow Glenn, Accountant, Mount Rainier National Park, 24 August 1935, Structure Files, file: 304-A Olympus G.S., Olympic National Park Archives.
58 Ibid.; Preston P. Macy, Acting Custodian, to O. W. Carlson, Assistant Superintendent, Mount Rainier National Park, 8 February 1936, 1, Preston P. Macy Papers, Accession No. 3211, box 1, file 19, University of Washington Libraries, Special Collections Division.
59 Superintendent's Narrative Report, 2 November 1935, 4, Accession No. OLYM-420, Catalog No. OLYM-18242, box 1, file: 2, 1935, Olympic National Park Archives; 3 August 1936, 6, Accession No. OLYM-420, Catalog No. OLYM-18242, box 1, file: 3, 1936, Olympic National Park Archives.
60 Rothman, American Eden, 85; National Park Service, Statement of Controlling Development Policies, [ca. 1938], B-1, OLYM-621, Olympic National Park Archives.
61 Ibid., B-2 - B-4; Ickes quoted in Evans, Historic Resource Study, 222.
62 Evans, Historic Resource Study, 347-351.
63 Superintendent's Narrative Report, 3 October 1938, 1, 3 November 1938, 1, Accession No. OLYM-420, Catalog No. OLYM-18242, box 1, file: 5, 1938, Olympic National Park Archives; Evans, Historic Resource Study, 361-362.
64 Superintendent's Narrative Report, [no date, ca. November 1938], 1-3, 2 December 1938, 2-3, Accession No. OLYM-420, Catalog No. OLYM-18242, box 1, file: 5, 1938; 4 January 1939, 3, Accession No. OLYM-420, Catalog No. OLYM-18242, box 1, file: 6, 1939, Olympic National Park Archives.
65 Superintendent's Narrative Report, 7 July 1939, 3, 9 August 1939, 2, 12 September 1939, 3, 3 November 1939, 1, 4, Accession No. OLYM-420, Catalog No. OLYM-18242, box 1, file: 6, 1939, Olympic National Park Archives; Wray, "Statement of Historic Context", A-17 A-20, A-25.
66 Evans, Historic Resource Study, 388-391.
67 Superintendent's Narrative Report, 9 January 1942, 2-3, Accession No. OLYM-420, Catalog No. OLYM-18242, box 1, file: 9, 1942, Olympic National Park Archives.
68 Superintendent's Narrative Report, 9 April 1942, 3-4, 12 November 1942, 4, Accession No. OLYM-420, Catalog No. OLYM-18242, box 1, file: 9, 1942, Olympic National Park Archives; 13 January 1943, 2, 11 February 1943, 1-3, Accession No. OLYM-420, Catalog No. OLYM-18242, box 1, file: 10, 1943, Olympic National Park Archives.
69 Evans, Historic Resource Study, 388-391.
70 Superintendent's Narrative Report, 9 January 1942, 2-3, Accession No. OLYM-420, Catalog No. OLYM-18242, box 1, file: 9, 1942, Olympic National Park Archives.
71 Superintendent's Narrative Report, 9 April 1942, 3-4, 12 November 1942, 4, Accession No. OLYM-420, Catalog No. OLYM-18242, box 1, file: 9, 1942, Olympic National Park Archives; 13 January 1943, 2, 11 February 1943, 1-3, Accession No. OLYM-420, Catalog No. OLYM-18242, box 1, file: 10, 1943, Olympic National Park Archives.
72 Superintendent's Narrative Report, 12 October 1942, 3, 14 December 1942, 1-2, Accession No. OLYM-420, Catalog No. OLYM-18242, box 1, file: 9, 1942, Olympic National Park Archives; 10 April 1943, 5-6, Accession No. OLYM-420, Catalog No. OLYM-18242, box 1, file: 10, 1943, Olympic National Park; 12 June 1944, 4-5, 12 July 1944, 4, Accession No. OLYM-420, Catalog No. OLYM-18242, box 1, file: 11, 1944, Olympic National Park Archives. Archives; Evans, Historic Resource Study, 391; Jack Nattinger, interviewed by Paul Gleeson, 27 September 2007, tape 2, side 1.
73 Mary Johnson, transcript of a talk with Jack Nattinger et al., no date, transcript on file, Olympic National Park Archives.
74 Evans, Historic Resource Study, 379.
75 Ibid., 383-385.
76 Superintendent's Narrative Report, 13 September 1945, 3, Accession No. OLYM-420, Catalog No. OLYM-18242, box 1, file: 12, 1945, Olympic National Park Archives; 12 October 1949, 2, 10 November 1949, 3, Accession No. OLYM-420, Catalog No. OLYM-18242, box 1, file: 16, 1949, Olympic National Park Archives; 14 June 1951, 3, 12 July 1951, 2, 13 August 1951, 2, 10 October 1951, 2, Accession No. OLYM-420, Catalog No. OLYM-18242, box 1, file: 18, 1951, Olympic National Park Archives.
77 Jack Nattinger and Ted Sullivan, interviewed by Paul Gleeson and Fred Walters, 27 September 2007, tape 1, side 2, transcript on file, Olympic National Park Archives.
78 Nattinger and Sullivan, 27 September 2007, tape 1, side 2, transcript on file, Olympic National Park Archives; Jack Nattinger to Paul Gleeson, 29 September 2007, letter on file, Olympic National Park Archives.
79 Nattinger and Sullivan, 27 September 2007, tape 1, side 2, transcript on file, Olympic National Park Archives; Jack Nattinger to Paul Gleeson, 29 September 2007, letter on file, Olympic National Park Archives; Superintendent's Narrative Report, 21 October 1958, 6, Accession No. OLYM-420, Catalog No. OLYM-18242, box 1, file: 24, 1958, Olympic National Park Archives; March 1959, 7, Accession No. OLYM-420, Catalog No. OLYM-18242, box 1, file: 25, 1959, Olympic National Park Archives.
80 Rothman, American Eden, 345.
81 Nattinger and Sullivan, 27 September 2007, , tape 1, side 1, transcript on file, Olympic National Park Archives; Fred J. Overly, United States Civil Service Commission, Position Description, 3 December 1954, 12-14, on file, Fred J. Overly Papers, Accession 2214, box 2, file 5, University of Washington Libraries, Special Collection Division.
82 Olympic National Park, Construction Projects Tabulation, September, 1951 to February 20, 1958, 3, on file, Fred J. Overly Papers, Accession 2214, box 2, file 12, University of Washington Libraries, Special Collection Division; Fred J. Overly to Regional Director, Region Four, 24 March 1958, 9, on file, Fred J. Overly Papers, Accession 2214, box 2, file 8, University of Washington Libraries, Special Collection Division.
83 Back Country Study Committee (Ray W. Murphy, chairman), Olympic Back Country Study, January 1960, 1-4, on file, Accession OLYM-463, Olympic National Park Archives; Stanley McComas to Superintendent, 11 January 1959, 1, on file, Shelter Notebook, Paul Gleesons office, Olympic National Park.
84 Back Country Study Committee (Ray W. Murphy, chairman), Olympic Back Country Study, January 1960, 14-24, on file, Accession OLYM-463, Olympic National Park Archives.
85 Stanley McComas to Superintendent, 11 January 1959, on file, Shelter Notebook, Paul Gleesons office, Olympic National Park.
86 Back Country Study Committee (Ray W. Murphy, chairman), Olympic Back Country Study, January 1960, 8, on file, Accession OLYM-463, Olympic National Park Archives.
87 Superintendent's Narrative Report, July 1960, 8, August 1960, 7, Accession No. OLYM-420, Catalog No. OLYM-18242, box 1, file: 26, 1960, Olympic National Park Archives; August 1961, 9, Accession No. OLYM-420, Catalog No. OLYM-18242, box 1, file: 27, 1961, Olympic National Park Archives; August 1962, 8, Accession No. OLYM-420, Catalog No. OLYM-18242, box 1, file: 28, 1962, Olympic National Park Archives; June 1963, 8, July 1963, 8, August 1963, 6, 8, September 1963, 8, October 1963, 6, Accession No. OLYM-420, Catalog No. OLYM-18242, box 1, file: 29, 1963, Olympic National Park Archives.
88 Historic Property Inventory Report for Toleak Point Shelter, recorded 18 December 2006.