State Action in Relation to Preservation of Historical Resources in the Expanding West

STATE ACTION IN RELATION TO PRESERVATION OF HISTORICAL RESOURCES IN THE EXPANDING WEST

By C. J. Olsen

[September 10-12, 1959, the Pacific Coast Branch, American Historical Association, held its fifty-second annual meeting in Salt Lake City, one session of which was devoted to the general subject "Conservation of Historic Sites in the Expanding West." Panel discussions on this topic were as follows: "Federal Responsibility and Policy," by John O. Littleton, Chief, National Survey of Historic Sites and Buildings, National Parks Service, U. S. Department of Interior, Washington, D. C; "State Action" by C. J. Olsen, Director, Utah State Parks and Recreation Commission; and "The Role of the Professional Historical Agency," by Clifford L. Lord, Dean, School of General Studies, Columbia University, President, American Association for State and Local History. Because of its pertinence and significance to Utah, the speech by Mr. Olsen is here printed.]

The wording of the topic for this panel, "State Action in Relation to Preservation of Historical Resources in the Expanding West," implies, as I view it, three things: (1) that history in general is important in any society and that its physical evidences, therefore, deserve to be preserved; (2) that local or provincial history is likewise important and that the state and local government should assume the largest possible responsibility to preserve the significant sites and objects of history within its own boundaries; (3) that our amazingly expanding population in the Western states makes doubly urgent the efforts of preservation of our historical monuments, those which have not already been destroyed, while there is yet time.

On the point of population trends, the figures indicate a rate of increase destined to accelerate, at least through the next few decades, to a degree almost frightening. These figures call to mind the statement of one of our modern scientists that two things and two only will determine the ultimate number of people any nation or the world itself can support: food supply, and man's ability to tolerate his own kind.

We are all familiar with figures predicting population increase. Trends within the United States indicate that the percentage of gain will be accentuated in the West, especially in the three Pacific Coast states. The eight Mountain States, taken as a unit, are due to gain 44 per cent in the next eleven years. Mr. Philip M. Hauser, of the University of Chicago and one-time deputy director of the United States Census Bureau, concluded an interview on this subject (in U.S. News and World Report, November 28, 1958) with words to this effect : there is room in the United States for any increase we can foresee between now and 1980; after that, all bets are off.

Certainly then, if the historical resources of a state are of importance, not merely to historians and all associated specialists but to all of the people, we must act wisely and act soon.

Now we may ask: What are the general trends and what is being done by the various Western states to preserve their historical heritage?

Over the last half century, state action, supplementing the work of federal agencies in the conservation of our natural resources, has been strongly evident. But only in the last decade or so have the states taken positive official action to preserve their historical resources. Increasingly, during the last ten years, the states have become more sharply aware of the fact that whereas a forest may be regenerated, game restocked, and ground cover restored (to help assure the stability of soil), historical resources once forfeited may never be recoverable. Historical buildings, it is true, may be restored or reconstructed, but any attempted duplication is fraud unless based on perfected evidences — evidences often lost forever where need may be most important.

On the one hand it is gratifying to note the awakening of the separate states to the need for acting more fully in their own behalf; on the other stands the fact that all have awakened regrettably late.

S. K. Stevens, director of the Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, states that while figures are not available, it is likely that no state fifty years ago had spent more than a few thousand dollars to conserve its historical resources. His own state, Pennsylvania, so rich in early American history, did not create a commission of any kind to foster preservation until 1913. Massachusetts, Rhode Island, New York, where striking evidences of our history also lay so rich and deep, were equally late in taking official state action.

In the East generally, state agencies tended from the outset to retain semiprivate status. Here in the West, there has been a favoring of the attitude that state governments should accept more fully the duty of preserving the things that most clearly bespeak its history and distinguish the state itself. Various states now combine the privately supported and privately directed society with a state department of history or with a historical commission functioning as an official unit of the government.

In return for direct aid from the states (and usually proportional to the amount of that aid) state governments have sought increased representation on the governing boards of historical societies or of other agencies designed to develop and perpetuate the state's historical resources.

Time allows only brief attention to the programs of the various Western states.

In New Mexico the superintendent of the State Park Commission reports:

. . . considerable work has been done in the matter of conserving historical sites. In this state the Museum of New Mexico . . . encompasses a broad scope of activities and has been primarily responsible for the location, preservation, and maintenance of historical sites, each designated as a State Monument; whereas the State Park Commission has within its system only one facility of real historical significance.

From Wyoming, the director of the Wyoming State Archives and Historical Department states that by act of the legislature (1959) this department is now to assume the duties of the former Historical Landmarks Commission. As of the present summer, therefore, the state of Wyoming is formulating a new, and it is said, an ambitious program.

From Nevada, the chairman of the State Park Commission expresses hearty approval of the criteria adopted in the Arizona program and is hopeful that Nevada will establish similar practices. It is the Nevada chairman's opinion, and that of commission members generally, that ". . . historically significant sites, especially those of statewide interest, ought to be cared for by state agencies." Their feeling is that sites of lesser significance should become the special responsibilities of counties or local municipalities.

Under such a circumstance there always arises a serious question as to who should preserve what — and inevitably then, the question as to whether some sites even though of consequence may be preserved at all, where responsibility itself remains unsettled.

In Montana the state parks agency is a division under the State Highway Commission. Its director reports as follows:

. . . we believe that individual states have a primary responsibility to preserve and interpret their historic sites and monuments. . . . The state of Montana cannot set itself up as a good example. . . . The reason for this is that we simply have not had the money — not because there is not a desire on the part of the State Park Administration.

These words regarding funds have a familiar sound, and it is no coincidence that their echo is the same whether heard in the Wasatch, the Bitterroots, or the Cascades. California seems to be the exception.

A letter from the historian of the Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission says:

We believe our historical areas should be preserved and interpreted. . . . People cannot be attracted from the East or Midwest merely by rest rooms, camping areas, or picnic grounds. We do know that many people come across the country to view our historical sites as well as our scenic and geological wonders. As we interpret these areas to the people we . . . have preserved our heritage.

And it is at this point precisely that I feel the academic historian must leave at times the archives and his chair to go into the field itself and serve a vital role, not merely as an informer, but as a compelling interpreter of historical fact. In 1954 Washington had only fifteen historical sites. As of this summer it has twenty-nine. The Washington letter concludes with this line: "In addition, we have five historical museums. This will indicate our interest in historical interpretation!'

Concerning the California program, the following facts are taken from a letter of the chief of the Division of Beaches and Parks of the

California Department of Natural Resources, under whose authority the historical resources program is administered.

1. Here again the director pointedly stresses the need to interpret effectively whatever is preserved.

2. At the present time some thirty historical areas are included in the State Park System. These range in theme from early Indian to things recent.

3. In addition to the responsibility for historical parks and monuments, the Division of Beaches and Parks in California has the duty of registering all historical landmarks in the state. This is the case even though most of these markers have been established by lesser governmental divisions or by private groups. More than 680 such landmarks have been registered in California in conformity with legislative criteria.

4. The California program has been worked out to provide close co-operation between the Division of Beaches and Parks and other branches of state government as well as with federal agencies, county and municipal governments, and with private groups.

5. Despite all that is being done in California, the director concludes that in a state whose population now numbers fifteen million and is destined to increase enormously still, "much else needs to be done while there is yet time."

6. Important new efforts of acquisition and restoration are currently being launched in California. Among these are the Columbia Historic State Park, the Pueblo de Los Angeles Historical Monument, and (one of their most recent and important acquisitions) the Hearst San Simeon State Historical Monument containing, among many other things of importance, one of the nation's outstanding art exhibits.

Seen in total perspective, the efforts being made by the Western states, while varying greatly as to both organizational pattern and degree of effort, are largely uniform as to main attitudes and objectives. Dominant among these attitudes is the conviction that a state's historical resources are immensely worth preserving and that it is a fundamental duty of the state to preserve them. In proportion to the degree of acceptance of this attitude in any state, funds have been augmented to support programs set up. Currently, however, the budget provided in any state (unless it is California) does not seem to have risen to a point wherein funds meet needs.

The cemetery near old Camp Floyd, site of the Johnston Army encampment, 1858—61, was for many years run down and neglected, marked only by a fence and a monument erected to the memory of the soldiers, officers, and civilian employees who died during the Utah campaign. The site is now under the jurisdiction of the State Parks Commission and with the co-operative efforts of the Utah State Historical Society and volunteer workers those buried there have been identified and appropriate markers placed. The grounds will be landscaped and maintained as a unit of the state parks system.

THE UTAH PROGRAM

Since the coming of the first Utah pioneers in July, 1847, Utah people generally have been extremely pioneer-minded; and this amounts, in turn, to their having been very historically minded.

But here as elsewhere the state as official sponsor and guardian of its own history has been slow to act. This condition, while not totally excusable, is largely explainable by the fact that Utah history has been greatly conditioned throughout all of the state by Mormon pioneer settlement, and in church writings at least (subject to the religious perspective) appears much of the state's written history which otherwise might not have been written at all. Along with such written record and out of this pronounced pioneer history interest have been saved many objects, relics, early buildings, and sites which also might have been lost to time.

But not until 1957 did Utah enact a law creating a State Park and Recreation Commission, one of whose major responsibilities as stipulated by the law is to acquire and preserve, among other things, historical monuments and sites in the state. The legal arrangement whereby members of the commission are secured is clearly indicative of the close dependence intended by the law between related branches of the state government. Of the twelve-man commission, seven are ex-officio members, including the director of the Utah State Historical Society. All members are selected because of an understanding and demonstrated interest in problems centering in the park and recreation program along with its historical interests. As a matter of bodi preference and of need, the efforts of the Utah State Park and Recreation Commission are carried on throughout all areas of the state in the closest possible collaboration with county and city administrators, church groups, business organizations, societies, or other agencies concerned in any way with state history and in the preservation of its evidences for the people.

In the newly established Utah State Park and Recreation Commission, the efforts being launched to expand and improve park and recreational areas are inseparable at many points from efforts needed to secure, restore, and make available to the public those historical resources of the state not already preserved and maintained by other groups. Granted an initial budget of $50,000 in 1957 (a sum smaller than that needed for park maintenance in many city systems) the Utah Commission has nevertheless worked vigorously, and has attempted whenever possible to use the logic and eloquence of its advocates instead of cash. To date some sizeable favors and much collaboration have been achieved from agencies, organizations, or private persons having strong faith in the value of the things the commission was expressly created to promote. Among the specific agencies offering valued support to the Parks Commission are: the National Park Service, the California Division of Beaches and State Parks, the Utah National Guard, the State Highway Commission, Utah State Tourist and Publicity Council, and the Utah State Historical Society. The Historical Society, in its attentive and constant concern for all things related to state and regional history, has been an indispensable ally. And prior to the creation of a state park commission, the Society served not merely to keep state and regional history alive and warm through effective use of the written word, but took to the field itself to secure and preserve various important sites in the state. Our state Park Commission, at its inception, was the fortunate beneficiary of these acts.

The Rockefeller family, as an extension of its long-standing concern for conservation, donated $20,000 to the Utah Park Commission to further its program. In making this gift, the money was offered (among other stated reasons) to further Utah's historic interests and as "seed money to encourage other gifts."

The State Land Board, the Fish & Game Department, the Water and Power Board — in fact all state agencies — have been most co-operative.

Motivated in part by the Rockefeller suggestion, gifts from within the state have already been forthcoming. These mark the beginning, we hope, of others yet to come — all of importance in a program of acquisition which we are keenly eager to expand and accelerate.

Responsible in large measure for the careful, scrutinizing look being directed in Utah toward conservation of the state's resources (including its historical ones) is Harold P. Fabian, a retired lawyer serving without salary as chairman of the Utah State Park and Recreation Commission. As a long-time friend of ardent conservationists, Mr. Fabian has been invaluable to the commission in drawing influential businessmen and others of high professional caliber to serve on hard-working committees, survey teams, and regional study groups. As a result of such leadership, an encouraging number of sizeable projects already have been completed or are currently being developed. Various other committee members are also giving excellent service to the state.

These two homes built by important early Mormon leaders represent types of early architecture and depict extremes of frontier life. President Brigham Young wintered in his St. George home (above) from 1874 until his death in 1877. The home (below) in Santa Clara of facob Hamblin, missionary to the Indians, was built in 1863 and occupied by his family until 1870. Both are being restored and preserved under the state parks program.

Perhaps I can conclude my remarks regarding the Utah effort in no better way than by quoting from two sources. The first is an excerpt from a letter received a year ago from the director of the National Park Service concerning some of the survey work in Utah then in progress:

. . . there are doubtless many problems to be faced by the commission in launching its program. But whatever you are able to accomplish now is a lasting investment in the future of Utah and in the welfare of its present and future citizens. ... I hope you will consider seriously the "high cost of waiting," and take bold forward-looking steps on acquisition of lands before spiraling property values or other uses of the land make areas unattainable. . . .

My second quotation involves Governor Clyde's emphasis of the commission's responsibilities in preserving the historical heritage of the state, in which he said: "This is your heritage. Cherish it, preserve it, protect, foster it. Transmit knowledge of it to your children and all who come after us."

It is in such spirit that we are pressing ahead with the Utah program as vigorously and as wisely as we know how.

INTERPRETING HISTORICAL RESOURCES

I should dislike to conclude this paper without re-emphasizing as strongly as I can this point: that only to the extent that our interpretive techniques are effective is the whole effort of preserving an historical resource worthwhile. Initially, I think this means that we must combine all of our best interests with all such major agencies of public influence as the school, book publisher, magazine and newspaper editor, tourist agency, radio and television to help the public know more fully (what you and I are supposed to know so well) that history itself is important. Obviously this must be accomplished by continuing effort, but ultimately it must be done more fully and perfectly if the things we preserve are to gain meaning rather than remain objects of mere curiosity.

The person who carries to Gettysburg only curiosity, knowing nothing of the great war issues, or of Lincoln and of all he symbolizes, is likely to carry away from Gettysburg nothing that impresses the mind or touches the heart. The person who visits Utah's Pioneer Monument, knowing nothing of the history that motivated the migration of eighty thousand dedicated people by wagon or by handcart may see in Brigham Young only an anonymous and meaningless figure looking down from a sixty-foot granite shaft.

Through persistent and ingenious alliances with forces such as I have named, perhaps we can help people know more truly that good history is prophecy in retrospect; that history and its objects are the only witnesses qualified to give expert testimony of things passed; that history, adequately understood, is a voice forever sounding across the centuries to reveal not merely what men thought or said or did, but giving clues to what is universally right or wrong. In this perhaps we can help John and Mary Citizen and more of the Little Citizens know with Voltaire (and with us) the important fact that history can be written truly enough only in societies of free men.

Basic also to the interpretation of our historical resources must be, I think, a more positive effort to help the people of any state know that local or provincial history is important. I suspect that the word history transmitted into some kind of image in the general mind is most commonly an old man with a dim eye and a long gray beard. I suspect too that if this old man is not quite dead, he dwells, of necessity, in a remote land. But perhaps we can help people to know more surely that history is people of all ages, all colors, ancient and immediate, existing in all times, and in all places — often as close to home as Butch Cassidy's old log cabin, or Miles Goodyear's log hut on the Ogden which served as the first permanent post in Utah.

I borrow words written by Dr. William Mulder of the University of Utah (as printed in the Utah Historical Quarterly, January, 1959) to impress this idea more fully:

... A history of the world narrowly conceived and poorly written may be very parochial, whereas the history of a town or country written with insight and imagination and a sense of the humanly significant may be universal. All history is inescapably local history, in the sense that it happened in a particular place at a particular time. Yet a musket fired at Concord Bridge may be the shot heard round the world, or a word spoken at Gettysburg find itself addressed to the ages. . . . The eddy is always part of the larger current. . . . The waters of history originate in a thousand remote and local springs, but they all issue in the same great sea that is the story of mankind.

I shall not pretend to tell you specifically how Voltaire's ideas or Dr. Mulder's are to be made known and made meaningful to the public. I only know that the words are important and true, and that through our collective wits in the years ahead and in alliance with all good educative forces we should help to plant the spirit of such words in the minds of people in every state. Only to the extent that this is achieved can all the labor of acquiring and preserving historical resources bear fruit.

In addition, provision should be made on the site itself with the most ingenious interpretive statements and other devices we can contrive. This means that through the adroitly written word, through impressive and expertly produced audio-visual aids, and through other eye-catching, thought-stimulating, and sentiment-stirring devices, we must learn more fully how to capture interest and impress deeply, when too often we have been content merely to inform. In this, and in this especially, the administrators of state programs need both the knowledge and the interpretive understandings which only the qualified historian can well enough supply.

For full citations and images please view this article on a desktop.