Bandelier Administrative History

During the maneuvering aimed at arranging the transfer of the two tracts, the long-dormant effort to create a national park on the Pajarito Plateau began to revive. The new attempt, which proposed the inclusion of Valles Caldera, began when Bandelier concessionaire Mrs. Evelyn C. Frey wrote Senator Dennis Chavez on February 26, 1961, to inform him that the 100,000-acre Baca Location no. 1 was for sale. Chavez contacted the Park Service, and the agency began to dust off old plans for the region. Meanwhile, Chavez got Clinton P. Anderson, the other senator from New Mexico, interested in the project.

The ranking Democrat on the Senate Public Lands Committee, Anderson was an influential figure on Capitol Hill. His conservation credentials stretched back to the 1920s, when he was instrumental in bringing the Teapot Dome scandal to light. Once in the Senate, Anderson became a power on Capitol Hill. By the 1960s, he was a fixture. Tall, forceful, and tubercular, Anderson began to promote the project.

NPS officials in Washington also explored the park possibilities of the Pajarito Plateau for the first time in a number of years. In June 1961, Director Wirth wrote a memo limited to office use to Regional Director Thomas J. Allen, to inform him that the agency was interested in acquiring the Baca and changing Bandelier from a national monument to a national park. "Confidentially," Wirth added, "Senator Anderson is very much interested in this and so is the Secretary [of the Interior, Stewart Udall]." [31] The Baca was for sale, but the owners, the Bond family, held it off the market, waiting to see if a national park in the region was feasible. The Canyon De San Diego grant, also a part of the Jemez Crater proposal, was also for sale, but Wirth thought there was little in that tract suited for park status.

Conditions upon the plateau had changed since the Second World War, and as a result, the options of the agency were limited. Allen responded by informing Wirth that the one- million-acre Jemez Crater proposal of 1939, the basis upon which the agency relied for its justification of the new national park idea, was "certainly not feasible [in 1961]. . . . we should recognize that the proposal today is not the proposal recommended as nationally significant in 1939." Allen also believed that the Valle Grande bill was an extremely controversial measure, for it would encounter bitter resistance from the Forest Service. He pointed to the Frijoles Mesa acquisition as evidence. Although the land in question in that case belonged to the AEC, the Forest Service opposed the transfer to the NPS. "We ought to be very sure of our ground before we get further involved," the battle-seasoned Allen wrote. "We can expect a real fight on this larger proposal." [32]

The Forest Service continued to oppose the idea of a national park on the Pajarito Plateau, while the Park Service explored new alternatives. Among the proposals advanced was one that made the larger area a national recreation area instead of a national park. The USFS had more trouble opposing the recreation area. It would not arouse the ire of the hunting constituency of the USFS, whose sport would be prohibited by the creation of a national park. [33]

NPS regional officials, however, were not really interested in a national recreation area. They began to look for other ways to accommodate the USFS. The initial Bandelier-Valle Grande proposal, S. 3321, would have added a total of 185,383 acres to the existing monument to make it a national park. Of the total, 100,000 would be purchased from the owners of the Baca ranch, while the USFS would transfer another 67,500 acres. Forest Service opposition to a project of this magnitude was sure to be fierce and unending. NPS officials knew they would have to cut back on the amount of land that they requested.

The Forest Service was no more interested in allowing the establishment of a large national park on the Pajarito Plateau in 1961 than it had been during the 1920s. Nevertheless, Park Service officials tried to get their old foes to acquiesce. On August 25, 1961, NPS and USFS regional officials met to discuss the issue. Both sides agreed to a joint study of the area, but there was little other common ground. The NPS could not yet count on the support of USFS officials.

NPS officials knew that a compromise that insured USFS support of the position of the Park Service was essential to the success of the park effort, but Secretary of the Interior Stewart Udall was the person who found the middle ground. In October 1961, supporters of the park proposal, including Anderson, Udall, New Mexico Congressmen Joseph A. Montoya and Thomas G. Morris, USFS and NPS representatives, and George W. Savage, who represented the estate of Frank Bond, toured the Baca area. Aware of potential USFS resistance, Udall proposed that about 30,000 acres of the Baca be incorporated in the new national park, while the remaining 67,000 be attached to the Santa Fe National Forest. In essence, Udall's proposal gave both agencies what they wanted.

As a result of Udall's stance, the NPS modified its stance in hopes of achieving a compromise. The Department of the Interior and the Park Service reviewed the proposed Valle Grande National Park and reduced its size considerably. Instead of 185,383 acres, the new proposal included only 30,745 acres of the Baca tract, the 3000-acre Upper Frijoles tract which the AEC was still in the process of transferring to the NPS, and the 30,649 acres of the existing national monument. The new proposal called for the transfer of the remaining 69,000 acres of the Baca to the Forest Service.

After public hearings in Santa Fe in September 1962, the USFS and NPS appeared to be reconciled to Udall's compromise. Both agencies testified in favor of the bill, as did other Government departments and members of the public. Will Orndorff, the President of the New Mexico Cattle Growers Association, was the only important objector. Orndorff and the livestock lobby preferred to see the land put to unrestricted commercial purposes.

The existing legislation still posed an obstacle. The original bill, S. 3321, did not reflect the Udall's compromise and died at the end of the Congressional session. New bills followed when Congress reconvened at the beginning of 1963. At the opening of the new session on January 9, 1963, Anderson introduced S. 47, which incorporated many of the new changes. Morris followed it with H. R. 1941 a week later. All the objections to the proposal had been satisfied, and the chances of the bills looked good.

But disaster struck, and the project began to disintegrate. On January 29, 1963, the Santa Fe New Mexican reported that a group of Texas investors, headed by James P. (Pat) Dunigan, had purchased the entire Baca tract. Although he announced that "the Government [was] not precluded from negotiating for a portion of the tract," Dunigan upset the balance of power. [34] The 66,000 acres that Udall wanted to add to the Santa Fe National Forest were no longer for sale, and the USFS had no reason to support Federal attempts to purchase 30,000 acres to create a new national park. The Forest Service lost interest. From its perspective, without something to sweeten the arrangement, it had no reason to support a proposal that enlarged the domain of its chief rival.

In any event, Dunigan had other plans, and he quickly encountered local animosity. He began work on a master plan for the development of the Baca. The local newspaper, the Los Alamos Monitor got hold of portions of his plan and publicly quoted it. In April 1963, the newspaper reported that Dunigan planned a ski area, racetrack, and resort community for the Baca. Upset at the prospect, representatives of Los Alamos County contacted state officials, and Dunigan's project received considerable scrutiny. The following day, the newspaper reported that the state racing commissioner was not aware of plans for a racetrack. Dunigan was not used to having his private business discussed in public. He angrily responded that his representative got carried away. His plans were not that extensive, but this did little to quell rumors of the beginning of a "little Texas" on the Pajarito Plateau. The rumors escalated, and the pressure increased. Finally, Dunigan abandoned development plans in June 1963, deciding that a working cattle ranch offered a better alternative.

The attempt to establish a national park was not yet dead. On July 15, 1963, both New Mexico Senators, Anderson and Edwin Mechem, introduced a new bill, S. 1870, that allowed the purchase of the 30,000 acres for the national park while eliminating the part of the Baca that the USFS was to acquire. Entitled the "Valle Grande-Bandelier National Park bill," Mechem claimed that the proposed park would be the biggest thing ever to happen to northern New Mexico.

The bill seemed likely to pass Congress. On October 21, 1963, the Department of the Interior reported favorably on it, and Anderson called a Senate Public Lands subcommittee meeting on the subject. When Anderson's Senate Public Lands subcommittee met to consider the bill on May 29, 1964, Pat Dunigan's opposition strangled the proposal. He testified in front of the committee, opposing the project on the grounds that a national park would stifle the economic potential of the area. Even with the persuasive Anderson as an advocate, subcommittee members believed the bill should be put aside. The subcommittee authorized the Department of the Interior to offer Dunigan $750,000 for the 30,000-acre tract. He refused to consider the offer.

The Park Service was out of options. The land it wanted for the Pajarito Plateau national park was not for sale. Dunigan was angry at both the Federal Government and the Los Alamos community and held the trump card in the region. There was little that Congress, the Department of the Interior, or the National Park Service could do. Anderson felt that the opportunity to acquire the Valle Grande had passed. [35] Despite Mechem and Anderson's urgings of grass roots support, the bill died at the end of 88th Congress. No one reintroduced a bill in the next session.

After the demise of the Valle Grande proposal in 1964, interest in new acquisitions at Bandelier waned. Without congressional action of any kind, grass roots advocates could not maintain local enthusiasm for the project. Park Service officials were aware of the possibility of Forest Service resistance, and Pat Dunigan did not appear willing to negotiate. Once again, efforts to create a national park on the Pajarito Plateau were stymied.