Bandelier Administrative History

Other Federal agencies in the region also initiated programs that affected Bandelier, and the USDA Forest Service often collided with the NPS. The roots of conflict between the two agencies dated back to the founding of the Park Service in 1916, and relations on the Pajarito Plateau could rarely have been characterized as friendly. The Park Service regularly sought Forest Service land to expand, and the foresters consistently opposed NPS efforts. After 1960, however, relations became cordial, and the two agencies cooperated with some regularity as they pursued often antithetical missions. The values and cultures of the two agencies dramatically differed, and each side viewed the other with considerable mistrust.

The Roadless Area Review and Evaluation (RARE I & II) processes of the 1970s clearly revealed the difference in perspective between the Park and Forest Services. RARE I, the initial stage in evaluating national forest land for inclusion in the national wilderness system under the terms of the Wilderness Act of 1964, began in 1973, but it was an incomplete, slow process that frustrated both preservation advocates and those who wanted to develop national forest land. In 1977, the Forest Service came out with the RARE II proposal, designed to speed up the review process and include all national forest land in the U.S. [35]

Although a solid idea in principle, the implementation of RARE II offended wilderness advocates in the West. The emphasis of the Forest Service on multiple-use—the doctrine of balancing a number of different kinds of uses of national forest land— angered the wilderness community, as did the quantitative nature of the assessment of roadless areas. The Forest Service proposed a formula that assigned numeric values in each of four categories to each roadless tract of more than 5,000 acres. On that basis, the Forest Service compared the areas and placed them in one of three categories: instant wilderness, further review, or unsuited for wilderness designation.

Despite the efforts of the Forest Service to involve the public, wilderness advocates found the process unsatisfactory. From the perspective of organizations like the New Mexico Wilderness Study Committee, the term "multiple-use" was a euphemism for development. Environmentalists believed that the RARE II process was designed to move quickly in order to placate development interests, and the quantitative measurement system was a threat to any equitable assessment of the aesthetic value of wild land. [36]

The Park Service favored the goals of RARE II, but believed that the selection process was cumbersome and ineffective. Additional wilderness areas fit the objectives of the Park Service. But in the Southwest, where relations remained rancorous, numerous problems grew out of the evaluation process. The two agencies perceived differing qualities of the same tracts of land. [37]

The Forest Service reviewed two areas of the Santa Fe National Forest adjacent to Bandelier—the St. Peter's Dome area west of the Bandelier wilderness and the Caja del Rio area, east of the Rio' Grande—for possible inclusion in the national wilderness system. From the point of view of the Park Service and the pro-wilderness community, the areas offered important additions to the wilderness area already enclosed in the monument. The New Mexico Wilderness Committee strongly advocated a recommendation of instant wilderness for both.

In contrast, the wilderness values of the areas did not impress the Forest Service. "Wood-hauler rut roads" crisscrossed the Caja del Rio section, and the "high water level" of Cochiti Dam separated it from the Bandelier wilderness. The Forest Service valued the wild character of the Dome section even less. Of the fourteen areas within the Santa Fe National Forest assessed by the quantitative formula, the Dome section rated the lowest. [38]

Again the values of the two agencies differed. While the aesthetic qualities of the two areas did not meet the criteria of the Forest Service, the Park Service saw these two areas as logical extensions of the established wilderness within the monument. The designation of the area surrounding the park as wilderness had the added benefit of offering additional protection for the area within park boundaries. It guaranteed that the wilderness area within the monument would not be damaged by the development of its watershed.

In June 1978, the Park Service received the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for RARE II from the Forest Service, and made its comments. Despite the negative appraisals, the draft document included two areas adjacent to Bandelier: the 15,000-acre Dome tract and the 9,000-acre Caja area. John Hunter indicated that the inclusion of both tracts in designated wilderness areas would benefit the wilderness within the monument. [39]

When the final Forest Service RARE II plan emerged in early 1979, the regional office of the Park Service and the administration at Bandelier were both unhappy with the results. The Forest Service proposed the designation of only 6,000 acres of the Dome area as wilderness, slicing seventy-five percent of the total wilderness acreage near Bandelier recommended in the draft proposal. The decision of the Forest Service did little to reconcile the differences between Federal agencies on the Pajarito Plateau.

RARE II also displeased the environmental movement and its followers. Earlier in the process, a coalition of the most important conservation and environmental groups, including the Wilderness Society, the Sierra Club, Friends of the Earth, and the National Audubon Society recommended wilderness designation for thirty-six million of the sixty-two million acres reviewed by the Forest Service. The final proposal of the USDA Forest Service included the designation of slightly more than fifteen million acres, less than one fourth of the acreage reviewed. The coalition pronounced the proposal "an acute disappointment." [40]

The question of timber sales on land adjacent to Bandelier offered another classic forum for conflict between the Park and Forest Services. RARE II complicated the relationship between the two agencies on the Pajarito Plateau; the suggestion that the Forest Service convert areas adjacent to the monument into designated wilderness made foresters wary of what they perceived as the policy of incremental additions practiced by the Park Service. This issue played an integral part in the long-standing tension between the two agencies. The NPS regarded development of adjacent roadless lands as part of a plot by the Forest Service to disqualify the areas from future consideration as wilderness. A polarization of relations between the two agencies resulted.

The La Mesa fire of 1977 served as a catalyst for renewed discord over the issue of timber cutting on land adjacent to the monument. The fire damaged more than 15,000 acres of land, including portions of the monument, the national forest, and Department of Energy land. Immediately following the fire, Cristobal Zamora, the Supervisor of the Santa Fe National Forest, held a salvage timber sale of questionable legality for Sawyer Mesa, part of the watersheds of both Alamo and Frijoles canyons. The area to be salvaged was part of the proposed St. Peter's Dome wilderness, and the impacts of the salvage operation made the area unsuitable for wilderness.

Superintendent John Hunter viewed the event with consternation. The Forest Service had not consulted the NPS before letting the contract, and its lack of concern for the position of the NPS perturbed Hunter. He wrote Regional Director John Cook that the Park Service spent more than $1,300,000 to purchase the watershed in Upper Frijoles Canyon "to prevent this same event from occurring on private lands and now it is taking place on Federal lands." Hunter wanted the Park Service to attempt to "curtail" the salvage operation and convince the Forest Service that Bandelier needed some kind of buffer zone along the joint boundaries to protect the monument from adverse affects. [41]

Yet Hunter's remarks also revealed the suspicion that characterized the relationship between the two agencies. He noted that the Wilderness Society had suggested the addition of the Dome area to the designated wilderness in Bandelier, and mused that the "entire action may be an action by the [Santa Fe National] Forest to remove [the Dome area] permanently from future consideration." [42]

The two agencies remained at loggerheads. Cook instructed Hunter to open channels of communication with the foresters. Despite the efforts of the Park Service, the Forest Service continued to let salvage timber in the area surrounded Bandelier. The issue became a point of contention between the Santa Fe National Forest and the staff at Bandelier National Monument. The National Parks Conservation Association and other conservation groups recommended that the two agencies work out a cooperative plan for the administration of the area, but they made little progress toward that objective.

Because of a lack of access roads, some tracts could not be leased. One 2,650-acre tract of national forest land on the western edge of Bandelier needed a road that crossed the Headwaters of the Frijoles section of the monument to allow a lessee to remove the timber. In 1979, the Forest Service approached John Hunter to request a right-of-way for a road to facilitate the sale. "On the basis of agency policy and congressional intent," Hunter denied the request. [43]

In 1981, the Forest Service reapplied for a right-of-way for a road across the headwaters section. This time, however, Deputy Regional Forester James C. Overbay circumvented Hunter and took his request to John Cook's successor as regional director, Robert Kerr. Overbay enclosed Forest Service studies that showed of the ten possible road courses the foresters proposed, the route across NPS land offered the only feasible alternative. Economic, environmental, and engineering reasons made the other choices untenable. [44]

The Forest Service had a precedent for a right-of-way across Bandelier. In 1964, the foresters requested a right-of-way for Sanchez Canyon in the far southwestern corner of the monument. The portion of the Santa Fe National Forest to the west of the monument had little access; the Baca Location #1 bordered its north side, the Cañada de Cochiti grant was to the south, Bandelier closed off access from the east, and steep canyons made passage from the west too difficult. While the owners of the Baca and Cañada de Cochiti tracts allowed intermittent access, they sometimes locked the gates and prevented passage by the foresters. In early 1964, the owners of the Baca Location granted the Forest Service a right-of-way, and construction of a road in the national forest near the western boundary of the monument began. This development pleased the administration at Bandelier. Some visitors to the monument wanted to use the Dome road to gain access to backcountry trails. But continuing the road to the south presented intricate problems.

The Forest Service needed access to Sanchez Canyon as a result of the actions of Jim Young, the owner of the Cañada de Cochiti grant. Young offered the USFS a right-of-way across his land, but his stipulations made Sanchez Canyon the only feasible way to complete the route. With the support of U.S. Senator from New Mexico Joseph P. Montoya, the Forest Service began to survey the right-of-way, and pressed the Park Service for an answer.

Although in 1962-63, the Bandelier-Valle Grande National Park proposal and the sale of the Baca Location #1 out from under the Park Service had chilled relations between the Park and Forest Services, Bandelier Superintendent Albert G. Henson had no objections to the proposal. The road would only cross an "isolated tip" of the monument, he wrote the regional office, and it seemed a small price to pay for a chance at meaningful cooperation. The regional office concurred with Henson, and by July 1964, the two agencies reached an agreement. The Forest Service enlarged an old wagon trail through Sanchez Canyon, and used the road until 1971. [45]

In response to the request for a right-of-way in 1981, Robert Kerr organized a meeting that included himself, John Hunter, and James Overbay with the premise that "we can work out something beneficial to both agencies." At the meeting on April 28, 1981, Kerr granted a permit across NPS lands for one year following the date of the timber sale. On August 12, 1981, the Park Service issued the Forest Service a permit for a one- quarter-mile road across park lands. [46]

Despite the seeming insignificance of a small road through the park, the action set dangerous precedents. Under the sympathetic Carter administration and its Secretary of the Interior, Cecil Andrus, Hunter and the park staff had resisted the overtures of the Forest Service. When James Watt became Secretary of the Interior, the agency found itself in a defensive position. Many in the park believed that the Department of the Interior dictated the course of action, revealing interference in a local issue that contradicted the states-rights rhetoric of the "New Federalism." Worse, the precedent meant that in the future, the NPS would have a more difficult time when it insisted on the sanctity of its mandate. Little actions like the timber road across the monument could become pieces of evidence for increasing attempts to make commercial use of the resources of the national park system.