Lake Roosevelt Administrative History

Concessions at LARO, 1957-1986

National Park Service concessionaires at LARO and other parks face a number of challenges, including seasonal operation; the need to have Park Service approval of all facility plans, designs, and materials; and Park Service regulation of rates, prices, and sale items. But the advantages include protection from competition and a guaranteed flow of customers. In 1958, the Park Service extended the maximum term of concession contracts from twenty to thirty years to provide additional advantages to concessionaires. The Concession Policy Act of 1965 reaffirmed the established concession-related policies of the Park Service. It required the Park Service to limit concessions to those necessary and appropriate to the parks' purposes, and it tried to ensure a reasonable opportunity for concessionaires to make a profit. The concessionaire may gain a "possessory interest" (all but legal title) to physical improvements, plus it has preferential rights for renewal, if operations are satisfactory. Legislation in 1970 confirmed that all Park Service areas, including NRAs, come under Park Service concession statutes. [92]

Kettle Falls Marina, 1958. Photo courtesy of National Park Service, Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area (LARO.FS).

From the termination of the GCNC contract in 1956 until the 1980s, LARO concessionaires were small mom-and-pop operations, typically run by individuals or couples who offered visitors seasonal snack shops and perhaps docks and marina services. Most had such a low volume of business that LARO had difficulty finding people to operate them. Some years, the services were minimal at best. In 1957, for example, the only concession operation at LARO was a small food stand at Spring Canyon. In some of the major development sites in the late 1950s, boaters on Lake Roosevelt were advised to contact LARO rangers to obtain fuel for their boats. LARO's Mission 66 program called for concessionaires at Kettle Falls, Fort Spokane, North Marina, and Spring Canyon. The facilities desired included cabins and lodges, trailer sites, stores, eating facilities, gas stations, and docks. By 1963, however, LARO had decided that concessionaire accommodations were not necessary at LARO because private developments in nearby communities were adequate. [93]

Concessionaires Mr. and Mrs. William Brauner and LARO Superintendent Homer Robinson at the Kettle Falls boathouse, 1958. Photo courtesy of National Park Service, Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area (LARO.FS).

In 1966, at the end of the Mission 66 program, LARO's visitor and administrative facilities reflected the lack of concessionaire investment in the NRA. Park Service facilities were valued at close to $760,000, while concession facilities were worth just over $4,000. [94]

Throughout the 1970s, LARO's concession operations continued to be marginal for most permittees. For example, only two of the eight concession permittees grossed over $5,000 in 1974. A permit for the rental of houseboats was issued for the first time for the 1973 season, but the concessionaire was hurt by the gas shortage. Another new idea was that of having students operate the Spring Canyon concession for school credit, which was put into effect in 1976 but was cancelled at the end of the year due to a substantial financial loss. LARO also implemented the Park Service's new Servicewide Concession Evaluation system in 1976. LARO staff worked on establishing a marina concession at Seven Bays, and this opened in 1978 with thirty boat slips and a small store (this concession, originally operated by developer Win Self, is now managed by the CCT). [95]

Concession stand at Spring Canyon, 1968. This sandwich-and-pop stand was typical of LARO's concessions during the 1960s and 1970s. Photo courtesy of National Park Service, Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area (LARO.HQ.MENG).

By 1978, LARO's two potential full-spectrum concession operations were located at Seven Bays and at Keller Ferry. A concession was needed at Kettle Falls, but previous efforts had proven to be economically unfeasible. Visitors surveyed that year opposed having restaurants and lodging facilities within the NRA, but they complained about the lack of showers and thought water ski areas, moorage, marine repair and supply services, boat trailer parking, hookups, and boat rentals might be desirable. Park staff identified additional boat moorage as LARO's greatest need, followed by boat maintenance services. The four concessionaires operating in 1978, all on five-year revocable concession permits, were as follows: 1) snack bar and boat fueling service at Spring Canyon, 2) marina with moorage for fifty boats at Keller Ferry, 3) thirty-boat marina at Seven Bays, and 4) camper supply and boat fueling service at Kettle Falls. LARO Superintendent William Dunmire noted that the Park Service would likely authorize the expansion of the two existing marinas, although it had been taking a "go-slow posture" in authorizing requests for additional concession services. [96]

By 1981, the value of the concession facilities at LARO had jumped to $230,000, about 8 percent of the value of Park Service visitor facilities. All LARO concessions (Spring Canyon, Keller Ferry, Seven Bays, and Kettle Falls) took in about $80,000 in gross receipts in that year. Some of the concessionaires were severely impacted by the unanticipated low lake levels in 1984 and 1985 during the visitor season. Congress established a Visitor Facility Fund in 1982 that used the franchise and building use fees charged concessionaires to fund maintenance and rehabilitation of government-owned, concessionaire-operated visitor facilities. As visitation to Lake Roosevelt increased in the 1980s, various landowners and corporations made proposals to LARO for concession operations, and LARO staff began to feel the need for a lake-wide comprehensive concession management plan. [97]

The CCT actively investigated a partnership proposal with the Del E. Webb Corporation, which had facilities at Lake Powell, for developing a marina-resort at Seven Bays, but in 1986 that company decided against the joint venture. [99]

Tribal Regulation of Concessions within the Indian Zones, to 1975

The question of tribal rights to regulate and administer concessions located in LARO's Indian Zones was raised as early as 1958. As a result, LARO Superintendent Homer Robinson asked the Solicitor's Office for an opinion on the authority of the Park Service to regulate and administer concessions in the recreation area's Indian Zones. The 1958 opinion held that Indians had the same rights and opportunities for private and commercial uses and public recreational development of the entire reservoir as any other member of the general public but did not have the exclusive right to use the Indian Zones for such purposes. The Solicitor noted that in 1946 representatives of the Park Service, Office of Indian Affairs, and Reclamation favored having a central administrative agency control all commercial uses of the reservoir, including within the Indian Zones. So, the Park Service was granted the responsibility for approving and supervising the operation of any concession within the NRA, and the tribes were given no preference in obtaining concession contracts within the Indian Zones. [100]

Attorneys for the STI questioned whether the Park Service had the power to prohibit and regulate Indian recreational concessions in the Indian Zones. They were particularly concerned about the LARO proposal for a concession at Fort Spokane, immediately across the Spokane River from their reservation. Robinson noted that none of the four sites proposed for concession operations on Lake Roosevelt were within the Indian Zones. His main concern was that LARO would not be able to develop satisfactory concessions unless it could offer preferential contracts to protect the Park Service concessionaire from marginal businesses. [101]

A 1974 Solicitor's Opinion dealt with tribal rights at Lake Roosevelt. In 1975, both tribes responded to this opinion by passing resolutions that tested the limits of the opinion point by point. Related to LARO concessions, both tribes claimed exclusive jurisdiction over concessions permits within the reservations, including the freeboard land that had been part of the NRA. [102]