To Know the Institutional Knowledge - Part I

Mark at the Minuteman Missile National Historic Site, SD
(Photos by Mark)

The images I posted here are some of the places I lived and worked, and flourished (Minuteman Missile National Historic Site, Rio Grande Wild & Scenic River, San Antonio Missions National Historical Park, and Big Bend National Park). 

Did you know that the NPS has traditionally had the highest public approval rating (in the 70% - 80% favorable column) of any federal agency for decades? Even today, in this time of social challenges, America’s national park areas remain number one. But do most people really “understand” the National Park System/and Service – the history, the purpose, the values? 

Authors have written many chapters about the beginnings of the NPS. One chapter shows that it wasn’t created overnight. Instead, the script for the Bill to create a “Park Service” (in 1916) was a result of several years of discussion, debate, and lobbying by 16 individuals meeting off-and-on in the DC apartment of Robert Sterling Yard. 

Other historic names attending included Frederick Law Olmstead Jr., Robert Marshall, Representatives William Kent and John Raker, Senator Reed Smoot, Enos Mills, Gilbert Grosvenor, and Horace Albright. Stephen Mather stopped by too; not as an author of the Bill, but to orchestrate the presence of the “powerful” others. Their final product was introduced into Congress, passed and became the National Park Service Organic Act of 1916. 

The “Act” is a brief piece of legislation but astonishingly summed-up in one sentence that the Service is: “…to conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and the wild life therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations.”  

What words in that one sentence are “meaningful” to you and is the sentence arrangement important?  
Even when some people have heard of the Organic Act, it is easy to use that word “enjoyment” to fulfill their own ideas without fully knowing/understanding the intent of the authors, the administrative history, Congressional Committee hearings and discussions, and the Congressional Record of the House and Senate.

Sometimes people believe the NPS must balance two incompatible missions: to conserve resources and to provide public access i.e. enjoyment. 

It’s an old argument that was settled long ago. At no point was ”enjoyment” equated with recreation, and it is clearly circumscribed by “unimpaired.” Papers of Congressional Committee members make clear that there are two goals for which the Act refers to listed in order of importance – conservation is paramount while enjoyment refers to the public’s opportunity to experience, appreciate, and learn from the natural and historic objects through activities that are inspirational and educational. 

This enjoyment is not just a selfish pleasure but an active appreciation. Furthermore, rules of rhetorical style (circa 1916) called for listing goals in descending order. Again, the first “enjoyment” refers to enjoyment of the resources – not personal recreation; the second ”enjoyment” is critical too – basically, that present-day enjoyment is a privilege that comes with an obligation to pass on the resources, unimpaired, to future generations. Amazing how it took the authors a year to select and order just the right words!

The next time you are on social media, please don’t opine about others challenging the purpose of the NPS – you now have real data. 

So, when you read some troll spewing weird concoctions from Project 2025, it is ok to calmly reply with real facts from the administrative history of the authors. Or when some political appointee spins around and around you can cite the Congressional Record. Or when some Administration asserts personal beliefs, you can fact check, with composure, the law of the NPS Organic Act.

Rio Grande Wild and Scenic River , TX

San Antonio Missions National Historical Park, TX

Big Bend National Park, TX