Grand Teton National Park
THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE LOOKS TOWARD THE
21ST CENTURY: THE 1988 GENERAL SUPERINTENDENTS
CONFERENCE AND DISCOVERY 2000
Janet A. McDonnell
January 2001
INTRODUCTION
In 1988 and 2000, the National Park Service held
major Service-wide conferences the first with the broad theme
"Planning for the 21st Century" and the second to shape a
vision for the 21st Century. The first one was held in the wonderfully
scenic environment of Grand Teton National Park in Wyoming and the
second one, twelve years later, in the shadow of St. Louis' soaring
arch. Each conference provides a "snapshot" of the Park Service at the
time its people, its programs, its priorities, and its values.
The meeting in St. Louis opened with a stirring video presentation that
posed the questions "Who are we?" and "What do we value?" And to some
extent, both conferences tell us something about how the Park Service
grappled with these fundamental questions.
Although both conferences were convened to address
the future of the Park Service, they differed in their setting, format,
organization, goals, and purpose. The "general superintendents
conference" at Jackson Lake Lodge in Grand Teton National Park was a
traditional superintendents conference. Most of the 500-plus
participants were park superintendents or assistant superintendents. The
second conference called "Discovery 2000" at the Regal Riverfront Hotel
in St. Louis, Missouri, was larger, more inclusive, more representative
of the Park Service as a whole, and specifically designed to include
"partners" who work with the Service to carry out the larger common
mission. By 1999 Park Service Director Robert Stanton had recognized the
need to shift from a traditional superintendents conference to a
different, more inclusive kind of meeting. Discovery 2000 was twice the
size of the Grand Teton conference with more than 1200 participants. In
addition to superintendents and assistant superintendents, this unique
conference included large numbers of cultural resource specialists,
archeologists, anthropologists, and interpreters. It also included
approximately 200 Park Service employees carefully selected as potential
leaders in the next century. The participants included a broader mix of
Park Service Washington and regional office staff, and representatives
from various federal, state, and local agencies, Indian tribes,
concessionaires, non-profit organizations, and foreign parks. Less than
25 percent of the participants were park superintendents, and only 70
percent of participants were Park Service members. [1]
Jefferson National Expansion Memorial
|
The format of the conferences varied. At Grand Teton
National Park, participants spent most of their time each day in large
plenary sessions listening to speakers, and though Discovery 2000
included plenary sessions, it was characterized more by approximately
140 smaller group sessions and workshops designed to stimulate creative
thought and discussion. The 1988 conference provided more opportunities
for relaxation and informal interaction than Discovery 2000. It
included a barbecue, wine tasting, art auction, a book-signing for
former Park Service Director George B. Hartzog, Jr., an art raffle, a
print-signing session with artist Morton Solberg, and a free afternoon
for participants to hike, raft, and enjoy the park. With over a decade
past since the last superintendents gathering, the conference at times
took on the flavor of a family reunion. Discovery 2000 included a few
evening activities: an opening reception at the Gateway Arch, a street
fair at the Laclede's Landing National Register Historic District, and a
baseball night at Busch Stadium. Park Service members who attended both
conferences observed that Grand Teton National Park offered a more
relaxed setting than St. Louis. There were more group meals and
activities at the park and more opportunities for informal discussions.
The Jackson Lake Lodge with its vast lobby and outside terrace was
particularly well-suited for these informal interactions. Participants
were invited to bring family members to the conference, at their own
expense.
Discovery 2000 was more intense and perhaps more
intellectually demanding on participants. Planners hoped to inspire and
extract "the best thought of each individual participant regarding the
long-range future." In the months before the conference, they sent
messages to each participant encouraging them to prepare mentally. To
encourage advance preparation, they distributed a reading list as well
as documents called "Duties of a Session Leader" and "Duties of a
Participant." Planners kept after-hours social events to a minimum
because they believed those activities were inconsistent with their goal
of a "hard-working" conference. [2]
The St. Louis conference incorporated some unique
features. There were scheduled journal writing sessions to encourage
participants to record their thoughts, perceptions, and experiences.
Conference planners set up a time capsule where participants were
encouraged to express their visions for the Park Service. Reflecting
the tremendous technological advances of the 1990s, conference
organizers established a specially designed "Discovery 2000" internet
web site that participants could use to register for the conference and
get other important conference information. The web site also allowed
"virtual participants" to receive the most current information about the
conference. Remarks by the keynote speakers, summaries of the sessions,
the daily conference newsletter, and media reports were posted
throughout the conference. Even after the conference ended, organizers
continued to use the web site as a tool for communicating with
participants.
Another unique feature at Discovery 2000 was the
"Expo 2000 Trade Show." The trade show, sponsored by the Jefferson
National Parks Association, consisted of nearly 80 exhibit spaces for a
variety of commercial vendors, non-profit organizations, and National
Park Service programs. It was designed as a marketplace for new and
innovative technologies, methods, and programs to help Park Service
managers and their partners "better cope with the 21st
century." "The idea was to have Expo be more than just a collection of
vendors and program offices, but a group of displays that would mirror
the forward-looking aspects of this conference," said Gary Cummins,
Harpers Ferry Center Manager. There was a greater emphasis on
environmentalism and sustainability in St. Louis. More than 20 of the
vendors at the Trade Show offered "green" products for sale to the Park
Service and other agencies. Vendors set up what was called an "ecology
tent" outside the hotel to demonstrate how habitats could teach people
to live more sustainably. [3]
Rocky Mountain National Park
|
The two conferences occurred in different political
environments. The 1988 meeting took place in a more combative political
environment at the end of President Ronald Reagan's Republican
administration during a period of budget decline. A week before the
conference, the Wilderness Society had issued a report calling on the
federal government to move all hotels and other concessions out of the
national parks and listing ten parks as endangered, including Rocky
Mountain and Yellowstone. In addition, the National Parks and
Conservation Association had recently issued a report recommending a $50
million annual increase in the Park Service's budget just to fix a
backlog of resource-management problems. A recent General Accounting
Office survey had concluded that the park service had an unmet need of
$1.9 billion for maintenance and capital improvements. [4]
In part reflecting the contentious nature of some
issues and the level of interest in the Park Service's response to these
reports, the 1988 conference received much media attention. Nearly 40
media representatives attended, to include CBS Evening News, ABC
World News Tonight, New York Times, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times,
Minneapolis Star Tribune, Atlanta Constitution, and smaller papers
in the West. Park Service related stories hit the front pages of
newspapers across America that week. [5] Discovery 2000, by contrast, drew only limited
media coverage. Conference Chair Jerry L. Rogers conceded that
organizers should have done more to make the media aware of the
importance of the conference. [6]
Sand Creek Massacre National Historic Site
|
Discovery 2000 came at the end of President William
Clinton's Democratic administration during a period of modest expansion
and significant change. The Service had experienced a major
restructuring in the mid-1990s. Funding for the national parks had
increased under the Clinton administration from $1.38 billion in 1992 to
$2.04 billion in 2000. That increase was in addition to $416 million
the Service had collected from admission fees since 1996. "We feel good
about the things that have gone on for the Park Service in the Clinton
administration," said Nat Wood, assistant director of external affairs
for the Park Service. During the Clinton administration several new
units had come into the national park system that reflected a growing
awareness of and emphasis on cultural diversity such as Little Rock
Central High School National Historic Site, Sand Creek Massacre Historic
Site, and Rosie the Riveter-WWII Home Front National Historic Site.
These units, said Director Stanton, honored the minorities and women who
had helped shape American history and culture. [7] President Clinton had established a number of new
National Monuments but had left most of them under the Forest Service
and the Bureau of Land Management. The effect that this practice would
have on the Park Service and the Service's future role in relationship
to these other agencies would become a subject for discussion at the
conference.
Although Discovery 2000 was more focused on the more
distant future than the Grand Teton conference, both addressed critical
issues facing the National Park Service. The problems the Park Service
faced in 1988 and 2000 were similar in many respects to include
development around park borders, invasive non-native species, air
pollution, and deteriorating roads and facilities. Some particularly
contentious issues were discussed in 1988 such as the reintroduction of
the timber wolf in Yellowstone and the potential politicizing of the
Park Service. The 1988 conference also focused on the current
legislative agenda and on communications and media relations, perhaps
reflecting the Park Service's desire and need to improve in this area.
Conference participants also addressed the future of the National Park
Service; park boundary expansion proposals; bio-diversity in the parks;
the use of marketing techniques to increase park visitation; demographic
changes; threats from outside park boundaries; and education. Some of
these same issues were discussed in St. Louis such as the future of the
Park Service, education, resource protection, the role of science,
bio-diversity; leadership; demographic changes, threats from outside
park boundaries, and environmentalism and sustainability.
A strong thread running through both meetings was the
continued conflict between two Park Service missions: recreation and
preserving resources. The conferences reflected the ongoing debate over
how best to accommodate park visitors. Both emphasized the increasing
threats to parks from outside their borders and the need to form
partnerships with surrounding communities. They emphasized the Park
Service's increasingly important role in educating the public. The
addressed the growing threat of invasive, non-native biological species.
At Discovery 2000, Park Service leaders indicated that the focus of the
agency's mission was shifting from accommodating visitors to
preservation of park resources. While the 1988 conference focused
primarily on Park Service units, Discovery 2000 emphasized the threats
to parks and park-like places everywhere on the planet and the need to
be assertive in working with others to protect those places. The
Service had launched what was known as the Natural Resource Challenge, a
program to give park managers a scientific basis for decision-making.
The initiative proposed to spend roughly $20 million a year over the
next few years to bring science back into the parks. A companion
initiative, the Cultural Resource Challenge, was announced at Discovery
2000.
The 1988 General
Superintendents Conference
When Park Service Director William Penn Mott Jr.
called for a conference for all park unit superintendents in early 1987,
he left most of the planning and the agenda to a committee of
superintendents. Mott named Yellowstone National Park Superintendent
Robert Barbee as conference chairman. The planning committee included
several superintendents and assistant directors to include Dan Wenk,
Superintendent at Mount Rushmore National Memorial. At Barbee's
request, Joan Anzelmo from Yellowstone served as conference coordinator.
Organizers planned the conference with a $600,000 budget and the theme,
"Planning for the 21st Century." The purpose of what would
be the first general superintendents conference since 1977, was "to
share and discuss ideas face to face," Mott said. The Director called
the conference to boost morale, reaffirm the mission of the Park
Service, provide a forum for leadership, review current issues, address
the challenges of the future, and, most important, to provide
inspiration. While traveling throughout the national park system, Mott
had begun to realize "that we needed to collectively gather all
Superintendents and senior NPS managers for a conference to look at
current critical issues and go about the business of planning the future
direction of the National Park System." [8] The planning committee, with Mott's approval,
selected speakers who would "inspire, provoke, and stimulate." "This is
not a regional or headquarters agenda," Chief of Public Affairs George
Berklacy observed, "this conference is by and for superintendents." [9]
Golden Gate National Recreation Area
|
The conference faced criticism from the start. In
early May, Federal Times published an article questioning some of
the activities associated with the conference. The article criticized
the Park Service for its plans to spend an estimated $600,000 for the
conference and questioned whether the benefits would outweigh the cost.
"In a time of fiscal crisis, on the surface this may not seem like a
good investment," conference committee member Brian O'Neill,
superintendent of the Golden Gate National Recreation Area, conceded in
the article. But he also pointed out that the meeting was "designed to
rebuild the esprit de corps of the park service" and that the Park
Service had not had a similar meeting in over 10 years. The article
indicated, however, that others believed it was inappropriate to hold
such a meeting when many parks could not afford proper maintenance
because of budget constraints. [10]
Stung by the criticism, Mott quickly released a memo
reaffirming his commitment to holding the conference and his approval of
the conference agenda. To keep costs down, he said, he had decided not
to hold the regional superintendents conferences that fiscal year. He
reiterated that the conference would be "a provocative and inspiring"
meeting with nationally acclaimed resource speakers who would address
broad topics concerning national parks and their future needs and
challenges. [11] The cost issue
was short-lived. None of the other media representatives who later
wrote about the conference would question its costs. Rather, they would
focus on its substance.
The four-day conference opened at Jackson Lake Lodge
on Tuesday May 31, 1988. Participants included the Park Service's 341
superintendents, 10 regional directors and staff, and about 50 people
from its headquarters in Washington. Six former Park Service directors
attended: Russell E. Dickenson, William J. Whalen, Ronald H. Walker,
Gary Everhardt, Conrad L. Worth, and George Hartzog. Other dignitaries
included Wyoming's Democratic Governor Mike Sullivan; Republican Senator
Malcolm Wallop from Wyoming; Republican Congressman Richard Cheney from
Wyoming; Democratic Congressman Bruce Vento from Minnesota; Cy Jamison,
Subcommittee on National Parks & Public Lands, and former Secretary
of Interior James Watt. The president and vice-president of the National
Parks and Conservation Association, Paul Pritchard and Destry Jarvis,
attended as did eleven senior representatives of various concessions and
recreation companies and representatives of Parks Canada.
The serene mountain setting could not mask
controversies. Politicians and interest groups competed for attention
from the first moments of the conference. While Wyoming's Governor
Sullivan and Senator Wallop warmly praised park superintendents for
their "widely respected professionalism," each made it clear they would
continue to resist Park Service plans to reintroduce wolves at
Yellowstone National Park. Meanwhile, Bruce Vento, an outspoken
congressional advocate of the parks, promoted his controversial
legislation to grant the Park Service greater autonomy. [12]
Redwood National Park
|
The conference opened with a carefully planned and
prepared 15-minute, 120 slide audio-visual presentation produced by the
Park Service's Harpers Ferry Center in West Virginia. Though stunning
and inspiring, the presentation focused almost exclusively on the
natural resources in the National Park system and included few images of
cultural resources. In his opening address, Director Mott called upon
the assembled superintendents to promote diversity within their
management ranks as well as diversity in park ecosystems. He also
encouraged them to act boldly in defense of their parks. "I have often
told you I want you to be risk takers. What I mean by that is to
encourage you to analyze carefully each management option you consider,"
he explained. Mott challenged the superintendents "to stand up for
park values." "We cannot expect someone else to do that for us," he
said. "We must be willing to do that ourselves."
Mott went on to discuss relationships with
communities outside park boundaries. The National Park System, he said,
was "the storehouse of our culture's greatest treasures," but there were
"some ominous cracks in the storehouse." The parks, he said, "are no
longer islands" and faced numerous threats from outside park boundaries.
The Director encouraged superintendents to reach out to the surrounding
communities and work with government agencies and the private sector to
resolve problems before they reached a crisis stage. "That," he
explained, "is our challenge as we move into the 21st
century."
Reflecting the new emphasis on scientific research
and the importance of bio-diversity, Mott warned that the park system
had "inadequate basic inventories of the resources contained within our
boundaries." The Park Service, he said, must close the gap between
"what we know and what we should know if we are to adequately preserve
and protect the values for which the parks were established." [13] This issue would be a dominant
theme years later in St. Louis.
Congressman Vento, who served as Chairman of the
Subcommittee on National Parks and Public Lands, then addressed the
conference. The outspoken Democrat asserted that Interior Secretary
Donald Hodel, Assistant Secretary of Interior for Fish, Wildlife and
Parks William P. Horn, and the Reagan administration had muzzled Park
Service professionals and starved the Service of funds. They had
continued to pursue the program of developing public lands (basically
for energy and recreation) launched by former Interior Secretary James
Watt. National parks, he insisted, "are the crown jewels of our
natural heritage and those people are turning them into rhinestones." [14]
Vento charged that the parks were "in a state of
rapid decline" because of political interference, dwindling budgets, and
the Reagan administration's insistence that development should take
precedence over preservation. Declining support from the Reagan
administration had meant less money for maintenance and staffing when
the parks were drawing record crowds. Most of the budget cuts, he
added, came from "political appointees" who were unwilling to serve as
advocates for preservation of America's cultural and natural heritage.
He called political interference "a cancer that's working its way
through the national park system." [15]
The Congressman advocated a reorganization of the
Park Service. Under his proposed legislation, the Park Service Director
would be appointed for a five-year term, longer than the term of the
president who appointed him. In addition the bill would create a
three-member park system review board which would report to the
president and Congress annually, recommending improvements for the park
system. These changes, Vento said, would free the Director from
political pressure. Vento also called for a vigorous program to acquire
privately owned lands within park boundaries and for strong park action
to minimize park degradation from threats outside park boundaries. "Air
pollution, development, water projects, overuse, and a host of other
problems affecting the resources of the parks demand that Congress
address the issue of park protection, and we will," he said. [16]
Vento claimed that the park system budget under the
Reagan administration, when measured in real dollars and adjusted for
inflation, had declined by $275 million from 1980 to 1989. "The problem
for the National Park Service is the need for strong advocacy," he said,
and the Service was not getting it from its Interior Department
superiors. In a news conference later that day, he charged that in many
instances Director Mott had "had the rug pulled out from under him" by
senior Interior officials. [17]
The next speaker, William P. Horn, presented a very
different perspective. Horn denied there was widespread disharmony in
the Park Service because of political interference. He preferred to
call it an atmosphere of "creative tension." Horn objected to what he
called "a continuing drumbeat of criticism that the administration is
anti-park." "It's a bum rap," he said. Horn added that funding for
national parks had grown from $391 million in 1980, the last year of
President Jimmy Carter's administration, to $734 million in FY 1989,
"the largest budget ever for the National Park Service." The budget, he
insisted, represented a 29 percent post-inflation real growth in the
agency's budget, and outstripped the 23 percent increase in visitation
over the same period. Park Service employment had increased from
15,576 full time employees in 1982 to 16,461 in 1989. These numbers, he
said, "are at odds with the pernicious mythology that we are not
supporting the national park system." Horn defended the Reagan
administration's record on parks and later told reporters that he
opposed the Vento bill. Rather, he favored a healthy mix of senior
political management with senior career management. [18]
Grand Canyon National Park
|
Mott vehemently denied Vento's claim that the Park
Service was "hobbled" by politics. "No one, not even the secretary of
Interior Donald Hodel, has ever throttled me in saying what I personally
want to say," Mott said. [19] At a
somewhat tense unscheduled news conference later that day, managers of
the dozen most embattled parks rallied around Mott in defense of the
Reagan administration's record. They explained to reporters how
resource management had improved during the 12 years since the last
general superintendents' conference. They pointed to upgrades such as
demolition of two dams in Rocky Mountain National Park, removal of wild
burros at Grand Canyon to allow bighorn sheep to rebound, and signs of
increasing numbers of grizzlies at Yellowstone. "Biologically, we're in
better shape than seventy-five years ago," said Barbee. Barbee and
other superintendents acknowledged that they had had policy disputes
with Reagan appointees but insisted that allegations of environmental
groups were often exaggerated. [20]
The National Parks and Conservation Association
joined the fray, charging that Secretary Hodel had proposed fundamental
changes in park policy "over the strenuous objections of park
professionals." Those changes, according to the association, gave
preference to visitors' recreation over preserving resources.
Association vice president Jarvis accused the Reagan administration of
"trying to change the philosophy of the national parks to favor
recreation over preservation." The debate over how far the Park Service
should go to accommodate visitors continued throughout the week. Mott
and several superintendents countered that preservation remained
foremost in the latest draft of the park policies manual. [21]
Thursday morning was devoted to the management of
natural and cultural resources. The afternoon and evening were set aside
for whitewater rafting, hiking, horseback riding, and sightseeing,
followed by a western barbecue with a bluegrass band.
The keynote speaker for Thursday, Dr. Robin Winks,
Professor of History at Yale University and Past Chairman of the
National Park System Advisory Board addressed the themes of education
and changing demographics. He told the conference, "I take the national
park service of any society as a series of symbols about what a people
chose to take pride in. These are the testimonials, the building blocks
that Americans believe they have done historically. You begin to get to
the heart of a people by viewing what they have chosen to preserve."
Winks told the superintendents that they were stewards over what he
viewed as "the single greatest university of the world." "Any national
park system is a political expression as well as a cultural expression,"
he continued. "The natural resource is not for recreation. You are
conserving the great natural and historical heritage of society and the
wildlife thereof." "There need to be recreation areas. These are
subjects of great pride and while recreation will occur in them, let's
not forget why we created them
You should think of those visitors
as coming for an education." Winks' expression "a university without
walls" would resonate long after the conference.
Winks cited several obstacles the Park Service faced
in "educating" the public about the parks and the American heritage that
the parks represented. The chief one, he said, was ignorance about the
parks, and another challenge was demography. Given the current ethnic
trends in the U.S., Winks said, within 20 to 30 years "a majority of the
people visiting Concord battlefield will say, 'This is not my
revolution,' or visiting Manassas battlefield, 'This was not my Civil
War.'" The Park Service had to educate these new Americans about the
cultural heritage represented by the national parks. It must "fight
against any fragmentation," Winks added, and must think of all its
resources together. [22]
The next speaker, Dr. Joseph Sax, an environmental
law expert from the University of California at Berkeley, focused on
threats from outside park boundaries. Sax accused the Park Service of
being "too timid" about protecting its lands from encroaching
development. Superintendents, he said, were expected and
sometimes required by law -- to sue developers, loggers, oil drillers,
or others whose activities threatened the parks. "Superintendents have
the blessings of Congress to file the lawsuits," he added. And if they
did not, they could be sued themselves for not doing so.
Sax also told the superintendents that they had a
powerful weapon, granted by Congress, to deal with developments on
private property outside park boundaries. That method, he said, was
litigation. Congress encouraged the park superintendents through
the interior secretary to bring lawsuits against those external
developments that threatened the parks. Such legal action would allow
for a resolution of the problems without a precedent-setting federal
zoning law, because each case would be settled based on its individual
facts and merits. The language of the 1916 legislation creating the
National Park Service would strengthen any lawsuit.
Congress recognized the growing insignificance of
boundaries, Sax said, and the loss of private and public distinctions in
the encroachments on the national parks. "It was intended that the use
of the courts would be made," Sax added. Some activities occurring near
parks were not illegal under local law, he said, such as visual
intrusions and subdivisions. But the organic act of 1916 established "a
federal standard of protection, not an adoption of state and local
standards." Consequently, the Park Service could expect to be successful
in lawsuits protecting resources threatened from outside park boundaries
because of the special and "absolute, not to be compromised" protection
offered national parks. [23]
The superintendents gave Sax a polite round of
applause but were reluctant to follow his advice. Privately many
expressed doubts that taking matters to court was the best response.
Several superintendents indicated that they had reservations about using
the courts to resolve border disputes. They preferred using public
education first. Some indicated that they had not filed suit in any of
the conflicts with private development around their parks. They
preferred to negotiate with developers, lumber, mining, and other
interests. [24]
The next speaker, Dr. Valerius Geist, a zoologist and
professor of environmental design at the University of Calgary,
addressed the threat of non-native species and the importance of
bio-diversity. Geist warned the superintendents that commercial
production of wildlife for consumers would result in the importation of
heartier Eurasian domestic strains of wildlife which would out-compete
native species in their own habitats. Already, he said, the United
States had tens of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of
non-native species in the wild. Geist predicted that the importation of
non-native game "to satisfy gastronomes' palates" would almost certainly
result in the destruction of native North American wildlife. Releases
of animals from game farms were inevitable, he said, and American native
species could not compete against heartier Eurasian species. "There
are 30 million wild animals in the United States," he said. "For every
game animal, there are five firearms, nine human beings and 110 head of
livestock. The odds of survival depend entirely on the sympathetic view
of the people." Part of the solution, he concluded, was to remove
control of exotics from private hands. [25]
Friday was dominated by sessions on marketing and
urban parks. Marketing experts urged park managers to use everything
from television ads to additional highway signs to encourage park
visitation. Superintendents were told they must forge a marketing
strategy to meet the needs of the changing population. Speakers
included representatives from some of the nation's leading marketing
firms to include Patricia Russell-McCloud, President of Russell-McCloud
and Associates and Ann Clurman, senior vice president of a New York
marketing consulting company called Yankelovich, Clancy, and
Shulman.
Statue of Liberty National Monument
|
Clurman observed that new surveys by her firm
indicated that Americans were starting to feel "overwhelmed" by
technology and were becoming more nostalgic. "They are wanting to know
more about their past," she said. "And that probably means even more
visitors to national parks." Parents, she said, would be dragging their
kids to the same places their parents took them such as the Statue of
Liberty and the Washington Monument. But most of the park service's
340-plus units were relatively unknown to the public. Americans,
Clurman continued, shared "a profound need to reconnect." Several
growing trends, the maturing of the baby-boom generation, a growing
dissatisfaction with the '80s style materialism and concern for the
environment, suggested even greater popularity for the nation's parks.
That mindset, she said, would define an American generation that was
better educated, more discriminating, lived longer and had more
disposable income and leisure time. [26]
Echoing some of the same themes, Dr. Alan Hogenauer,
president of Checklist, a New York marketing consultant company, told
the conference that the public's awareness of their national parks, he
said, was "deplorable." He stressed that marketing should not mean "the
blind pursuit of hordes of new visitors." Nor should it include
"abrasive TV ads" or anything tasteless or inappropriate. "The word
marketing offends many people in this agency," he conceded. "But park
professionals must see beyond that prejudice to understand that they can
no longer "sit and wait passively for the visitor."
Another speaker, Dr. John Crompton, Professor of
Parks and Recreation at Texas A&M University told the
superintendents that instead of pursuing the same marketing goal as
private industry sales they should try to make parks more
satisfying to visitor. This included distribution of people in the
parks so they do not try to visit the same scenic view at same time.
Also, the Park Service should pursue the "right visitor" instead of
visitors in general. "Many people come to national parks and they have
no idea what they're about, " he said. The Park Service needed to
inform people why the park is there in the first place that the
parks are there to make them aware of their cultural and natural
heritage. [27]
Saturday included sessions on interpretation, media
relations, and a closing banquet with Dick Jackman, the Director of
Corporate Communications for Sun Company, Inc., as the guest speaker.
Dr. John Hunt from the University of Massachusetts discussed domestic
and international tourism trends and their impacts on the National Park
Service. Robert Dilenschneider, head of the world's largest public
relations firm, Hill and Knowlton, Inc. talked about crisis management.
He warned superintendents that the major environmental crisis of the
1990s would strike the national parks, and as "guardians of America's
soul" they must be adept at handling the conflicts. He warned that they
would find themselves "in the middle of swirling change."
Superintendents would confront acid rain, genetic engineering, waste
management and the changing strategies of environmental activists, the
five issues that will dominate the 1990s, he said. "You are going to be
in the center. For the various interest groups, you're going to be in
the position of the pawn on the chessboard. You've got to get yourself
out of that position." The ability to work with media was critical to
crisis management, he added. Dilenschneider warned Park Service
officials that they were unprepared because they often were poorly
trained in administrative matters and had no overall long-range
strategy. He predicted the increased use of computers throughout the
Service. [28]
After a non-denominational worship service on Sunday,
the participants left Grand Teton National Park having reaffirmed some
basic conservation principles that had shaped the Service since its
creation in 1916. One reporter predicted that the conference would
spark an intensified commitment to lowering the historic barriers
between parks and neighboring communities. More than once, Mott
exhorted his superintendents to go beyond the boundaries of our parks
and resolve problems before they reach a crisis stage. [29]
Mesa Verde National Park
|
Conference organizers rated the meeting as a success.
Comments from participants were positive. The facility worked well, the
speakers were engaging and provocative, and participants had ample
opportunity to interact. The morale boost that Mott had hoped for seems
to have occurred. Chrysandra Walter, superintendent of Lowell National
Historical Park observed, "We have renewed our sense of purpose." "This
week has been almost like a religious retreat, said Bob Heyder,
superintendent at Mesa Verde National Park. "I'm going away refreshed
and inspired." [30] The conference
also encouraged participants to think more seriously about the future
and changing demographics in the country and how to better communicate
with the public and the news media.
Yet, participants left with no clearly articulated
plan or agenda to guide them in the next century. The focus seemed to
be more on dealing with contemporary issues than developing any
significant plans for the future. In the summer of 1988, the Park
Service faced not only a possible change in administration but also
growing threats to park resources. Throughout the week participants
received warnings and lessons in politics and power, psychology and
salesmanship, one reporter observed, "skills shaped less for wilderness
than for a civilized world of every more people and ever more pressure."
A common solution was offered to superintendents dealing with growing
number of friends and foes of the parks Marketing. Marketing in
this instance was not a search for greater numbers of visitors but the
presentation of an image. [31]
A number of contentious issues were aired during the
meeting and many perspectives joined the debate. The views of Mott,
Vento, Horn, National Park and Conservation Association leaders
Pritchard and Jarvis, and experts from outside the Park Service were all
heard. Participants discussed the future of the Park Service, reactions
to proposed legislation to change the method of selecting the agency's
Director, restoration of the timber wolf to Yellowstone, and boundary
expansion proposals by the National Park and Conservation Association.
The divisions between conservationists and
administration officials were not resolved. They could not even agree on
how much money was being allocated to the Park Service. Congressman
Vento described a shrinking budget, while Horn claimed there was a 29
percent increase. Career officials said President Reagan had in fact
increased money available for day-to-day expenditures but the
administration had all but eliminated programs to protect natural
resources and acquire additional park land. One reporter indicated that
when inflation is considered, the budget had been cut between 10 to 30
percent. Superintendents agreed that environmental threats to parks
from beyond their borders remained the most difficult to reconcile. [32]
The conference gave added visibility to the issue of
returning the timber wolf to Yellowstone and helped propel it in the
political arena. But at one point, the issue briefly took on a light
note. At the closing banquet Mott provided attendees with buttons
containing a wolf's head with blinking eyes. Around it were the words
"Bring back the Wolf. The 'Eyes' Have It." As Mott approached the
podium to address the conference's closing banquet, suddenly the lights
went out. Then from small, battery-powered wolf-head buttons pinned to
almost every person in the audience, tiny, red wolves' eyes began to
blink on and off in the darkness. As if on cue out came a long, drawn
out "OOOOOOO!" some 500 voices imitating a wolf howl. The legend on
each pin read "Bring Back the Wolf. The 'Eyes' Have It." Participants
laughed and applauded. Some months earlier Mott had had the pin
designed and produced as part of the public education campaign about the
wolf. With equal good humor, Senator Wallop, who resisted returning the
wolf to the Yellowstone ecosystem, countered with his own button. It
read, "SOS. Save Our Sheep. The 'Ewes' Have It." [33]
Measuring the impact of the conference is difficult,
particularly since no new reports or policy initiatives grew out of the
meeting. As participants returned home, what would soon become a
devastating wildland fire episode in Yellowstone National Park was just
beginning. Barbee and Anzelmo had planned to make the papers available
in some form but could not follow up on the conference as they had
planned. The fires would consume much of their time and energy over the
next two years and become a major political focus for the agency. [34]
The Grand Teton conference did not resolve any of the
major problems facing the Park Service, but in some ways it marked the
beginning of a decade of change. In October 1991, the Park Service held
a 75th Anniversary Symposium called "Our National Parks
Challenges and Strategies for the 21st Century" in Vail,
Colorado. The mission of the conference was to review the problems and
challenges confronting the Park Service, discuss issues and options,
propose strategies, and make recommendations. "From the start I wanted
it made clear that this was not to be a white-wash of past practices by
the Park Service," Park Service Director James M. Ridenour explained. "I
wanted the agenda to be wide open and I wanted help from the private and
academic world for this introspection." [35]
Unlike the Grand Teton meeting, which had been
planned and organized by senior Park Service officials, Vail was
convened under the direction of Harvard University's John F. Kennedy
School of Government, the World Wildlife Fund, The Conservation
Foundation, the National Park Foundation, and the National Park Service.
It brought together nearly 700 experts and interested parties from
inside and outside the Park Service to consider the future of the
National Park System. While the vast majority of 1988 conference
participants were Park Service employees, nearly half the Vail
participants were from outside organizations and institutions. This
reflected the growing recognition that the Service did not function in a
political or institutional vacuum.
Cape Hatteras National Seashore
|
The conference was guided by a steering committee
chaired by William J. Briggle, a veteran Park Service employee, with
Henry L. Diamond, of Beveridge and Diamond, P.C, a highly respected
conservationist, as symposium general chair. In addition to Park
Service members, the steering committee included representatives from
The Nature Conservancy, World Wildlife Fund, Coopers and Lybrand, and
John F. Kennedy School of Government, former ambassador to Australia
William Lane, and President of the National Park Foundation Alan Rubin.
Its task was to prepare a comprehensive report and set of
recommendations for improved Park System stewardship and Park Service
management for the Director of the Park Service.
In the spring of 1991, the steering committee formed
working groups focused on organizational renewal, resource stewardship,
park use and enjoyment, and environmental leadership. Each working group
consisted of non-Park Service chair and vice chair, three Park Service
managers, and five members from outside the Service. Unlike the 1988
conference, which was dominated by superintendents, the Park Service
members represented various park units and programs and a broad range of
professional experience and expertise. Interested individuals from
within and outside the agency provided written and oral comments to the
working groups. Congressional representatives and their staff members
also provided their perspectives. The groups held extended working
sessions to formulate preliminary recommendations. Out of these
sessions, they produced draft reports, which served as the basis for
discussion at the meeting in Vail. Conference participants joined in
dozens of discussion sessions and revised the preliminary
recommendations. They also attended plenary sessions where
distinguished leaders from within and outside the Park Service presented
their views on national and international park system issues. The
conference addressed the issues of environmental leadership,
organizational renewal, park use and enjoyment, and resource
stewardship.
The steering committee later produced a final report
called "National Parks for the 21st Century: The Vail
Agenda, Report and Recommendations to the Director of the National Park
Service." The report contained six strategic objectives that together
constituted the Park Service's vision for the 21st century
(Resource Stewardship and Protection; Education and Interpretation;
Proactive Leadership; Science and Research, and Professionalism) and
more than 140 specific recommendations for achieving them. Echoing some
of the themes from the 1988 meeting, the report highlighted threats to
park resources from inside and outside park borders and the need to
"ensure continuity and sustainability in the public's access to park
values." [36]It reflected the
inherent tension in providing access while properly managing resources.
The report encouraged the Park Service to convey the meaning of each
unit and its contributions to the nation's values, character, and
experience through education and interpretation. On the issue of
leadership, the report observed, "The National Park Service has lost its
ability to exercise leadership in determining the fate of the resources
and programs it manages." [37] In
the area of science and research, the report noted that the Park Service
was "extraordinarily deficient" in its capacity "to acquire, synthesize,
act upon, and articulate to the public sound research and scientific
information." It recommended that the agency engage in a sustained,
integrated program of natural, cultural, and social science resource
management and research to acquire the information that it needed to
manage and protect park resources. The report called on the Service to
create and maintain a highly professional organization and work force
with higher standards and better training. [38]
Held just three years after the superintendents
meeting, the Vail conference reflected some of the fundamental changes
occurring within the Park Service. With its mix of working and plenary
sessions, emphasis on partnerships, broad participation, and candid
discussion of critical issues, it helped set the stage for Discovery
2000.
George Rogers Clark National Historical Park
DISCOVERY
2000
In September 1998 at a meeting in Grand Teton
National Park, Park Service Director Robert Stanton told his senior
officials that there would be a general superintendents conference in
2000. During the next few weeks, the Director began describing the
conference as a "general conference" rather than a "general
superintendents conference" because he recognized that the mission of
the Park Service included broader responsibilities than managing the
National Park System. Stanton appointed long-time Park Service
executive Jerry L. Rogers as chair of the conference team, with
Superintendent of Independence National Historic Park Martha Aikens,
Superintendent of Mount Rushmore National Memorial Dan Wenk, and
Superintendent of Pinnacles National Monument Gary Candelaria as
co-chairs. The conference team held the first of many planning meetings
on April 29, 1999 after observing an innovative, discussion oriented
Intermountain Regional Superintendents Conference. Stanton also
appointed Intermountain Regional Director John Cook, Alaska Regional
Director Bob Barbee, and Deputy Director Jackie Lowey to a steering
committee to represent the National Leadership Council in overseeing the
conference team's planning effort. Having the steering committee
enabled the conference team to make decisions quickly without action
from the larger National Leadership Council.
Stanton specified that the conference take place in
2000 in St. Louis if the team could arrange a suitable meeting place. He
made it clear to planners that he wanted the conference to take
advantage of unique moment in time the millenium to focus
on the distant future. Thus, the steering committee and conference
team emphasized "vision" rather than "planning." Stanton designated the
highly experienced Jim Gasser as meeting planner. The conference team,
the steering committee, Deputy Director Denis Galvin, Midwest Regional
Director Bill Schenk, Office of Policy Chief Loran Fraser, Harpers
Ferry Center Manager Gary Cummins, and Jefferson National Expansion
Memorial Superintendent Gary Easton met in St. Louis in June 1999 to lay
out the basic goals and framework that would guide their planning. They
agreed that the 2000 conference would be visionary; include a
substantial percentage of "partners;" encompass the broader mission of
the Park Service beyond park boundaries; encourage active participation;
include a mix of plenary sessions and small discussion sessions; and
focus on resources, education, and leadership. [39]
Conference planners anticipated a much larger
audience than was present at Jackson Lake Lodge and knew that it would
be difficult to accommodate such a large number in any national park in
September. They also recognized that the public might resent the Park
Service taking up all the accommodations in a National Park -- a major
vacation destination -- for its own use. St. Louis' central location
allowed easy access and kept travel costs down. Moreover, the Jefferson
National Expansion Memorial and the Gateway Arch were symbols of
optimism and possibilities for the future an appropriate
inspiration for a conference about vision for the 21st
century.
In December 1999 Director Stanton publicly announced
his plan to convene in September of 2000 the first Service-wide
conference since 1988, which would be called "Discovery 2000: the
National Park Service General Conference." Stanton laid out three goals
for the conference: to develop a vision of the Park Service's role in
the life of the nation in the 21st century; to inspire and
invigorate the Service, its partners, and the public about this vision,
and to develop new leadership to meet the challenges of the future. "The
intent," he said, "is to produce thinking that will guide us for several
decades beyond our gateway of discovery here in St. Louis,
Missouri."
The conference would explore four tracks or themes:
cultural resource stewardship, natural resource stewardship, education,
and leadership. Aikens would lead a leadership track; and Candelaria,
now superintendent of Wrangell-St. Elias National Park and Preserve,
would lead the natural resources and cultural resources stewardship
tracks with the assistance of associate directors Kate Stevenson and
Michael Soukup. [40]
The conference team recruited nationally and
internationally renowned speakers to highlight each of the four tracks.
They first enlisted organizational leadership expert Dr. Peter Senge
(leadership), followed by two-time Pulitzer-Prize winning Harvard
biologist Dr. Edward O. Wilson and accomplished St. Louis scientist Dr.
Peter Raven (natural resources), historian Dr. John Hope Franklin
(cultural resources), and best-selling author and poet Maya Angelou
(education). All but one of these distinguished individuals donated
their time and expertise a donation of services estimated at
$150,000 or more. Their keynote addresses would be followed by a broad
series of lectures, workshops, and in depth discussions.
The five-day conference opened on September 11, 2000
at the Regal Riverfront Hotel in downtown St. Louis with more than 1200
participants. It included Park Service members from the Washington
office, the regional offices, and the parks, as well as their partners.
It also drew representatives from non-profit and advocacy groups, often
some of Park Service's harshest critics. Former directors Roger
Kennedy, Walker, Whalen, Dickenson, and James Ridenhouer participated in
the conference. George Hartzog who was unable to attend addressed the
participants by videotape. In contrast to the Grand Teton conference,
only one congressional representative attended Mark Souder from
Indiana. Nor did the conference attract the same level of media
representation as at Grand Teton National Park. Planners invited
Secretary of Interior Bruce Babbitt to attend, but he declined.
Much like the 1988 conference, the conference opened
with a dramatic, fast-paced video produced by Harpers Ferry Center
called "A Mosaic of Ourselves." Unlike the Grand Teton presentation,
"A Mosaic of Ourselves" included many images of Park Service cultural
resources and examples of National Historic or Natural Landmarks,
National Register properties, and other mission-related properties
outside the National Park system. Former Director Hartzog addressed the
conference by videotape. Conference Chair Jerry Rogers told the
participants that their job was "not to plan the future but to conceive
it." He challenged them to look ahead ten to thirty years and develop a
vision for the next century. [41]
Director Stanton developed the theme of a week of
work and vision in his opening address. "We are here to contemplate a
vision to dream, anticipate, and begin to formulate the role the
National Park Service will play in the future of this nation," he said.
He went on to declare that Discovery 2000, the National Park Service
general conference was "a gathering of friends. It is safe here to
think aloud." The national parks, Stanton said, could no longer be
viewed as "islands of nature, free from the pressures of growth and
development." He explained, "Today we know that parks can and must be
created in which many jurisdictions and many partners and owners are
involved."
The Director then focused on natural resources,
expressing concern about dying species and disappearing ecosystems. He
also emphasized the importance of historic places, calling America's
history "a patchwork quilt in which each piece has a special story but
the full effect is only achieved when they are sewn together." "The
preservation of our cultural resources," he said, "demonstrates the
values of diversity and community that honor and link us with the
heritage of our predecessor and represent our individual and collective
legacy to our successors and future generations."
The Park Service's mission, Stanton observed, had
extended far beyond the parks themselves. The world had changed. That is
why Discovery 2000 was, he explained "more than a superintendents'
conference the broader concept of a general conference is the reason why
servicewide, regional, and local managers of programs, as well as many
delegates-at-large are here along with the superintendents."
The demographics of America was shifting, Stanton
said, but the culture and values of this changing America were not yet
woven into the National Park theme. Minority communities were still
underrepresented. The changed world was why the conference planners had
included many non-Park Service employees in the audience people
from other federal agencies, state, local governments and tribes,
universities, foundations, and elsewhere. Physical isolation no longer
existed, he said, but the Park Service had to overcome other forms of
isolation.
The Director noted that the eve of the millenium was
the perfect time to work on vision. Beyond any plan or action, there
must be a vision. He encouraged participants to participate actively in
sessions, to share their vision in the "time capsule", to revisit the
Discovery 2000 web site, to journal, and to "share ownership of our
collective future." Finally, he emphasized the need for follow-through
after the conference. [42]
The first day of the conference focused on the theme
of cultural resource stewardship. Dr. John Hope Franklin, a renowned
historian and scholar who served as chair of the National Park System
Advisory Board, gave the keynote address. In his remarks, Franklin
reflected on past changes and future challenges for the Park Service.
The agency, he noted, was both an educational and cultural institution.
Franklin emphasized the important role parks played as places where
visitors could hear about important, complex subjects such as the
struggle for racial justice, women's rights and the rights of workers.
He commended the Park Service for its increasing candor in interpreting
its historic sites and for its role in expanding the number of sites
that related to all citizens. The Park Service, he said, had a unique
opportunity to teach "in real places about real history and real nature
with real things."
Looking ahead to the challenges of the next century,
Franklin encouraged the Park Service to redefine its focus on the
purposes and prospects of the service and the system; better manage
places and programs in partnership with all levels of government and
with private industry; respond to and reflect the nation's changing
diverse population and demographics in both its workforce and outlook;
and rededicate itself to its role as an educational institution that
brings more scholars into the parks and allows more park employees
opportunity to expand their scholarship. Franklin called on the Park
Service and its partners to "broaden the truths we teach" in order to
deepen the respect of our fellow citizens in order to deepen their
support for the Service and its mission. Park Service employees, he
insisted, must communicate their message outside the parks. [43]
After Franklin there were concurrent sessions on such
topics as "Investing in Wisdom," "Just the Facts Ma'am: Why is Context
so Controversial?", "Natural/Cultural Nature/Human History: Is It
All One?", and in a session called "How We Learn From Experience,"
participants discussed the importance of embracing change.
Tuesday was devoted to natural resource stewardship.
In introducing the first natural resource keynote speaker, former
Director Roger Kennedy observed that the Park Service must educate the
public about resource protection. It must merit trust and build
constituencies outside the parks. "Resource protection has to walk out
of the park in the hearts of the visitors," he said. Echoing the themes
Geist had presented years earlier in Grand Teton National Park, the
day's speakers emphasized the important role of science and the
importance of bio-diversity.
Harvard Professor Dr. Edward O. Wilson, who was
regarded internationally as the preeminent biological theorist of the
late 20th century and as one of great naturalists in American
history, gave the "natural resource" keynote address. Wilson warned
that it was a crucial time for the Park Service and for the environment
in general. National parks were destined to play an even larger role.
The planet, he warned, could easily lose a quarter of its plant and
animal species in the next 30 years, and the national parks would become
increasingly important for scientific research, education "and the
future of society." Wilson observed that the parks were "our treasure
house of the remnant natural ecosystems" and as such need to be
thoroughly understood. The Park Service and the national parks, he
predicted, would have a major role in research in collaboration with
academic community. He advocated increased education to compliment the
research efforts. He concluded, "There's no better classroom than our
national parks, and no more respected teachers" than the people of the
National Park Service. [44]
Concurrent Sessions that day included such
forward-looking topics as: "The National Park Model: Vestige of the Past
Or Foundation for the 21st Century?," "Direct
Dealings: Working with Park Neighbors of the Future," "Science-based
Decision-Making: How Much Information is Enough?" In one session,
"Natural Resources: Winning in the Parks, in the Courts, and for the
Public," Superintendent Mike Finley urged the crowd to "adopt an
attitude of rigid defense," much as Sax had in 1988. Finley and
Solicitor Dave Watts emphasized the importance of fact gathering and the
need to be prepared for lawsuits. In a lively discussion, session
participants questioned whether there were opportunities in waiting to
be sued or seeking lawsuits when park resources were in jeopardy. Watts
advised the participants to fund data gathering, keep an eye on new
policies, and engage in long-term legal planning now.
In the closing plenary session that day, Dr. Peter
Raven, addressed the conference. Raven, a nationally and
internationally renowned conservationist, held the position of Engelmann
Professor of Botany at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri and
served as Director of the Missouri Botanical Garden. Raven urged the
Park Service to make the national parks accessible and meaningful to
every segment of U.S. population. The Service, he said, could not manage
resources in parks without a well-resourced scientific staff on site. It
should adopt a goal of managing parks for the greatest amount of
bio-diversity possible and should pay special attention to invasive
species. He also recommended increased coordination with other land
management agencies and the private sector. The Park Service and the
Interior Department, he added, must invest further in understanding
global climate change and other forms of pollution coming from outside
parks. Raven argued that the parks would have their greatest value in
the educational arena. After his formal remarks, Raven and Wilson
responded to questions from conference participants and a lively
discussion ensued. In one particularly powerful moment, Wilson
observed, "The national parks will be very vital for the long-term
psychological health of the human species." [45]
Wednesday focused on the theme of education. Former
Director Dickenson introduced gifted poet, dramatist, and author Maya
Angelou. He emphasized that education programs and interpretation were
"key to a quality park experience" and called for improvement in the
interpretive program. Keynote speaker Angelou praised, encouraged, and
challenged conference attendees, using poetry, humor and song. While
sharing deeply personal stories about her own life, she encouraged Park
Service members to read and write poetry to use poetry and the dramatic
arts interpreting the parks, American history, and the natural sciences.
With observations such as "I am human, nothing can be alien to me" she
established a profound emotional connection with the audience. [46]
Concurrent sessions that day included "Silent Garden:
Broaden the Stories Build Constituencies," "Long-Distance
Learning and Technology: Reaching Those Who Don't Visit Us," "Key
Education Trends in the Near Future," "Reaping the Sweet Rewards:
Building Sustainable Education Programs." One participant observed that
the Park Service needed to go to the public with its education efforts
rather than wait for the public to come to it. Another envisioned a
future in which parks provided life-changing experiences for all young
visitors.
Thursday was devoted to the subject of leadership.
Dr. Peter Senge, a nationally acclaimed expert and lecturer on
organizational leadership, opened the sessions. Senge told Park Service
members that they had the opportunity to put more meaning into people's
lives at a time when many sensed that something was "deeply out of
whack." People were desperate for quiet time and a place where they
could reconnect with what is primary. Senge described the gap between
one's vision and the current reality in which one lived as "creative
tension." He challenged the commonly accepted definitions of
"leadership," which often mean dominance and control. Leadership, he
concluded, had nothing to do with position or title. It was the
capacity of the human community to shape its future. It was both deeply
personal and inherently collective. He defined leadership as one who
helped workers believe they could shape their own futures. [47]
More than three dozen workshops on leadership
followed to include: "Will the NPS Ever be Able to Add Two Plus Two and
Arrive at Four," which focused on how the NPS implemented and accounted
for its programs and policies, "Park Development and Future Park
Preservation: Alternative Transportation Planning and Gateway
Communities," "From Crisis-of-the-Moment to Visionary Thinking: Making
the Transition," and "Leadership Beyond Park Boundaries." One session
examined the possibility of using national parks as venues for
conferences in which corporate leaders would discuss the adoption of
sustainable practices in their organizations. Another highlighted some
of the impediments to visionary thinking inherent in the Park Service.
At the end of the day, all the participants once again in the hotel
ballroom to hear James Lee Witt Director of the Federal Emergency
Management Agency discussed leadership and change. "How we treat each
other inside our organizations," he said, "is one form of customer
service."
Friday, the final day, Deputy Secretary of Interior
David Hayes addressed the conference and Director Stanton followed with
his closing remarks. Stanton told participants that they were "poised
on the edge of a future in the shadow of the timeless arch of the
Jefferson National Expansion Memorial." The end of the conference was
just a beginning for the 21st century National Park Service.
Stanton noted that although Discovery 2000 had met its goal of being
"forward-looking and visionary," participants needed to focus on what
remained to be done and the direction the Park Service must go. "We
have a monumental obligation to the future," he added, a duty to point
the way in the new millenium. "We must extract from this conference
and the things that follow it a clear, coherent vision that can be
stated with understandable simplicity, and that will have a reasonable
consensus behind it," he continued. He encouraged the attendees to "go
forth" with new insights and energy, with the determination to share
what they had gained and with more inclusive cultural values. Again, he
emphasized the importance of diversity in the workplace.
Stanton anticipated that Discovery 2000 would lead to
explicit vision statements that could be helpful to future Directors. He
anticipated there would be other follow-up activities and that the work
of the conference would continue. The Director then articulated his
far-reaching vision for the National Park Service. His vision included
an agency where each employee was valued and encouraged to reach his or
her full potential. He envisioned the Park Service as an agency that
exercised leadership, erased barriers with other federal agencies,
tribes, state and local governments, and the private sector, and played
an increasing role in education. He encouraged the agency to go beyond
its preservation role to create memorable experiences for visitors. In
closing, he challenged participants to incorporate the insights that
they had gained during the week into their day-to-day work. [48]
In the weeks following the conference, Jerry Rogers
received overwhelmingly positive feedback from the participants.
Conference planners had developed 15 "measures of success" and used them
as benchmarks in selecting the numerous workshops, discussion sessions,
and the keynote speakers. Rogers believed he and the other committee
members had come very close to achieving their goals for the meeting.
They had, Rogers said, tried to the greatest extent possible to make
Discovery 2000 "a dialogue-based and participatory conference, in which
NPS employees of all levels and partners and critics were all equal."
They had sought openness to various points of view. Rogers conceded
that they had not achieved perfection in this, but they had accomplished
much and learned much about planning and executing participatory
conferences.
Rogers sent out messages over the next few months
challenging participants to reflect not only on what they had heard the
conference but also on their own visions for the Park Service. "We
hoped beforeand especially nowthat Discovery 2000 was not an
event but a beginning. Ideas, thoughts, contacts, habits (such as
reflecting, journaling, writing poetry), and methods of treating
subjects that began there all need to be continued, cultivated, and
perfected.
This, for me, is part of the vision from Discovery
2000." [49]
Notes were taken in each workshop and discussion
session so that there would be a good record. The plan was to make
these notes plus journal offerings and time capsule entries available to
the National Park Service's Advisory Board for use in its ongoing
scholarly review of the Park Service's future. There were plans for
follow-up sessions and conferences.
Lincoln Home National Historic Site
CONCLUSION
Although many participants have indicated that they
found Discovery 2000 meaningful and thought-provoking, it is far too
soon to assess the meeting's full impact. Questions remain: Will the
optimism and energy from the conference be maintained? Will the
participants continue to develop their visions for their own work and
for the Park Service as a whole? Will they take the necessary actions to
ensure that the "seeds" planted in St. Louis continue to grow? Will the
visions lead to meaningful change in the Park Service?
Unlike the Vail conference, which produced the "Vail
Agenda," neither the 1988 conference nor Discovery 2000 produced a
clearly articulated plan or agenda for the 21st century. But
that was never the purpose of either conference. They were not
designed to provide Park Service leaders with a series of detailed
resolutions. The 1988 conference was primarily focused on providing
inspiration and boosting morale, while Discovery 2000 went beyond this
to focus on shaping the agency's vision and purpose.
Although the two meetings differed in size, format,
and focus, and reflected different political environments, they conveyed
similar themes. Again and again, the discussions and presentations at
these conferences reflected the fundamental dilemma that has faced the
National Park Service since its inception: how to protect park resources
while accommodating the needs of park visitors. Both conferences were
significant, noted Joan Anzelmo, because "they gathered the core
organization together with its partners, and challenged the participants
to stand up for the mission, to be relevant to society and to expand in
meaningful ways the diversity of the workforce to reflect the nation."
[50]
Discovery 2000 was unique. It was more balanced and
inclusive and perhaps stimulated more creative thought than any previous
Park Service conference. While Discovery 2000 encouraged open
discussion, except for the early exchange between Congressman Vento and
Assistant Secretary Horn, the format of the Grand Teton conference left
little room for contending viewpoints. Discovery 2000 gave equal weight
to natural resources, cultural resources, and education and devoted much
more attention to interpretation than the Grand Teton conference.
The emphasis on cultural resources, interpretation,
and education in Vail and in St. Louis reflected fundamental changes in
the Park Service. The cultural resource-related professions were
growing in prominence. Discovery 2000 dramatically illustrated that a
larger and more diverse group of Park Service employees had a voice by
2000. It incorporated more of the Park Service's partners and critics
and reflected the agency's growing emphasis on its emerging leadership
role. Together the conferences provide a measure of just how much the
National Park Service changed in the last decade of the 20th
century. They also highlight the significant challenges that the
National Park Service will face in the 21st century, though
it is too soon to know just how well they prepared the Service to
address those challenges.
Fort Davis National Historic Site
NOTES
Unless otherwise noted, copies of all records cited
here are in the files of the National Register, History, and Education
Branch Division (NRHE), National Park Service, Washington, D.C.
1 Electronic message, Jerry L.
Rogers to author, December 1, 2000.
2 Jerry L. Rogers review
comments, January 10, 2001.
3 NPS Newsletter, Discovery
2000, No. 2, September 12, 2000, p.1.
4 "Forum targets future of
national parks," Rocky Mountain News, Denver, Colorado, June 1,
1988.
5 See file of Grand Teton
Conference news clippings at NRHE. Original file is in the Historical
Collection at Harpers Ferry Center.
6 Rogers review comments.
7 "Park Service is shifting the
focus of its mission to preservation," St. Louis Post-Dispatch,
September 4, 2000.
8 Mary Ellen Butler, Prophet
of the Parks: The Story of William Penn Mott, Jr., (Ashburn, VA: The
National Recreation and Park Association, 1999), p. 208; memo, National
Park Service Director to Directorate and Field Directorate, April 1988;
"Mott sees conference as morale booster," Daily Sentinel, Grand
Junction, Co., June 4, 1988.
9 Electronic message, Robert
Barbee to author, December 11, 2000; "Forum targets future of national
parks, Rocky Mountain News, June 1, 1988.
10 "NPS Meeting, or $600,000
Picnic?" Federal Times, May 2, 1988.
11 Memo, Director to
Directorate and Field Directorate, April 1988.
12 "Politicians, advocates
wrangle over future of national parks," Denver Post, June 5, 1988.
13 Mott tells nation's park
managers to promote diversity, Star-Tribune, Casper, Wyoming, June 2,
1988; Superintendents discuss future of nation's parks," Juneau
Empire, June 1, 1988.
14 "Vento assails Hodel as Park
Service opens conference," Star Tribune, Minneapolis, MN., June
2, 1988.
15 "Political Ôcancer' under
Reagan destroying national parks, lawmaker charges," The Atlanta
Constitution, June 2, 1988.
16 "Vento: Yellowstone
officials already have authority to reintroduce wolves," Casper Star
Tribune, June 2, 1988.
17 "Parks officials map
survival strategy," Rocky Mountain News, June 2, 1988; "Park service
leaders deny being hobbled by politics," Phoenix Gazette, June 2
1988.
18 "Vento: Yellowstone
officials already have authority to reintroduce wolves," Casper Star
Tribune, June 2, 1988.
19 "Park service leaders deny
being hobbled by politics," Phoenix Gazette, June 2 1988;
Politicians, advocates wrangle over future of national parks," The
Denver Post, June 5, 1988.
20 Butler, Prophet of the
Parks, pp. 208-209; "Politicians, advocates wrangle over future of
national parks," The Denver Post, June 5, 1988.
21 "Take national parks out of
Interior, key ally urges," The Sacramento Bee, June 2, 1988.
22 "Expert claims Hodel may be
breaking the law if he allows oil, gas leasing in B-T," Casper Star
Tribune, June 3, 1988.
23 Ibid.
24 "Law prof: Go to court to
save park borders," Tacoma (Wash) News Tribune, June 3, 1988;
"Use congressional tools to aid parks, author says," Rocky Mountain
News, June 3, 1988.
25 "Imports threaten U.S.,
Canadian wildlife policies, zoologist says," Casper Star Tribune,
June 3, 1988.
26 "National parks urged to
blow their own horns, by Charles Seabrook, Atlanta Journal, June
4, 1988; "National parks boom, special needs predicted," Rocky
Mountain News, June 4, 1988; "Rosy future envisioned for parks,"
Denver Post, June 4, 1988.
27 "National parks urged to
blow their own horns," Atlanta Journal, June 4, 1988.
28 "Get ready for environmental
crises, park bosses told," Rocky Mountain News, June 5, 1988; "High-tech
reaching the wilds," Chicago Tribune, June 15, 1988.
29 "Politicians, Advocates
wrangle over future of national parks," Denver Post, June 5,
1988.
30 Courier, August 1998, p. 7;
"Park chiefs recharge spirits; commitment at NPS reunion," Santa
Barbara News Press, June 5, 1988.
31 "Park Service focus shifting
from pines to people," San Jose Mercury News, June 13, 1988.
32 "Politicians, advocates
wrangle over future of national parks," Denver Post, June 5,
1988.
33 Prophet of the Parks,
p. 210; Courier, August 1998, pp. 7-8.
34 Electronic message, Barbee
to author, December 11, 2000; electronic message, Joan Anzelmo to
author, December 8, 2000.
35 Ridenour, James M. The
National Parks Compromised: Pork Barrel Politics and America's
Treasures, (Merrillville, IN: ICS Books, Inc., 1994), pp. 67-68.
36 National Park Service,
"National Parks for the 21st Century: The Vail Agenda, Report and
Recommendations to the Director of the National Park Service," 1992, p.
17.
37 Ibid. pp. 21, 24, 26.
38 Ibid. p. 31.
39 Jerry Rogers review
comments. The conference team held their June meeting in the Adams
Mark Hotel in St. Louis, where they planned to hold the Discovery 2000
conference. However, planners later learned that a group of African
American students had sued the Adams Mark Hotel chain for alleged racial
discrimination. The NAACP and later the U.S. Department of Justice
joined the suit on behalf of the plaintiffs. Sensitive to the
allegations of racial discrimination and the growing media attention,
the National Park Service began looking for a new site for its
conference and cancelled its contract with the Adams Mark
40 Memo, NPS Director Robert
Stanton to Discovery 2000 Participants, December 13, 1999.
41 Author's notes from
Discovery 2000, September 11, 2000.
42 Robert Stanton, "Discovery
2000 National Park Service General Conference: Opening Remarks,"
September 11, 2000.
43 "Dr. John Hope Franklin
Encourages NPS to Chart a Proud and Promising Future," No. 2, September
12, 2000, p. 4; author's notes from Discovery 2000, September 11, 2000.
44 "Serving as Stewards of
Ancient Heritage in the Century of the Environment," Discovery 2000
Newsletter, No. 3, September 13, 2000, p. 4.
45 "Dr. Peter Raven Outlines
Recommendations for NPS Future," ibid., p. 6.
46 "Angelou Wows Crowd," ibid.,
No. 4, September 14, 2000, p. 1.
47 "Senge: Parks Can Reconnect
People," ibid., No. 5, September 15, 2000, p. 3.
48 Robert Stanton, "The
National Park Service of Tomorrow: Vision, Challenge, and Exhortation,"
September 15, 2000.
49 Electronic message, Jerry L.
Rogers to Discovery 2000 Participants, September 26, 2000; electronic
message, Jerry L. Rogers to Discovery 2000 Participants October 27,
2000.
50 Electronic message, Anzelmo
to author, December 8, 2000.
Janet A. McDonnell was formerly the Bureau Historian for the
National Park Service in Washington, D.C.
|