Although there were thirteen national parks in 1912, each received a separate appropriation and had separate management. The business of these playgrounds was scattered among three departments, and nowhere in Washington was there a single official or desk wholly devoted to their interest.[335] To this problem Stephen Tyng Mather brought high intelligence, sound philosophy, and supreme endeavor. By 1915 he had achieved administrative experience that ripened into wisdom equal to undertake the preservation of America’s scenic and recreational heritage.
With this general proposition in mind, Mr. Mather made two visits to Yellowstone during the season of 1915. There he carefully analyzed the administrative policies and personnel. While it is only fair to state that other federal officials were also planning a new national park organization and procedure it was largely Mr. Mather’s Yellowstone report that provided the needed impetus. From then on he supplied the energy, foresight, and devotion to effect a transition.
On August 25, 1916 the National Park Service Bill received President Wilson’s signature. This measure placed the control and general supervision of the entire national park activity squarely into the hands of a Director of National Parks. The bill was sponsored by Senator Reed Smoot of Utah and Representative William Kent of California.
Thereafter, on October 1, 1916, the troops of U.S. Cavalry left Fort Yellowstone for duty along the Mexican border. With C. A. Lindsley as Acting Superintendent a fine ranger corps was organized of mountain scouts and released soldiers. Shortly afterwards Congress reversed its action and voted to deny the use of Department of the Interior funds for protective purposes. This forced the return of the soldiers, and the army resumed control on June 30, 1917.
During the next six months National Park Service officials, aided by the army officers, gathered data which proved the inadvisability of continuing the use of troops. It should be noted that the attitude of the officers throughout was cogently expressed by Captain Harris:
And it is believed that to the extent in which the present method of government and protection is an improvement upon former methods it is due to the visible power and force of the National Government as represented by the military garrison in the Park.
It is not to be inferred that the claim is made that a military government is the only one practicable for the Park, or even that it is the best adapted or most suitable. It is believed, however, that no efficient protection can be given to the Park without the support of a well-organized and disciplined police force of some description.[336]
In this spirit, the cost of a military garrison and its lack of opportunities to drill were reviewed. It was clearly demonstrated that a ranger force of a chief ranger, four assistants, twenty-five permanent Park rangers of the first class, and twenty-five seasonal rangers would constitute a “well-organized and disciplined police force” and something else besides. It was also pointed out that the cost would be considerably less. This effort resulted in a second withdrawal of the troops in 1918. At the same time another ranger force was effected with substantially the same personnel as developed in 1916.[337] In due time the members of this new corps acquired a modest attitude of confidence in their own capacity which still abides.
Mr. Mather assumed office as the first National Park Director on May 16, 1917. In a short time the fruits of his vision were disclosed. Under his inspiring leadership the National Park program was steadily expanded. Peace was made with, and a degree of cooperation obtained from, the natural antagonists of the National Park Service. Several wealthy citizens who had acquired vast private estates were induced to donate portions thereof for the general public. Sportsmen who had observed the diminution in numbers of wild creatures were converted to the idea of refuges through self-interest. The positions of the lumber, grazing, irrigation, and water-power interests were less yielding on this all-out conservation issue. They would evidently favor a compromise. The general public gradually responded to the suggestion that the country beautiful was even more alluring than beautiful cities.[338]
In Secretary Lane’s third annual report in 1919 the National Park Service policy was announced under three broad principles:
First, that the National Parks must be maintained in absolutely unimpaired form for the use of future generations as well as those of our own time; Second, that they are set apart for the use, observation, health, and pleasure of the people; and Third, that the national interest must dictate all decisions affecting public or private enterprise in the Parks.[339]