That all of that certain tract described as follows: Beginning on the south boundary line of Crater Lake National Park at Four Mile Post No. 112; thence west along the south boundary line of said park 4.26 chains which is the northwest corner of this tract; thence south 114.42 chains; thence south 40°59′ east, 84.39 chains; thence east 15.13 chains to highway stake No. 130; thence north 89°30′ east, 18.06 chains; thence north 20.83 chains; thence north 19°40′ west 126.04 chains; thence north 27°52′ west 43.50 chains to the south boundary of Crater Lake National Park; thence west 24 chains, following the south boundary of said park to the place of beginning, in.
On March 16 Secretary of Agriculture Arthur M. Hyde submitted a report that gave less than enthusiastic endorsement to the bill, provided that Albright’s revised boundary description was incorporated into its text. Hyde observed:
. . . It is understood informally from the National Park Service, that the bill incorrectly describes the lands which it is desired shall be affected by it and that a new description will be proposed; that this new description covers an area of approximately 973 acres extending along both sides of the Fort Klamath road for a distance slightly in excess of 2 miles; that the purpose of this addition is to insure a more attractive entrance to the Crater Lake National Park by giving especial protection to the timber along the highway.
This department feels that as a general rule such piecemeal adjustments of coterminus boundaries between national parks and national forests are less desirable and effective than comprehensive and permanent adjustments based upon careful studies of all factors involved which will include within the park all areas predominantly of park value and exclude from the park all areas predominantly of industrial value. It also dissents to the idea that the inclusion within national parks of the roads giving access thereto is essential to the maintenance of the scenic attractiveness of such roads, since this department in the administration of the national forests also adheres to a policy of conserving the scenic values of the lands abutting on the highways. In this particular instance, however, representatives of the Forest Service have agreed that the addition of a certain area to the park would not seriously conflict with the use and management of the surrounding national forest lands, and if the bill is amended to correctly describe that area, this department will offer no objections to its enactment.
After some deliberation the House Committee on Public Lands reported favorably on the bill I on March 24 with the recommendation that Albright’s boundary revisions be inserted. [15] As amended the bill encountered little opposition in Congress. It passed the House on April 18, was referred to the Senate Committee on Public Lands and Surveys on April 19, and received a favorable report without amendments on April 26.[16]
After passage by the Senate on May 9 the bill was signed into law (47 Stat. 155) by President Herbert C. Hoover on May 14, 1932. Thus, 973 acres were added to the park, the addition becoming popularly referred to as the park’s “southern panhandle.”
The boundary change, which added some 973 acres to the park, had ramifications for the Park Service in terms of road maintenance. In response to inquiries from the Oregon State Highway Commission, Superintendent Elbert C. Solinsky stated on July 14, 1932:
It is true that our park boundary has been extended to include approximately 973 acres along the southern boundary. This addition includes a section of the state highway between Fort Klamath and the old park boundary. I believe approximately three miles of this highway have been added to the park and are now a part of the park highway system and subject to maintenance from Park Service funds. Unfortunately this year no allotments have been provided for the maintenance of this section. In fact practically no funds are available for road maintenance of our park roads. For that reason we will not undertake any maintenance work on the new section added by this boundary change this year. [17]
Some years later Superintendent Earnest P. Leavitt observed that considerable friction had developed between the Park Service and the Forest Service during negotiations for this addition to the park. Among other observations, he stated that:
. . . originally it was contemplated that the addition would be along section lines and would be a sizeable area. Before the addition was worked out, however, the Forest Service officials in charge became provoked at the National Park Service and determined that they would agree to only the very smallest area possible that was necessary to preserve this stand of ponderosa pine. The result is that we have a very narrow and irregular tongue of land extending south from the park boundary. [18]
***previous*** — ***next***
