Rolf Wallenstrom oral history transcript

              Oral History

of

Rolf L. Wallenstrom

Interviewed by:

Jerry C. Grover

Oral History Program

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

National Conservation Training Center

Shepherdstown, West Virginia

Name: Rolf Lennart Wallenstrom

Born: July 12, 1932

Date of Interview: November 19, 2000

Location of Interview: Home of Jerry & Judy

Grover, Tigard, Oregon

Interviewer: Jerry C. Grover

Years worked for Fish and Wildlife Service:

From January 1959 to May 1989

Offices and Field Stations Worked, Positions Held:

Minneapolis, MN – Appraiser Trainee

Fergus Falls, MN – Supervisory Appraiser

Aberdeen, SD - Wetland Program Supervisor

Washington, D.C. - Departmental Manager Development

Training Program

Pierre, SD – Area Manager for SD, NE

Washington, D.C. - Deputy Associate Director,

Environment [Habitat Preservation, Endangered

Species, Federal Aid]

Washington, D.C. -Associate Director, Environment

[Habitat Preservation, Endangered Species, Federal

Aid]

Portland, OR – Regional Director

Most Important Projects:

Prairie Pothole Land Acquisitions, Area Manager concept,

Kesterson, Spotted Owl, Oahe BR project, condor recovery

Colleagues and Mentors:

Robert Burwell, Nat Reed, Burt Rounds, Mike Spear, Thor

Marston, Frank Dunkle, Chuck Sowards, Lynn Greenwalt

Most Important Issues:

California Water Management & Bay/Delta issues,

Endangered Species, Wetlands Acquisition

Rolf & Ginnie Wallenstrom - May 2010

ABSTRACT: Rolf had a wide-ranging career that led him

from a beginning in the controversial wetland acquisition

program in the Dakotas, through several reorganizations and a

leadership role in the Washington Office to his final assignment

as the Regional Director for the Service’s Pacific Region. He

had to deal with major issues throughout his career to implement

the scientific conservation management of natural resources,

which are the responsibility of the Fish and Wildlife Service.

Ultimately, politics would be his undoing when he was fired for

not accepting a political transfer to a "well-paid, do-nothing

2

position" which would have allowed a political appointee to fill the RD position. He was also unwilling to yield regarding the raging California water projects, oil drilling and the endangered species issues. Rolf challenged his firing and he was reinstated to the position of Regional Director, receiving all back pay, benefits and legal fees. He agreed to retire if the Department would agree to fill his position with a professional Wildlifer, which DOI did. Rolf and wife Ginnie now split seasonal time at their homes in Vancouver, WA and Georgetown, TX.

The Oral History

JERRY GROVER = JG: This is Jerry Grover, a retired Ecological Services & Fishery supervisor in the Portland Regional Office to do an oral history with Rolf Wallenstrom from Vancouver, Washington in my home regarding his career with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Also with us today is Judy Grover. Rolf, what was your position when you retired?

ROLF WALLENSTROM = RW: I was the Regional Director for the Pacific Region of the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. This area encompassed the five western states, Hawaii, and the Trust Territories of the Pacific.

JG: Where were you born and raised and what got you going into the field of natural resources?

RW: I was born in Albany, New York, but raised in a suburban neighborhood of Schenectady, New York. By the time I was in high school, my folks had moved to Syracuse, New York. During my growing up years, my dad and I regularly hunted, fished and camped in the summer.

JG: Where did you go to college?

RW: I attended Syracuse University because of its College of Forestry. I wanted to study something to do with the outdoors. I graduated in 1955 with a B. S. in Forest Products Engineering.

JG: What kind of a job did that get you?

RW: My first professional job was with Diamond Match Corp. in Superior, Montana as a management trainee. Ginnie and I had set our wedding date for April 1956 in Syracuse, with plans to live in Montana. While I was traveling back to Syracuse for our wedding, my draft notice arrived! But because of the wedding, I got a ninety-day postponement.

JG: Who did you marry?

RW: Ginnie McGean. I actually started dating her in the eighth grade. We dated pretty steady, but not all the way up to marriage. We were engaged once, and broke it off once. We didn't get married until 1956, the year after I graduated from College. We went on a long honeymoon. We drove back to Montana to pick up what few personal possessions I had there and then spent our honeymoon driving totally around the country for six weeks. I came back and reported for basic training.

JG: You were in the Army as an enlisted man?

RW: Yes. After Basic Training at Fort Dix, NJ, my duty was at Fort Meade, Maryland. For the two years, I worked in an Engineers Battalion and a Special Services Battalion. I had pretty good duty. I worked as a Surveyor, was a Life Guard, and was on an Honor Guard/Drill Team. That pretty much took care of the two years.

JG: Did you get a chance to go overseas or anything like that?

RW: No! I was about to ship out, but my mother passed on at about that time, so they held me back. Ginnie and I then moved to Crowns, Maryland.

JG: Did any family result from this?

RW: We have a daughter and a son. Our daughter was born in Annapolis, Maryland in 1957. And our son was born five years later in Fergus Falls, Minnesota.

JG: What do your children do now?

RW: Both of my children are Drug Enforcement Special Agents with the DEA. My daughter is stationed in Houston, Texas, and my son is currently stationed in Chochabama, Bolivia.

JG: Are they both college graduates?

RW: Yes. They are both college graduates.

JG: And you are a Grandpa?

RW: Yes, I am. My daughter has the oldest of my grandchildren. Trevor is four years old. My son has a three-year-old son, and a one-and-half-year-old daughter.

JG: What are your children’s names?

RW: Lou-Anne and Jeff.

JG: O. K., that’s kind of the personal stuff. Now I'd like to ask about when you started to work for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and where you started. When did you start with the Service and what possessed you to join?

RW: After the Army, Ginnie and I moved to Baltimore, Maryland. I worked for Crown Central Petroleum Corporation in a Management Training Program. After I graduated from College, I put in applications all over the country with government agencies and everybody else. While I was in Baltimore, I got a letter from the Fish and Wildlife Service that asked, "if it were offered, would you accept a position with the Service in Minneapolis, Minnesota?” The position was as a Real Estate Appraiser, purchasing wetlands. Well, I had no idea what an appraiser did, nor what the Fish & Wildlife Service was doing purchasing wetlands. So I went down to the Washington Office, 3

and talked to some people. The job sounded like something that I would really love. I applied and I got it! I started with the Fish and Wildlife Service in January of 1959, as an Appraiser at GS-5. That was a salary cut from my oil company job. But we liked what we saw when we got there, and I never had any regrets.

JG: Did you stay in Realty from then on?

RW: Yes, until 1962. I was in the Minneapolis Office, Region 3, and basically at that time, the pace was a little slower and Realty had an excellent training program. They had a workbook type assignment with tests at the end of it. I can't remember if it was at the end of every week or every three weeks. Then they had college courses that they required everybody in Real Estate Appraisal to go to. So the first year was sort of on-the-job training. I was working with other trained Appraisers. I was also taking the courses. Legislation had been passed to use the Duck Stamp money to buy wetlands in the prairie pothole country, and the Service started up this acquisition program. They had offices located in the states of North Dakota, South Dakota, and Minnesota at that time. After that, I transferred in 1961, as a Supervisory Appraiser, to Fergus Falls, Minnesota. I had two or three others working for me, and I stayed there until 1964.

There were larger offices that had positions that were called Wetland Program Supervisors. They had a staff of acquisition people, plus a staff of biologists and surveyors. In 1964, I was appointed as a Wetland Program Supervisor in Aberdeen, South Dakota and I stayed there until 1971. I then went to the Manager Development Program in Washington, D. C. for a year.

JG: While you were in the Dakota’s working [in acquisition] was there a lot of money involved? Were you doing a lot of purchasing, or were you just going around doing a lot of appraisals?

RW: We were doing the actual appraisals, negotiations, and purchasing. Also, a large part of the job was trying to get County and State approval for the Program. There was a lot of resentment. In fact, when I got there, some of the key wetland counties had shut the Service off because of tax loss and because they didn't want private land going out of production. At that time, I think half of my time was spent trying to convince people to let us continue the Program. I was giving public relations programs on the “Ham and Chicken Circuit” to Service Clubs all around the county seat towns. I was telling them what the Program was about and trying to gain support.

JG: Was this on your own, or was there a concerted effort on the part of the Fish and Wildlife Service to support you on this “Ham and Chicken” circuit?

RW: The Service encouraged this. And of course wouldn't have had a Program [if not for gaining the public support]. We couldn't buy any land without County approval, so it was paramount that if we wanted to succeed we were going to have to convince them that it was best for the County?

JG: Did it work?

RW: Yes, it sure did. We had some counties that were pretty strict and required us to come in with each purchase to get an approval. Then here were some which gave us blanket approval for whatever we wanted to buy. Over the years, things would blow up; you'd get an individual who would campaign against us so to speak, and we'd have to go put that fire out and start back purchasing again. It was a very challenging and interesting time.

JG: What about your folks that you worked with and worked for? Were they a pretty good bunch of folks? Were they just coming and going, or were they also career people?

RW: They were all career people, and all college graduates. All of them were highly motivated toward the environment and wildlife. In fact, my first impression of the Service was that I thought everybody was that way. Just every minute with the Service was exciting. I never met anybody in the Service that I didn't enjoy being with.

JG: During this era, when you were in this land acquisition position, can you put a finger on one major success or successes? I am going to ask the reverse of that, too.

RW: Yes, I can. I mentioned the fact that Day County, South Dakota, had us shut off, and a minor success was getting them back on the wagon again, because that was the best wetland county in South Dakota. There was an irrigation project going on at the time called the Oahe Irrigation Project. It was a Bureau of Reclamation project. They were actively locating major drainage channels and irrigation channels and promoting the leveling of land, clearing of land, and drainage. So all of these discussions that we were in to try and promote saving wetlands made us almost a natural enemy of this project. It took a while. Actually, before the project was killed, I had moved on to the next job level. But I would say that the defeat of the Oahe Irrigation Project, which was de-funded by Congress, was a major accomplishment. I think the Fish and Wildlife Service was a key player, maybe the key player in getting it defeated.

JG: I take it that you felt that this was a good decision as opposed to development?

RW: Absolutely. And at that time, things were a lot different than they were by the time I retired. It was the beginning of the environmental era. Rachel Carson had written her book, and people were beginning to get concerned about habitat, pollution, and things. We had one hundred percent support, all the way from Assistant Secretary Reed, [Nat Reed] through to the Regional Director Robert Burwell and all of the Program Supervisors in Minneapolis. Politically, some of the South Dakota and Nebraska politicians were staunch supporters of these irrigation projects. There was more than one attempt to get me fired. As long as we had done our homework, and had all of the information, and all of our ducks in line, and weren't telling half-truths and stuff, we always got support from the Washington and Regional Offices. It was really a pleasure to work that way.

JG: Is there a point when, in this era, that you wish you had done things different, or when things just didn't come together or bombed out?

4

RW: No, not in that era, everything went pretty well. Later on there might have been.

JG: This kind of takes you up to the time in 1971 when you arrived on the doorsteps in D.C. for the Managerial Development Training Program.

RW: Yes, that was an outstanding program and they had outstanding people in it. Everybody was able to pretty much get assignments with various people in Washington that they were interested in working with. I thought that program was excellent.

JG: What was one of your major assignments? Did you have a long-term one?

RW: Yes, I had a long-term assignment with Nat Reed who was then the Assistant Secretary for Fish, Wildlife and Parks. That was probably the highlight of that program for me. It wasn't a long-term assignment. It was for like a month. Some of the people worked maybe half of the time, or more, in one assignment there. I felt that it would be better to move around, and not get too involved and not become a “staff person” to somebody. Instead, I wanted to try to get a little knowledge in several different areas.

JG: What were some of the other assignments that you worked on that seem to stick out, and benefit you later?

RW: I had assignments with Refuges and in Environment. I had others, but those are the ones that stick out in my mind because they were a major part of the Service's activities. I learned more about them, and how things worked in Washington.

JG: What was your grade at that time? And what was your working title or job title when you went into that program?

RW: I was a Wetlands Program Supervisor and I was a GS-13.

JG: You were one of the highest graded employees for doing this program?

RW: Yes. I had just been promoted to 13, prior to going into that program.

JG: And this was a year-long program?

RW: Right.

JG: Then what happened?

RW: At the end of that program, I went back briefly to Aberdeen, South Dakota, which reminds me of one of my other Management Training Program assignments.

One of my other assignments in Washington was to work on a new concept, which the Service called an Area Management concept, in a pilot Region. They took several States out of different Regions. They made a new Region 6, headquartered in Denver for the Regional Office. They had five Area Managers; new positions that were going to be hired to supervise various States or combinations of States under that new Region. The Area Managers were going to have line authority. Line authority would go directly from the Regional Director to the Area Manager. It was a brand new concept, and I worked on that for a while in Washington as a trainee.

To my good fortune, when I got back to South Dakota, they were just picking the Area Managers. And I got picked to be the Area Manager for South Dakota and Nebraska, headquartered in Pierre, South Dakota. That gave me supervisory responsibility over field activities in the Service -- Law Enforcement, Hatcheries, Refuges, Land Acquisition, and Endangered Species.

JG: As I recall, everything but Federal Aid.

RW: Yes, we had no field Federal Aid activity at that time.

JG: How long were you an Area Manager?

RW: From 1972 to 1979. In 1979, the Service was going to try to implement that pilot project nationwide but they made some, what I think were drastic, changes in it. They took some of the line authority away from the Area Managers. Some Regions were into it more than others. Some Regional Directors, I think, preferred to have staff people out there, and so they picked the kind of people that were staff people. From that point on, some Area offices functioned well, and some functioned poorly. I think it depended on what Region you were in.

JG: Were you a supporter of the Area Manager concept?

RW: Absolutely. We accomplished a lot. When I left Pierre, I got a promotion as a Deputy Associate Director for Habitat Preservation in Washington. I worked for the Associate Director who was Mike Spear.

JG: O. K., You're back in Washington. Let’s just step back a minute. You were talking about Area Managers; what did you think was the real strength of the Area Management Program that benefited the Service?

RW: I think that what benefited the Service was that there was a spokesman fairly close to the local scene. At the State level for instance, it was someone who could say “Yes” or “No” and resolve issues and problems, and make compromises all on his own. It didn't take days, weeks or months to get things done. Plus, I think that this was the first time perhaps that Refuges, Hatcheries, Realty, Endangered Species and Law Enforcement all worked as a team. I think that this was helpful for everybody, because everybody went to the same staff meetings. And they all learned what other activities the other departments were involved in. Everybody got to see that everyone had a lot of work to do, and that everybody was working hard at it. It was sort of an esprit de corps building thing, and it worked very well.

JG: Again, were there good folks involved?

RW: Terrific, absolutely terrific.

JG: If it was such a good system, what was its downfall?

5

RW: Probably people that wanted to maintain status quo, and had been doing things one way for a long time. They felt that they had gotten along for a long time doing it with control in the Regional Office, and they were going to keep control in the Regional Office.

JG: So, you're saying that it was a conflict between the Area Managers who had line authority, versus the folks who were suddenly staff at the Regional Office?

RW: That probably was the underlying emotion that caused more reorganizations that went back to all of the scenarios that I think everybody’s career has had from various line and staff functions in different places.

JG: Let’s go on to Washington. In Washington you were Deputy Associate Director, under Mike Spear, for Ecological Services, or was it Habitat Conservation at the time?

RW: Well, they changed names. I am not sure which year it was Ecological Services or Habitat Preservation. I think that the name, Federal Assistance was there at one time. I spent one year as a Deputy Associate Director, and then I was promoted to Associate Director for Environment in 1980. I was in that position until 1986.

JG: During that period, what were the big button pushers? What were you working on?

RW: We were working on mostly habitat preservation type activities, and the major projects in the country that were causing environmental damage. Three of them were right there in Region 6, when we had the Area Management concept. There was the Garrison Project in North Dakota, the Oahe Project in South Dakota, and the Mid-State Project in Nebraska. Eventually, every one of them was de-authorized.

Again, I think that the Service was very important in accomplishing that. California had numerous issues. Region 1 had a bunch of issues out here in the environment. Development in California wanted to impact wetlands and impact offshore areas with oil wells. In Endangered Species at the Washington level, we were involved in CITES, which is the treaty between all of the nations that participate in the endangered species activities. There were some foreign activities, which provided an opportunity to go to CITES conventions every two years where the foreign countries negotiated treaties and how they were going to conduct trade and protection of endangered species. That was very interesting also.

JG: Were those happy times for you, in D.C.? Were they rewarding or feel fulfilling, like you were doing something?

RW: Yes, it sure did. I enjoyed that. It seemed that during my career, six or seven years in one location was about enough. Well, there were a couple of down things during that time. There was a change of Administration and we got a new Secretary of the Interior, James Watt. He was anti-Service and anti-environment. That made life less than pleasant for the Service and its employees. He didn't like what we did or how we did it. So there were many changes made then; I think certainly that the support for some of our activities was gone. If people were going to continue those activities, they pretty much had to do it on the “Q. T.” The major activity in the Washington Office at that time was to eliminate Federal regulations. To a degree, that happened, but we managed to live with it.

JG: What were your relations with The Hill like at that time?

RW: I think that the Service maintained good relations with The Hill. We had our supporters and detractors. We probably walked on more eggshell type situations than we had in previous years. But that was never one of my fortes. Of course, I went up to The Hill for budget sessions and to explain environmental issues and those sorts of things. I never had an aptitude to convince a politician that he ought to do something environmentally. This probably got to be my demise at the end of my career.

JG: From Washington, and as the Associate Director, what was the next stage?

RW: In Region 1, there had been a change in Regional Directors. In fact, there were two fairly recent changes. Kahler Martinson was a long-time Regional Director and he was followed by Dick Myshak. And then, Myshak was transferred. Frank Dunkle was the Director at that time, and Frank was a political animal and a biologist. When a vacancy came up in Region 1, Frank picked me to be Regional Director. So, in 1986, I went to Portland, Oregon as Regional Director, Region 1, the Pacific Region.

JG: What was your charge, being the RD 1? What were you supposed to do?

RW: Well, it was pretty much to maintain things as they had been, and get a handle on California where we had great issues and problems. It also was maybe to improve morale because there had been frequent turnover and people were getting a little antsy. Things became a little more political than they had been in the past. The Service had always had career Directors, and we've had great Directors in my opinion until such time as politics entered into it. Frank Dunkle was good in some areas, and poor in others in my estimation. He was more political than any other Director that we've ever had. My charge was just to bring the Region together and get on top of the issues in California.

JG: What were some of the issues that were pushing your button down in California?

RW: Kesterson! The irrigation project down in California that had caused the contamination of the Kesterson area with selenium was just breaking then. And the Service ended up getting some of that land for a Refuge. The oil drilling off of the coast was an issue, and we played a big role in approving or not approving the oil well locations, and being critical of EIS's that claimed that they could ship a lot of oil off of the coast without an oil spill, and things like that. There were also endangered species issues. The California Condor became almost extinct. Perhaps the biggest decision I ever made was the decision to take into captivity the last surviving wild Condor, AC 6. That decision was opposed by the Tumach Indian Tribe who claimed that the Condor was a sacred bird to them and they would lose 6

their heritage if the last Condor was taken into captivity. The Audubon Society actively opposed it. But the [Endangered Species] Recovery Team recommended it and Frank Dunkle did give the Region a lot of authority for making decisions at the Regional Director levels. I made that call. And we called the Condor in. It was the last wild Condor out there. I have to think, it’s too early to say that it was a good decision, I guess, but at least now we've got 60 Condors in the wild, that have been raised in captivity from these wild ones that we took in. I think that we've got another 95 in captivity that are either being used for breeding purposes, or are ready to be released into the wild.

The irrigation project that caused Kesterson was a continuing thorn. The Bureau of Reclamation was a major opponent of ours. That project didn't die. I think it was pretty much fully constructed so it’s still going on, but there is nothing new developing down there. Of course, at the end of my career, the Spotted Owl came up. We had teams studying the Spotted Owl. The environmental community wanted it listed as an Endangered Species and, of course, the political community did not. Some of the things that I did in California got me crosswise with the Secretary’s office. Frank Dunkle being a political animal suggested that I take a position as Special Assistant to the Director, and relocate anywhere I wanted to in the United States. I would maintain my Senior Executive Service grade. I don't know exactly what I was supposed to do but when I asked him who he was going to replace me with, he told me, “Steve Robinson,” who was somebody who came into FWS public affairs from a job in the Nevada prison system through the political avenues. He was promoted within the Service through the political side of the Senior Executive Service. I told Frank that if he was going to put Robinson in that Regional Director position, and we had no political appointees at that time at that level, that I wasn't going to leave. So we had a stalemate for maybe six months, which finally ended in him firing me. This ended in me challenging him, hiring an attorney, and the Department rehiring me. They also paid all of my back pay.

JG: You were fired and rehired, courtesy of Dunkle, and the issue was over California water issues and the Spotted Owl?

RW: It was Endangered Species and oil drilling and irrigation projects, all of those.

JG: The Spotted Owl too?

RW: The Spotted Owl situation was just starting, but it was hot. At the end of all of this infighting, for about the last three months, it was a very unpleasant time. He [Dunkle] would put Acting Regional Directors in the job and would give me some kind of assignment around the country. I was to go look at contaminants or whatever. It was just a “make work” assignment. Of course, he was lobbying Congress to get me fired and I was lobbying my friends. Actually, I had a letter signed by, I think, 26 Congressional Representatives and Senators, telling the Service to keep me on. It was sort of interesting, but at the same time I was paying huge attorney's fees. When it was all over they rehired me, they paid my back pay, they paid my attorney bills, and I went back to work for a day, and then I retired.

They paid me to move anywhere in the country that I wanted to move.

JG: Benefit of the SES?

RW: Yes, but they didn't have to do it. It was a negotiated settlement from when they rehired me.

JG: So you retired then; it was what year?

RW: That was in May of 1989.

JG: Was that a good day for you, or where you still willing to work? Or, by this time were you ready to bag it?

RW: Well, I enjoyed, and I mean really enjoyed every day of my work. I never went into work without looking forward to an interesting day. I had worked for the government for 30 years. Leaving was certainly something that I was ready to do because I recognized that being crosswise with the Director and the Secretary’s office, and having to ask them to provide the funds for Region 1, and provide the new employees that we needed, that I would be a detriment to Region 1 if I were to stay in the job. Obviously, I would be de-funded, and probably given all of the worst employees that were available, so there wasn't a lot of thought about staying on. That would have been ridiculous.

And shortly before I retired, I had hip surgery that took three or four months for me to get back going around. But you know, I never really missed it. I missed the camaraderie of seeing the people that I had worked with for 30 years. I still see a great many of them. I miss things like conventions and meetings that were national in scope. I figure that I was really fortunate to have had 30 years of something that I loved. And to have accomplished something that I think was important, and I haven't really given it a second thought since I retired. I've kept busy. I am not working. I've been enjoying myself in leisure activity. I think I did one consulting job, and that was it.

JG: In retrospect, looking back on your career, do you have a high point that you would say, “Hey man, this was something that I really signed up to do”?

RW: Yes. Certainly I would say that Region 6 and the Area Management activity during those six or seven years was a definite high. Most of the other points were certainly pretty high too. I enjoyed every job.

JG: Did you have a particular low point, where you wondered, “Why am I here?”

RW: Of course! James Watt and that Administration was obviously a low point. And from then on, to see the political influence affecting career ladders and the esprit de corps of the career employees was really disturbing to me. I know that it is a different world today. And I don't know that it is ever going to get back to the way it was. Maybe it never should. But things tend to follow a pendulum type movement, and some of the things that I started doing like wetland preservation, whether to take easements or not to take easements, whether we'd buy land or lease land, those issues; about the third time that the same 7

issue came up for discussion, and a vote, I began to realize that 30 years was enough. And “You better get the hell out of here,” because you have already experienced this reorganization once or twice.

JG: With your career, even under the circumstances, you took a very positive attitude with your leaving. For a young person coming in today, would you have a piece of advice or encouragement?

RW: Yes, I sure would. I would say that if you don't enjoy it, get out. If it’s something that you enjoy and you get satisfaction out of helping the country solve wildlife and environmental problems, do your best, and make your best calls. Make your decisions as professional as you can. If you can't get the whole pie on the first try, live to fight again. I don't recommend that anybody go out there and burn all of their bridges and decide that they are going to save the world in a short period. It takes give and take. You can get a lot of satisfaction just by taking what little you can get on a given day and living to fight again. That’s what I would recommend for new employees.

JG: In conclusion, do you have any other thoughts that you would like to include in this interview for the Archives?

RW: Well, I think that I would be remiss if I didn't recognize a couple people who were standouts during my career. Lynn Greenwalt, is perhaps, certainly during my career, the greatest Director that the Service ever had, and maybe ever will have. Robert Burwell was just a gentleman and a super person in Region 3. Burt Rounds, who was sort of the father of the wetlands program and was my Supervisor for several years, certainly made an outstanding contribution to the Service. When I was an Area Manager, I had a Deputy Area Manager who is deceased now. His name was Chuck Sowards. Chuck’s contributions to the Service, both in Fisheries and Wildlife were just outstanding. He really was a wonderful FWS Professional. He taught some of the fish programs at fish schools and switched to wildlife later in his career and did an outstanding job there also. I would certainly like to acknowledge his contribution.

JG: Very good. Thank you, Rolf, for your time and the completion of this interview.