Liberty Hyde Bailey and Enos A. Mills

Pioneers in Environmental Interpretation

by James R. Fazio

Reprinted from Nature Study Summer, 1975

    Depending on the inclinations and vigor of the historical ferret, the roots of environmental interpretation can be traced perhaps as far back as Aristotle, the Father of Natural History. It may even be claimed that interpretation actually began with the aborigines, for whom it was a matter of life and death to transmit certain revelations about their environment. It seems, however, that a more reasonable starting point is the great educational movements in Europe. Borrowing from a historical synopsis by Vinal (1926), we can view with appreciation the revolutionary ideas and innovations of the following men:
    When the eminent scientist, Louis Agassiz (1807-1873), [came] to America, he brought with him many of these revolutionary ideas and implemented them into the study of natural history. "Study nature, not books" became his motto, and he once spoke of his greatest accomplishment as being that he "taught men to observe." Agassiz contributed another principle basic to environmental interpretation and any modern study of ecology: "Facts are stupid things until brought into connection with some general law." (Cooper, 1945) Although Agassiz's efforts were directed largely at the specialist or researcher, many of his students carried the spirit of his teaching methods into the school system at all levels (Bailey, 1913). In addition, his short-lived summer school for teachers on the New England island of Penikese contributed a method of recently revised by universities around the country.
    "Nature study," is it was termed, probably first emerged as a primary and secondary school activity under the auspices of Pestalozzian "object teaching." In 1859, Edward A. Sheldon introduced the concept at Oswego, New York, following his return from Europe, where he had viewed the collection of objects, charts and devices developed by Pestalozzi and his students (Bellisario, 1969). By the 1880's the broadening concepts of nature study began to enter full bloom, ad a host of intrepid educators discovered the classroom beyond their doorsills.
    At the university level, Cornell was the first to include nature study as a formal part of its programs. There, in 1895, it was at first largely an extension effort attempting to acquaint farm families with the principles of "nature-sympathy" and "nature-relations" (Bailey, 1913). By the turn of the century, nature study appears to have gained "movement" proportions throughout much of the United States.

Pioneer Interpreters

    In studying the origin of environmental interpretation, particularly during the era of nature study, two names emerge from the dusty bookshelves -- Liberty Hyde Bailey and Enos A. Mills. Almost a continent apart, largely unknown to each other, and under widely different circumstances, these two men outlined methods of interpretation and teaching that are today being rediscovered. In fact, in the 1970's they are often heralded as innovative and progressive!
    Before we examine the methods and principles of these two pioneers in environmental interpretation, the following sketches will provide an introduction to the backgrounds of these remarkable men.

Liberty Hyde Bailey (1858-1954)
    The roots of the Bailey family are deeply entwined in the American soil. Liberty Hyde Bailey was born on a small farm bordering Lake Michigan. He was given his father's unusual name, which had originated 40 years earlier on the rugged Vermont homestead of Dana Bailey, an abolitionist grandson of a Revolutionary War veteran (Dorf, 1956).
    The younger Liberty was only five when his mother was taken by diphtheria. Too young for farm chores and too old to be confined to the house, the boy was free to run about the far, creating his own amusements and becoming well acquainted with the fields and forests surrounding his home. In even earlier years, he had been introduced to plant life through helping his mother drop flower seeds into their places in the garden. Whether out of sentiment or because of a desire that the child should not soon forget his mother, Liberty's busy father took time to continue the planting tradition for many years after her death (Dorf, 1956). These events, coupled with the natural inheritance from a gentle, poetic mother and the influence of a wise and kindly father, were to help shape the extraordinary life of Liberty Hyde Bailey.
    From frontier farm, Bailey's interests in natural history took him first to Michigan's agricultural college, then to Harvard as assistant to the eminent botanist, Asa Gray. Next, after serving as professor of horticulture at Michigan Agricultural College, Bailey moved to Cornell University in 1888 to begin building the horticultural department of his dreams.
    By the time of his death in 1954, the 96-year-old professor had not only developed Cornell's horticultural department into a position of world renown, but he had served as dean of the agricultural college and had become synonymous with Cornell's fame as a leading agricultural institution. Bailey's legend of "practical idealism" became a standard at Cornell, transcending nearly every field of endeavor. His influence on resident instruction, research, and extension teaching continues to this day; and, as will be shown in this article, the philosophy revealed in his writings shines as prophetic guidance for environmental education in the seventies.

Enos A. Mills (1870-1922)
    On April 22, exactly 100 years before Earth Day, Enos Mills was born in Fort Scott, Kansas. This contemporary of Bailey's was eventually to become the personification of nature study (almost nature worship) and a model interpreter. The years have seen his exploits and writings largely forgotten -- much to our own intellectual impoverishment.
    Like Bailey's, Mills' career may be traced to a pioneer mother who provided early and lasting influence on his life. It was her tales of the mining camps in Colorado that awakened Enos to the lure of the Rocky Mountains; and it was with her encouragement that the lad set off for Denver City at the tender age of fourteen! She realized that young Enos was not suited for the farm life of Kansas, either physically or by inclination, and in Colorado there was opportunity unlimited (Hawthorne and Mills, 1935).
    Young Mills found work in Estes Park, which in 1884 had already become a tourist attraction, and soon after homesteaded near the base of his beloved Longs Peak. Working as a ranch hand and miner during the winter months, he used his earnings to buy freedom for roaming the high peaks near Estes Park. Years of adventure and travel followed, coupled with intense self-teaching through the reading of a wide variety of books.
    Then, in 1889, there occurred one of those events which through pure chance eventually alter the course of history. Walking alone on a beach near San Francisco, young Mills' interest in a sea plant attraction the attention of another lone visitor on the empty shore. The bearded man was none other than conservationist John Muir. The friendship that developed was to focus the diverse interests and abilities of Enos Mills into a career of hat he termed "nature-guiding" (Chapman, 1921).
    Mills eventually settled down on his land at the foot of Longs Peak, where his sturdy log cabin remains to this day. There he also built a small hotel, unique not only in the wind-carved wood on which its every feature was based, but in its purpose as a "trail school." Card playing, dancing and the other usual resort pursuits were taboo; trail walks, nature study and Mills' evening talks were the attractive substance of the then-popular Longs Peak Inn. Winters were spent exploring, writing and touring the country to promote the early principles of forest management and later, promoting the establishment of Rocky Mountain National Park.
    Mills led a life which would thrill the most jaded reader of Argosy or True. Usually a lone traveler, he descended the sheer face of Longs Peak, was snowblind on a mountaintop, was caught in an avalanche, and was trailed by grizzly bears and mountain lions. Yet, many of the narratives penned by this rugged man read like the finest of poetry. And like the scholarly Bailey, he saw salvation for the world through teaching children to understand and appreciate nature.

Familiar Concepts

    According to Shomon (1968), one of the most important objectives of environmental interpretation is to develop in all of us what might be termed an "outdoor conscience." Not only will this serve Freeman Tilden's (1967) interpretive purpose of enriching the human mind and spirit, it will as well develop the prerequisite appreciation needed to accomplish the broader objectives of what we now term environmental education.
    As early as 1903, Liberty Hyde Bailey saw nature study as a means to "put the pupil in a sympathetic attitude toward nature for the purpose of increasing his joy of living." His philosophy showed through when he wrote that from direct observations the child would be led not only to knowledge but to love the common things and experiences in his life and environment (Bailey, 1913). In the Nature-Study Idea (1913) he wrote:
We are to open the child's mind to his natural existence, develop his sense of responsibility,...train him to respect the resources of the earth, teach him the obligations of citizenship...quicken his relations to human life in general, and touch his imagination with the spiritual forces of the world.
From our sad vantage point of 1974, we can keenly appreciate how different our century might have been if Bailey's philosophy had been widely espoused!
    On the other side of the continent Enos Mills had also evolved a personal philosophy which, if widely adopted, would have produced a society much different from ours. Chapman (1921) wrote of Mills:
...he had so succeeded in impressing a new regard for nature upon those with whom he comes in personal contact that he manages to run one of the most successful summer resorts in the West without having a flower picked on his place on a Colorado mountainside, or a bird or other wild thing hurt.
He is also reported to have said, "An acquaintance with a single bird, animal, or flower develops the sympathies and promotes universal brotherhood" (Hawthorne and Mills, 1935).
    Both men realized that, unlike Agassiz, they were not merely dealing with a new or novel approach to teaching science. Indeed, Tilden's (1967) principles of interpretation tell us that interpretation is an art, and that its chief aim is not instruction, but provocation. So it was that Bailey insisted that while nature study should not be unscientific, neither was it a science. Rather, it was spirit, an attitude of mind. And Mills (1920) wrote, "Nature guiding is more inspirational than informational...The nature guide arouses interest by dealing in big principles -- not with detached and colourless information."

Interpretive Methods

    To match their philosophy appreciation and understanding through the introduction of an individual to nature, Bailey and Mills developed their own techniques. In most cases, their methods were identical to those touted in today's most up-to-date literature for interpreters and teachers. In The Adventures of a Nature Guide, Mills (1920) quoted John Muir to describe the underlying method. Writing of his boyhood experiences, Muir stated:
    The animals about us were a never-ending source of wonder and delight. How utterly happy it made us! Nature streaming into us, wooingly teaching her wonderful, glowing lessons so unlike the dismal, grim ashes and cinders so long thrashed into us. Here, without knowing it, we still were in school; every lesson a love lesson, not whipped but charmed into us.
Mills repeatedly emphasized this approach. Once he wrote, "Nature will appeal to children and actively interest them unless blocked by the leader" (Mills, 1920). Referring to his trail school, he wrote, "...I wish children might have everywhere what they have here in enjoyment, educational foundation and incentive."
    As today, not everyone was in agreement with such liberal techniques. Mills complained:
    The unfortunate attitude of the parent was an obstacle to every outing. Many were thrown almost into a panic when a trip for their children was proposed, and too often came out of the panic to condemn such excursions with all the vehemence of old error.
    Elsewhere in his writings, Mills described "the academic mind" as holding that "things pleasurable and interesting are to be shunned; that they are akin to vice; that it is virtuous to do the disagreeable things, and all-important to force yourself to do what you do not like."
    Bailey's approach was in agreement and he wrote that "the works may be informal and free without being aimless." His spontaneity and informality were often criticized, but he countered that nature study could not be reduced to a mere system, "cut and dried" and made part of rigid and formal method. "It is," he wrote, "as free as its subject matter..." (Bailey, 1913). Likewise, he emphasized observation and decried "dissection, classification, theorizing or memorizing." Both men insisted that books should come second in field study, letting the individual's curiosity carry him from the object to the literature.
    The beliefs and methods put forth by Bailey and Mills read like a checklist for modern interpreters and environmental educators. Listed below are a few of their ideas and visionary proposals:

Warning for the Future?

    Liberty Hyde Bailey and Enos A. Mills are not only almost forgotten pioneers in the field of environmental interpretation, they also represent the thought leaders of what apparently was a "movement" of considerable proportions. The literature reveals that at the turn of the century the nature study movement was popular throughout the public school system in the United States. Strikingly, the philosophy behind that movement, as alluded to in the writings of Bailey and Mills, is quite similar to that which is embraced by many in the aftermath of Earth Day.
    Does this mean that the fruits of our seemingly strong advances in environmental education will go the way of the old nature study movement? Let us consider the following observations.
    First of all, we tend to view today's programs as revolutionary. Alas, in 1909 Liberty Hyde Bailey thought nature study would change the world of education. He wrote:
    Nature-study ought to revolutionize the school life, for it is capable of putting new force and enthusiasm into the school and the child...It is in much the stage of development that manual-training and kindergarten work were twenty-five years ago. (1913)
Nature study, by whatever name you choose, never came to enjoy the curricular success achieved by manual-training and kindergarten!
    Secondly, he believed:
    More than any other recent movement, (the nature study movement) will reach the masses and revive them...It explains the relations between man and his environment. It establishes a new sense of our dependence on the natural resources of the earth, and leads us not to abuse the nature or to waste our resources. It develops a public intelligence on these matters, and it ought to influence community conduct...(It) should greatly influence the bearing of the individual toward his conditions and his fellows, awaken his moral nature, and teach him something of the art of living in the world.
It can be said with some accuracy that somehow, this idyllic revival of the masses never materialized! Compare Bailey's goals with those that have been set by definition for modern environmental education:
...the process of recognizing values and clarifying concepts in order to develop skills and attitudes necessary to understand and appreciate the interrelatedness among Man, his culture and his biophysical surroundings. Environmental education also entails practice in decision-making and self-formulation of a code of behavior about issues concerning environmental quality (UNESCO, 1971).
    Thirdly, many of the principles embraced by interpreters and environmental educators today were set down by Bailey and Mills, and we also come under the same attacks experiences by those pioneers. Charges of faddism, superficiality, sentimentalism, disciplinary license and overburdening of already overburdened agency programs and school curricula were no strangers to Bailey and Mills -- and they are not strangers today.
    Finally, there appears to have been a breakdown in the solidarity behind the nature study movement. According to Richard B. Fischer, 1 Professor of Environment Education at Cornell University, emotionalism entered into the movement, bringing several of its key leaders to "swordspoint" sometime in the 1920's. Scientist-educator struggles ensued, as well as methodology disputes, and the nature study movement was largely engulfed by the rushing Twentieth Century.
    From a more optimistic view, it may be said that rather than dying an ignominious death, the nature study movement added an important link in the evolutionary chain leading to today's environmental education programs. One can trace the roots of this evolution to the beginnings of natural history awareness. After a long period of time came the nature study movement, thence the rise of management-oriented conservation education in the twenties and thirties and finally the emergence of environmental education as highlighted by the events on and around Earth Day, 1970.
    Throughout has been the threat od environmental interpretation, with Liberty Hyde Bailey and Enos A. Mills to be remembered for their significant contributions to the art. There is much to be learned not only from these great minds, but from the events which for half a century have thwarted the methods they helped establish. Let us hope their interpretive methods will be effectively applied by a cadre of professionally trained naturalists and teachers, and that at last their ideals will take permanent hold within our society. The environmental needs are so great today that should our present "movement" wither, there may not be an opportunity for evolution into yet another phase.

1. Personal communication, 1972.

Literature Cited

Bailey, L. H. 1913. The nature-study idea. The Macmillan Company, New York, 246 p.
Bellisario, Joseph. 1969. E. Laurence Palmer: his contributions to nature conservation and science education. Unpublished doctoral thesis, The Pennsylvania State University. 318 p.
Chapman, Arthur. 1921. Enos A. Mills, nature guide. In Enos A. Mills: author, speaker, nature guide. The Trail Book Store, Longs Peak Co. 37 p.
Cooper, Lane. 1945. Liberty Hyde Bailey -- an informal biography. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, N. Y. 259 p.
Hawthorne, Hildegarde and Esther Burnell Mills. 1935. Enos Mills of the Rockies. Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston. 260 p.
Mills, Enos. 1920. The adventures of a nature guide. Doubleday, Page and Co., New York, 271 p.
Shomon, Joseph J. (Ed.) 1968. Manual of outdoor interpretation. National Audubon Society, New York. 104 p.
Tilden, Freeman. 1967. Interpreting our heritage. The University of North Carolina Press Chapel Hill. 120 p.
UNESCO. 1971. What is environmental education? SMEAC Newsletter. 2(8).
Vinal, William Gould. 1926. Nature guiding. The Comstock Publishing Co., Ithaca, N. Y. 551 p.


Back to the Enos Mills Cabin Home Page

Browse in Our Gallery