Battlefield preservation

I’ve given an interview on my new book on the Battle of Brandy Station that has been posted on the CWPT website that can be found here. The CWPT is offering the book for sale as part of its regular fund raising efforts. I really appreciate the support given my work by the CWPT, and it’s likewise my pleasure to do what I can to assist with the Trust’s ongoing efforts. Jim Lighthizer, president of the Trust, wrote an excellent foreword to the book that explains why we work so hard to save these battlefields, and I commend it to you. Thanks also to Rob Shenk of the Trust for wanting to have my insights included on the Trust’s website.

For those of you who buy through Amazon, please click through the CWPT link, as the Trust receives a small commission on every sale that originates from its site. Every penny helps. Thanks.

And enjoy.

Continue reading

Some time ago, a friend named Jim Lamason came up with what seemed to be an honorable idea. Jim wanted to honor the men who gave the last full measure of their devotion at Gettysburg by forming a new organization to be called the Gettysburg Historical Association. I helped Jim with formulating the concept for this thing and agreed to serve on the board of directors. So did J. D. Petruzzi. Jim recognized that he is not the right person to serve as the president of such an organization, but agreed to do so when the others insisted he do so.

An organizational meeting was held at the end of January, and a set of bylaws was agreed upon. Most of the board was identified, and an executive committee was formed. Last weekend, a group of five of the board members, operating in secret, without following the protocols set forth in the bylaws, made a power play designed to force Jim to step aside as president. They succeeded. Jim resigned as president, board member and even as a member of the organization he founded.

Those five board members, acting in secret and without consulting with the other board members, then began taking unilateral and illegal steps. First came an announcement that the bylaws were null and void. Never mind that these people had agreed to them, and that the bylaws cannot be changed without a majority vote of the board of directors. Then came a refusal to communicate with another board member. At that point, it became clear that they have an agenda of their own, and that they intend to freeze out anyone who won’t drink their Kool-Aid and go along with their agenda. By nature, I am not one to drink anyone’s Kool-Aid, and when I made it clear that I wasn’t going along with their agenda, the erstwhile leader of the junta launched a vicious personal attack on me, demonstrating his true colors and showing what these people are really all about.

When I demanded that these people conform their conduct to the bylaws that they drafted and enacted, the response was a combination of hubris and childish personal insults. Consequently, four of the five board members who are not members of their little clique, including J. D. and me, have resigned, and I tend to think that the fifth, an honorable soldier on active duty in service to his country, will probably also resign. They’re now free to pursue their personal agenda and to enjoy the fruits of their scheme, for what that’s worth.

In the meantime, though, they have sullied the name of Gettysburg, they have dishonored the very people they claim to want to honor, and they have done a vast amount of damage to the cause, all in the name of hubris. To any of you who read this blog, I implore you to do yourselves a major favor and avoid this organization at all costs.

UPDATE, 11:15 AM: The fifth board member who was not a member of the clique has now also resigned, meaning that the five members of the clique are now alone and free to run things as they see fit, whether it’s legal or not. I have no doubt that they will find folks willing to drink their Kool-Aid and who will ratify their actions, which is all the more reason to avoid this organization at ALL costs.

I take no pleasure in any of this. In fact, I find it terribly sad and quite depressing. However, I felt that it was absolutely critical to make sure that the truth is told.

UPDATE, 9:15 AM, FEBRUARY 25: Two of the five remaining board members have apparently also resigned, even though they were two of the five who were involved in these events. That means that the three remaining members are the hard-core power-grabbers who pulled this off. They’ve now been exposed to the world for what they are. I will leave it to you to draw your own conclusions about what kind of people they are.

Continue reading

My friend Teej Smith sent along a really intriguing little tidbit about the discovery of Civil War-era human remains found on Bald Head Island, south of Wilmington, NC. Susan and I have spent several delightful vacations at Teej’s lovely home on Bald Head, so this tidbit is of great interest to me.

ARTIFACTS FOUND WITH REMAINS COULD REVEAL AGE OF BONES

State archeologists uncovered a third set of human remains on the Bald Head Island golf course Friday, February 12th. After construction workers unearthed a human skull a week earlier while renovating the golf course, authorities cordoned off the area to determine whether they were dealing with a crime scene or significant historical artifacts. It didn’t take long for officials to rule out foul play. Within hours, more bones turned up, and now investigators are considering the possibility that they have stumbled upon a Civil War-era burial site. Department of Public Safety Chief Chip Munna said that because the bodies were buried in a deliberate fashion, with arms folded across the chest, there’s reason to believe this could be the site of an old cemetery. State archeologists are checking to see if there are any records of burial sites located on Bald Head Island.

The bones and the investigation are now under the purview of the State Office of Archeology, and definitive conclusions about the remains won’t be available for a couple of weeks. However, authorities believe the bones are from adult males who lived in the 19th century. Porcelain buttons found at the site were commonly used on undergarments in the 1840s. The ethnicity of the men has not yet been established, and with Bald Head’s varied history, the bones could have belonged to Civil War soldiers, slaves, or even pirates.

On February 12th, a state archeology team collected two sets of skeletal remains for further study off-Island. While covering the story, a local TV news reporter tripped over a part of a skull, landing on a set of teeth, which led investigators to uncover the third set of remains.

Whether there are more remains is still unclear, but either way, Assistant Village Manager Chris McCall said that the State Office of Archeology will not require any further excavation. Instead, the State is asking the Club to fill in the hole in which the remains were found, leaving any other remains undisturbed. The State may also require the Club to hire a contract archeologist to monitor the filling and conduct a “remote-sensing survey” once the site has been restored to its pre-construction state.

In the meantime, authorities urge the public to stay away from the investigation site. The golf course is private property, and it’s also a potentially hazardous construction area. Said DOPS Chief Munna, “Anyone caught trespassing or attempting to locate or remove any items related to this investigation will be prosecuted.”

There was a large sand fortification on Bald Head Island called Fort Holmes, named for the wretched Confederate general, Theophilus Holmes, but very little of the fort remains intact today. Most of it was destroyed during the development of the island, so it makes sense that men might have died of disease or what not there and that they would have been buried there on the island. Still, this sort of thing is always intriguing when it occurs.

Thanks to Teej for sending this along.

Continue reading

Blindly lashing out in response to the letter from the four preservation entities opposing the Gettysburg casino, the spin doctors hired by David LeVan have issued an especially ignorant and intentionally misleading response:

We are extremely offended by the decisions of the Civil War Preservation Trust(CWPT), National Trust for Historic Preservation, Preservation Pennsylvania & the National Parks Conservation Association to not remain neutral in regards to the application of Mason Dixon Resort & Casino in the Adams County/Gettysburg Area. These Washington D.C. and Harrisburg, Pennsylvania based lobbyist groups are only interested in one thing and that is to use this casino “debate” to raise money for their own greed. Not one of these groups has helped to create or save one job since 2006 in this county, but yet raised a lot of money by using the Gettysburg National Military Park (GNMP) as a “prostitute” to fill their coffers full of donations during the last casino project. These full donations, “to save Gettysburg'”, have yet to be delivered here.

From their own press release they obviously do not understand the economic impact this project will contribute to this area: “the letter outlined additional concerns with the project, including potential impact on the regions vibrant heritage tourism industry. Citing current visitation statistics and scientific economic impact analysis, the groups concluded that the combination of Civil War preservation and the family friendly nature of Adams County has created a proven, winning formula for the park and its neighboring communities. A casino will conflict with this proven economic engine heritage tourism, and development compatible with and respectful of that heritage.”

The county has experienced a 35% decrease in visitation since 2002 and we are now at nearly 9% unemployment which equates to nearly 10.000 residents. So just how successful has this “proven, winning formula”
been? Maybe they should have asked some of the local residents that would like to have a chance at a job at the casino.

Not one of these groups bothered to contact our organization to request information or obtain the local “pulse” of area residents. Had they done so or even bothered to interview those unemployed residents, maybe they could have a clearer picture of what “we the residents” think and desire.

Their missions are to educate and preserve historical locations from development, yet they side with No Casino Gettysburg (NCG), who’s own leader freely admits that she and her husband are sub-dividing their farm land for residential development which is in the “view shed” from Confederate Ave and on the boundary of the battlefield. The groups have stated that this sub-division is not an issue to them, yet a proposed casino is?

PCAC has been contacted by several former CWPT members stating they were lied to, cheated out of their donation and taken advantage of during the 2006 casino campaign. Once these members found out the true facts of that project, they quickly became ex-members of the CWPT. Pennsylvania Preservation did not even bother to get involved with the application of the Valley Forge Casino, a casino that is now located approximately 3,000 feet from the Valley Forge National Historical Site. They could not provide even one quality reason why that site is less important than the GNMP.

Like NCG, these four lobbyist groups have just proven how hypocritical they really can be. We are warning “All Americans” to avoid these lobbyist groups new scams for cash and media attention.

Jeff Klein & Tommy Gilbert
PCAC Spokesmen

There is so much wrong with this intentionally misleading statement that I hardly know were to begin.

First, and foremost, it’s clear that these organizations are not “lobbyist groups”, as these liars claim. These are organizations that put their money where their mouth is and actually SAVE battlefield land to preserve our heritage for future generations. This is an intentional misrepresentation intended to mislead those members of the public not familiar with these organizations. Let’s remember that this entity seeks to cannibalize its neighbors in Gettysburg and stand to make millions at the expense of the small businesses in and around the town.

PADDOCK LAND USE ISSUE

Susan and Jim Paddock donated a conservation easement on a large, agricultural property – but like most easements retained some future building rights.

This allowed for some subdivision into large parcels, not to be confused with anything approaching sprawl.

They are exercising their right to sell these parcels which carry restrictive covenants on future building sites which will not be visible from the Fairfield Road or the National Military Park. This is being carried out with the utmost sensitivity to the adjacent historic and natural resources – sensitivity not being a term in the Pro-casino dictionary.

Thus, the nasty and completely unwarranted ad hominem attack against No Casino Gettysburg leaders Susan and Jim Paddock is wholly inaccurate – they placed a conservation easement on the property to prevent the construction of houses that would be visible from the battlefield. Again, this is an attempt to intentionally mislead the public.

NPS VISITATION FORMULA

According to the NPS November 2009 statement:

“The National Park Service has updated the formula used to estimate monthly and annual visitation to Gettysburg National Military Park. Retroactive to January 1, 2009, the park’s visitation estimates have been revised to use new people-per-vehicle numbers, resulting in a lower estimate of park visitation. The people-per-vehicle numbers are based on the results of a 12 month survey.”

This change in formula was a result of a new study and survey that found:

“A new person-per-vehicle multiplier of 2.4 for November through March; and 2.6 for April through October. Previously the park had been using a multiplier of 3.3 for November through March; and 4.0 for April through October.”

According to GNMP Chief Ranger Brion Fitzgerald, “This new visitation estimate will create a more accurate baseline and provide a better look at trends for the future.”

More Info: http://gettysblog.blogspot.com/2009/11/gettysburg-national-military-park.html

The good folks from the preservation organizations have wisely elected not to stoop to the same level in the gutter as the spinmeisters, and have sent the following letter

January 29, 2010

Mr. David LeVan
1094 Baltimore Pike
Gettysburg, Pennsylvania 17325

Mr. Jeff Klein
216 E. York St.
Biglerville, PA 17307

Dear Mr. LeVan and Mr. Klein,

In recent conversations you have had with members of the preservation community, you have deplored what you both described as the “misinformation” generated by the 2005-2006 Gettysburg Casino controversy, and expressed concern about the sometimes uncivil nature of that debate.

Local and nonresident members of the preservation community agree that this debate should be carried on by all parties in a civil and respectful manner. Our commitment is to provide our members, local decision-makers and the public with accurate information. This is particularly important because of the manner in which the previous Gettysburg Casino controversy divided citizens of Adams County. Keeping the debate civil and factual will help minimize the divisiveness that occurred during the previous controversy.

With this in mind, we would like to draw your attention to remarks by Mr. David La Torre, posted this morning on the Hanover Evening Sun website and in the Gettysburg Times. Mr. La Torre was either not privy to our conversations, or inadvertently made an inaccurate comment. He issued a statement that read: “To somehow suggest that there are enough jobs in Adams County when unemployment is now over 8 percent is ludicrous. It will be interesting to see how this message from these Harrisburg and Washington organizations will resonate with Adams County residents who are out of work and facing yearly tax increases.”

This is reminiscent of certain claims made by spokesmen for Chance Enterprises during the previous casino controversy that distorted our actual statements and written comments. We are committed to dealing professionally and courteously with you and your supporters, and after our recent conversations, we know you share our desire to avoid such misunderstandings.

Our letter (available for reference online at www.civilwar.org/aboutus/news/news-releases/2010-
news/assets/levan-casino-letter.pdf), which praised Mr. LeVan’s local philanthropic endeavors, at no point mentioned unemployment in Adams County, or the issue of jobs potentially created by any Gettysburg-area casino. Many of us also have friends and family deeply affected by the recession and would never minimize its impact.

Regarding jobs and this proposal, other casinos in Pennsylvania have made similar optimistic promises about job creation that have yet to be realized. Further, since the Eisenhower Resort is an existing amenity and no Category 3 facilities have yet opened, it is difficult to accurately project how many jobs will be created by casino operations over and above what already exist at the long established hotel.

Moreover, we have heard concerns expressed by a number of local small business owners who fear that the casino will relocate/divert existing jobs now based downtown, and dramatically hurt the business district of America’s most famous small town. Cost to taxpayers from traffic- and safety related projects and other predictable casino impacts also need to be analyzed by impartial experts.

Until such a nonpartisan, independent analysis is completed, the economic impact numbers remains speculative at best.

Finally, we note that in its rejection of the Crossroads application, the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board specifically stated, “The Gettysburg area itself is primarily a rural area without large population centers nearby to sustain the casino, thus the emphasis on the market to the South. In theory, this strategy is appealing. However, during the licensing hearings, Gettysburg presented testimony that it was ‘virtually the same drive time away’ from the Baltimore/Washington D.C. market as Charlestown slots in West Virginia . . . [and] the Board was not presented with any credible evidence to demonstrate how much of that Charlestown business could be expected to leave that facility and travel north to Gettysburg.”

To reiterate, our commitment to you throughout this process is to maintain a civil, factual and respectful tone. We are hopeful that, despite today’s inflammatory statement issued to the media by Pro-Casino Adams County, you and your supporters will fulfill your pledge to do the same.

Sincerely,

James J. Campi
Policy and Communications Director
Civil War Preservation Trust

Joy M. Oakes
Director, Mid-Atlantic Region
National Parks Conservation Association

Walter W. Gallas, AICP
Director, Northeast Field Office
National Trust for Historic Preservation

Melinda G. Crawford
Executive Director
Preservation Pennsylvania

This letter amply spells out any and all necessary reasons why someone would and should oppose this casino.

Aside from the libeling of the preservation organizations involved in the fight against this blight on the battlefield, the motivations of these pro-casino hired gun spin doctors ought to be abundantly obvious. Their intentions are to intentionally mislead the reading public into believing that this casino–which has absolutely no business being placed on battlefield land–will be a good thing.

It’s not. Let’s be honest about it, and let’s use these lies to mobilize folks to oppose this blight.

Continue reading

I suppose one has to give that moron David LeVan some credit for persistence. Rebuffed in his first effort to bring a grossly inappropriate casino to Gettysburg, LeVan–the same person responsible for the enormous and enormously loud Harley-Davidson dealership in Gettysburg–is trying again. This time, he wants to put his casino at the Eisenhower Conference Center, which is just a few hundred yards south of South Cavalry Field. The ground where this place sits was used as the campground for Judson Kilpatrick’s division on the night of July 3, 1863, and it served as a staging ground for the fighting on South Cavalry Field. There is absolutely NO place for a casino there. Imagine how casino nowadays evolved, now you can easily put up anywhere even online, see 666casino and try their online casino games.

From the CWPT:

Preservation Groups Declare Opposition to New Gettysburg Casino Proposal
Proposal poses direct threat to National Park and America’s most famous small town

(Gettysburg, Pa.) – In a letter dated January 26, 2010, a coalition of state and national preservation groups conveyed to Adams County, Pa., businessman David LeVan their decision to oppose his effort to open a casino a half-mile to the south of Gettysburg National Military Park. In the letter, the Civil War Preservation Trust, National Parks Conservation Association, National Trust for Historic Preservation and Preservation Pennsylvania cited the location’s proximity to the battlefield as a direct threat, noting that the potential development and traffic impacts place the National Park at further risk.
Contacts

* Virgil McDill, NTHP, 202-294-9187
* Jim Campi, CWPT, 202-367-1861 x7205
* Mindy Higgins, Preservation PA, 717-234-2310
* Shannon Andrea, NPCA, 202-454-3371

Related Links

* Joint Letter to Casino Investor (PDF)
* Map of Proposed Casino Location

Battlefields

* Gettysburg

After thanking LeVan for his outreach to the preservation community in this matter and his generosity to various local philanthropic causes, the four groups stressed that their position does not stem from any opposition to gambling, but, rather, from “our longstanding commitment to ensuring that singular and significant historic sites like the Gettysburg Battlefield are treated with the respect and consideration they deserve.”

“Some places are just too important to be treated with anything less than the greatest respect, and Gettysburg is one of those places,” said Richard Moe, president of the National Trust for Historic Preservation. “Anyone who has visited the battlefield in recent years can attest to the fact that commercial development is threatening the visitor experience at Gettysburg, and this proposed casino would greatly exacerbate the problem. A new casino located so close to this sacred soil is simply unacceptable.”

After preliminary plans for the casino became public in late 2009, each preservation organization performed its own independent due diligence investigation, including meeting with Mr. LeVan personally, before reaching the same conclusion: the site’s proximity to the hallowed ground of Gettysburg creates an inappropriate juxtaposition damaging to the national park.

“We remain committed to protecting our national icon—Gettysburg National Military Park” said Tom Kiernan, president of the National Parks Conservation Association. “A casino conflicts with the heritage-based economy of Gettysburg, with its meaning in American history today, and with its future relevance.”

If licensed, the casino would be incorporated into the existing Eisenhower Resort and Conference Center, just one half-mile from the boundary of Gettysburg National Military Park. The site is also within the historically sensitive “study area” of the battlefield, as defined by the American Battlefield Protection Program (the battlefield preservation arm of the National Park Service).

Not only is this proposal significantly closer to the park than the 2006 Crossroads Gaming Resort and Spa plan, it also lies along the Emmitsburg Road, at the heart of the Journey Through Hallowed Ground National Scenic Byway (created in October 2009) and Journey Through Hallowed Ground National Heritage Area (signed into law in May 2008). Such designations are not undertaken lightly and, according to the letter, “reinforce our belief that this is a region of tremendous historic significance that we have a duty to safeguard for future generations.”

“I remember four years ago when our organizations joined a dedicated group of local activists to defeat this short-sighted scheme the first time. No matter where I went, anywhere in the country, people were astounded at the very idea of a gambling casino at Gettysburg,” said CWPT president James Lighthizer. “There was a near-universal agreement that locating and marketing a gambling facility at Gettysburg unavoidably conflicts with the essential meaning of this place in American history.”

A. Roy Smith, chairman of the board of Preservation Pennsylvania, reiterated that the fundamental reasoning behind his group’s opposition to a Gettysburg-area casino has not changed. “We remain steadfast in our opposition to any casino proposed in close proximity to the Gettysburg National Military Park. Preservation Pennsylvania’s reasons for including this sacred place on the 2006 Pennsylvania At Risk listing have not changed — a casino near this highly significant site, in any location, is inappropriate.”

In addition to the proposal’s proximity to the national park, the letter outlined additional concerns with the project, including potential impact on the region’s vibrant heritage tourism industry. Citing current visitation statistics and scientific economic impact analysis, the groups concluded that “the combination of Civil War preservation and the family friendly nature of Adams County has created a proven, winning formula for the park and its neighboring communities. A casino will conflict with this proven economic engine—heritage tourism, and development compatible with and respectful of that heritage.”

The letter further noted that the portion of Cumberland Township where the casino would be located predominantly features residential dwellings and agricultural operations, with limited and generally small-scale commercial development occasionally intermixed. The groups expressed the opinion that the facility would “have the potential to significantly increase traffic through the area, generate more incompatible large-scale development, and would likely necessitate the kind of eye-catching signage that would be out of place in what has up to now been a relatively undeveloped area.”

There are plenty of places to put a casino. A Civil War battlefield is not one of them.

Give it up, LeVan.

Continue reading

The following threat to develop critical land near the Brandy Station battlefield was reported in yesterday’s edition of the Culpeper Star-Exponent newspaper:

‘Civil War Williamsburg’

By ALLISON BROPHY CHAMPION
Published: January 8, 2010

Union forces clashed with Confederates in two separate fights at Rappahannock Station — the wartime name for modern-day Remington — in August 1862 and November 1863.

A major crossing here was the Orange & Alexandria railroad bridge, which the Yankees burned in October 1863, the Library of Congress records.

Both sides wanted control of the vital waterway at the site and many died fighting for it.

Now, a local developer wants to return the place to its roots with the establishment of Culpeper Crossing, a Civil War-themed tourist destination on 14 acres of wooded, riverfront land adjoining the battlefield.

Bob Currier, in addition, has already placed a much larger parcel of actual battlefield into permanent conservation easement.

“We need a Civil War Williamsburg,” said the Remington resident, whose family has owned 100-plus acres at Rappahannock Station for more than a century. “It will be the only thing like it — on a battlefield where trenches are still intact.”

Located about five miles north of the more famous village at Brandy Station — the site of North America’s largest cavalry engagement in June 1863 — Remington sits about half a mile from the Rappahannock River in Fauquier County, though a portion of it sits within the border of Culpeper County.

Currier, who has a background as a builder, plans to get started on his “reproduction Civil War town” on the Culpeper side of the river this spring.

Besides an 18-room bed and breakfast and a museum, the secluded, riverfront development will include shops, a church, restaurant and live theater — the potential for up to 20 buildings in all, according to Currier.

He also plans to incorporate other periods of history relevant to the area including a Native American village, French and Indian War fort and Revolutionary War attractions.

Currier said he’s found hundreds of arrowheads and two dozen stone axes on the property. He wants to offer wildlife exhibits and the arts at Culpeper Crossing as well.

The Virginia Department of Historic Resources sees the possibilities.
“Your concept for Culpeper Crossing offers an exciting opportunity to present the rich history of this area in an engaging format and setting,” wrote DHR director Kathleen Kilpatrick in a letter to Currier last year. “We look forward to working with you to develop a sensitive and important new asset for Virginians and the nation.”

She encouraged “the use of local building tradition … to link Culpeper Crossing with the cultural heritage of its location.” It’s something Currier remains committed to doing as he moves forward, having ordered bronze statues of Gens. George Meade (Union officer from Pennsylvania) and Robert E. Lee of Virginia, who met in Remington.

Civil War soldiers who fought in Culpeper — believed to be the most marched upon county during the war — surely would never have guessed the history-themed recreation that awaits the river land at Rappahannock Station.

One letter in Currier’s collection of correspondence drafted in this area from that time stands out especially.

“I hope the time is not too distant when all who live may see this war ended and peace flow again in one unbroken stream through all our valleys — from east to west and from north to south,” wrote John M. Lovejoy of the 121st New York Regiment, stationed near Brandy Station in 1864.

Conservation easements

Currier wants his family’s land to remain unbroken by rampant development, which has crept closer to Culpeper’s battlefield sites in recent years.

And so about a year ago, he placed 189 acres of Rappahannock Station battlefield — adjoining Culpeper Crossing — into permanent conservation easement, meaning it’s going to stay as is forever.

He admitted that his foremost reason for pursuing the conservation easements through the DHR was for the money — easement holders can sell the tax credits they receive for cash. Currier did just that, getting about $3 million for the tax credits.

According to the terms of the easement designation, the land can never be subdivided and it carries strict limits, for perpetuity, on very limited development.

Currier credited family friend Sandra Stevens, an easement consultant from McLean, for helping him navigate the complicated process.

“What she is doing has dramatically affected the county,” he said of other easement projects Stevens worked on last year, including battlefield land in Brandy Station.

“I wouldn’t have gotten through it without her.”

Property value

Stevens, who has a background in lobbying, began her easement consulting business with Currier back in December of 2008.

“I did his and decided this was something I love doing,” she told the Star-Exponent in a recent interview. “It gives me an appreciation for the value of people’s property and how they feel about it.”

Successfully obtaining easement status is a complicated process, Stevens said, that spans about nine months. In Virginia alone, she said, there are 34 different land trusts, including DHR, the Civil War Preservation Trust and Piedmont Environmental Council, that hold properties in easement.

It’s an altruistic motive to put your land into easement, Stevens said, but these days many folks are doing it for the money too – to save the family farm.

She said she has thousands more acres in Culpeper County “in the pipeline” for easement designation.

The benefit to the county of historic easements is open space preservation, Stevens said.

“The state of open land in the county right on U.S. 29 has definitely changed,” she said. “We won’t be having overpasses and congested traffic areas like it would have been if had been developed as originally planned,” Stevens said, referring to the previously planned large development at Willow Run, property that she helped put into easement in 2009.

Wendy Musumeci, the DHR’s easement program coordinator, said her department holds 1,175 acres in historic conservation easement in Culpeper County.

Of those, 641 acres were added last year, she said, noting, “Future generations have to abide by these land restrictions.”

Culpeper County Planning Director John Egertson, speaking for himself and not the county, said conservation easements are a positive thing for the county because they maintain its overall rural character.

On the other hand, he noted, conservation easements could be detrimental if they prevented development in areas intended for growth, like the county’s technology zone next to the Daniel Technology Center.

“As for the various easements which have put into place to date, I am supportive of them all.”

Union soldier W.H.B. Dudley, camping near “Rapperhannac Station” in September of 1863 did not feel so supportive of the other side.

“We had a nice cav fight,” he wrote to his nephew George Payson. “We drove the rebels about 15 miles; they did run, tore up things good. I could see lots of dead rebels.”

We definitely do NOT need a Civil War Williamsburg where this guy wants to put it. I’m hard-pressed to think of a worse place for such a thing. It brings to mind the scheme to put a Disney park near Haymarket in the 1990’s.

Remington is immediately north of the Rappahannock, and adjacent to Beverly’s Ford, meaning it’s just north of the Brandy Station battlefield. It’s got its own battlefield in its own right. While I great appreciate the fact that Mr. Currier granted the preservation easement for his land, this is an incredibly stupid idea.

I want to encourage each and every one of my readers to do what you can to oppose this stupid scheme. Write to VDHR. Write to the CWPT. Write to Congress. Do what you can to prevent this thing from being built.

I’m not opposed to something like a Civil War Williamsburg being built–in fact, it could be a terrific idea if executed properly. However, a real battlefield next to one of the most important sites of the entire war is most assuredly NOT the place to built such a blight.

Continue reading

The Civil War Preservation Trust issued a press release today that indicates that, in spite of the terrible economic conditions that marked the year 2009, it nevertheless managed to save 2777 acres of battlefield land at 20 different locations:

CIVIL WAR PRESERVATION TRUST RESCUES 2,777 ACRES OF HALLOWED GROUND IN 2009

Despite difficult economic climate, national nonprofit group protects historic landscapes at 20 battlefields

(Washington, D.C.) – The Civil War Preservation Trust (CWPT), the nation’s largest nonprofit battlefield preservation group, has announced its land preservation accomplishments for 2009. Despite the difficult economy and challenges facing all charitable organizations, CWPT helped to permanently protect 2,777 acres of hallowed ground at 20 different Civil War battlefields in five states during the last calendar year. Overall, CWPT has protected more than 29,000 acres of battlefield land at 109 sites in 20 states.

“Despite the worst economy in recent memory, we pressed onward with our mission and achieved a level of success that surpassed all expectations,” noted CWPT President James Lighthizer. “We posted one of the most successful years in this organization’s history — including our second-highest-ever tally for acres preserved in a calendar year.”

With 30 acres of Civil War battlefield land lost to development each day, there has long been a pressing need to see these hallowed grounds protected, but many preservation projects in 2009 took on an added sense of urgency. In 2008, the Commonwealth of Virginia approved $5.2 million in matching grants for battlefield preservation, specifying a limited time frame for use of the landmark allocation.

“At a critical time in the fight to preserve some of this nation’s most hallowed ground, Virginia’s landowners, citizens, organizations and the government leaders at all levels have led the way to secure these battlefield lands for future generations of Americans,” remarked Kathleen Kilpatrick, director of the Virginia Department of Historic Resources. “There is so much to celebrate in these remarkable accomplishments, even as we prepare for the hard work ahead.”

However, in order to secure these funds, CWPT and other preservation groups had to secure $2 from other sources for every dollar they requested from the state. Understanding the once-in-a-lifetime nature of the opportunity, CWPT members responded, contributing to a “Virginia Legacy Fund” to meet the match requirements.

“CWPT’s members are the lynchpin of our success,” said Lighthizer. “They are smart, savvy people who want to know exactly what they are contributing toward — they want to examine a map, see pictures, read a personal account of the fighting on that property before they write a check. We respect our members and work hard to be responsible stewards of their generosity.”

In addition to land purchases, the year was also notable for the organization’s donation of 176 acres of the1862 battlefield to Harpers Ferry National Historical Park. The land was purchased by CWPT several years ago with the express intention of being transferred to the National Park Service once it was able to incorporate the gift. Incorporating newly protected land into existing parks is a perpetual goal for CWPT. In 2009, the organization participated in the preservation of land at two sites — Davis Bridge, Tenn. and Cedar Creek, Va. — where the acreage was transferred to a state or national park. In the case of Davis Bridge, the state of Tennessee contributed $864,000 toward acquisition of this key battlefield site.

Recognizing that the work of protecting historic landscapes is often beyond the scope of any single organization, CWPT strives to work in partnership with a wide variety of regional and local preservation groups to purchase significant pieces of land otherwise outside the reach of either independently. For example, CWPT this year partnered with the Central Virginia Battlefields Trust, based in Fredericksburg, to protect 93 acres at the Wilderness Battlefield, lending technical expertise to the transaction process, as well as contributing financially.

Another hallmark of CWPT preservation strategy is working toward reaching a “critical mass” of preservation at individual battlefields and connecting previously protected the parcels into unified entities. In 2009, the joint effort between CWPT and the Shenandoah Valley Battlefields Foundation to protect 209 acres at Third Winchester, Va., created a 576-acre swath of protected battlefield land. Recent preservation efforts added 11 acres at Glendale and 178 acres at Malvern Hill, both in eastern Henrico County, Va., — an area in which CWPT has now protected a total of 1650 contiguous acres, almost 900 of which have already been transferred to the National Park Service’s Richmond National Battlefield.

In addition to land purchases, CWPT remained actively engaged in education and advocacy programs designed to inform the public of the threats facing Civil War battlefields. In 2009, two major news conferences with Academy Award-winning actors — Richard Dreyfuss unveiled CWPT’s annual History Under Siege report in March and Robert Duvall called attention to Walmart’s plans to build on Virginia’s Wilderness Battlefield in May — raised the profile of historic preservation efforts and brought national attention to the cause. Also last year, CWPT received national-level awards of excellence for the complete overhauls of its website and Hallowed Ground, its quarterly membership magazine.

The full roster of sites protected by CWPT in 2009 includes: 55 acres at Natural Bridge in Florida; 60 acres at Wood Lake in Minnesota; 66 acres at Raymond and 12 acres at Tupelo in Mississippi; 643 acres at Davis Bridge and 5 acres at Parkers Crossroads in Tennessee; 68 acres at Aldie, 47 acres at Appomattox Station, 433 acres at Brandy Station, 85 acres at Chancellorsville, 11 acres at Glendale, 178 acres at Malvern Hill, 35 acres at Sailor’s Creek, 730 acres at five Shenandoah Valley battlefields, 253 acres at Trevilian Station and 94 acres at the Wilderness in Virginia. The value of these transactions totals more than $38 million.

“Although it is incredibly satisfying for me to reminisce on the successes of the past year, our work is far from done. The staff, trustees and members of the Civil War Preservation Trust will continue our efforts to protect these unique resources for future generations,” said Lighthizer.

With 55,000 members, CWPT is the largest nonprofit battlefield preservation organization in the United States. Its mission is to preserve our nation’s endangered Civil War battlefields and to promote appreciation of these hallowed grounds. CWPT has preserved more than 29,000 acres of battlefield land across the nation. CWPT’s website is www.civilwar.org.

Even with the economic hardships that so many people suffered through this year, people still dug deep and donated money to save Civil War battlefields. Good work, folks, and another year of great battlefield preservation accomplishment by the CWPT.

Continue reading

The CWPT issued the following press release on Friday:

Sen. Jim Webb Joins Preservationists to Celebrate Protection of Third Winchester Battlefield

Ambitious Project Required Cooperative Efforts from SVBF, CWPT, the Commonwealth of Virginia, Frederick County and the Federal Government

Nearly a year after the announcement of an ambitious effort to protect a landscape that the National Park Service described as some of the “most sanguinary fields of the Civil War,” representatives of the Shenandoah Valley Battlefields Foundation (SVBF) and Civil War Preservation Trust (CWPT) gathered today in Winchester, Va., with government officials and guests to celebrate the success of that undertaking.

On August 7, 2009, SVBF officially closed on the 209-acre Huntsberry property, which was part of the bloodied Middle Field during the Third Battle of Winchester, fought on September 19, 1864. Fighting on this land was especially fierce — the Union Army’s 19th Corps suffered devastating losses, with 40 percent of its men and every one of its regimental commanders either killed or wounded.

Speaking at today’s event, U.S. Senator Jim Webb praised the cooperative nature of the project, citing the importance of Civil War battlefield preservation to Virginians and all Americans.

“As someone with ancestors who fought on both sides of the American Civil War, the preservation of these battlefields has personal significance,” said Senator Webb. “The need to protect our nation’s battlefields is far too great for any one well-intentioned federal program. That’s why the partnerships with groups like the Civil War Preservation Trust and the Shenandoah Valley Battlefields Foundation are so critical. They are in this fight for all the right reasons. This partnership truly serves as a model of bringing all stakeholders to the table to tackle pressing national issues.”

Webb was joined at the podium by Kathleen S. Kilpatrick, Virginia’s Director of Historic Resources, Richard C. Shickle, chairman of the Frederick County Board of Supervisors, Paul Hawke, program chief of the American Battlefield Protection Program, SVBF chairman Dr. Irvin E. Hess, CWPT chairman emeritus Theodore Sedgwick and SVBF executive director W. Denman Zirkle. The involvement of each group was absolutely critical to the project’s successful completion.

Preservation Made Possible Through Partnership

The $3.35 million purchase price was funded through a partnership between the Battlefields Foundation and the Civil War Preservation Trust, together with government grants from the federal, state and local levels.

The federal Civil War Battlefield Preservation Program, funded by legislation championed by Senator Webb in Congress, issued a $1.23 million matching grant toward the effort, and a $1 million Virginia Land Conservation Foundation grant to protect important natural and historic landscapes was applied to the project. Frederick County contributed $112,000 from its Historic and Open Space Preservation Fund, which is supported by proffers from a residential development in the Third Winchester battlefield study area. Remaining funds had to be raised by the two nonprofit organizations through private donations. Preservationists stressed that while they closed on the land last month, payments remain and fundraising efforts are ongoing.

Welcoming guests to the event, Zirkle stressed that while the protection of this land has been a long-standing SVBF goal, the endeavor would not have been successful without the cooperation of the various organizations and agencies working in tandem. “Without tremendous advocates at all levels of government and stalwart friends in the preservation community, today’s celebration would not have been possible,” he said.

The county’s Shickle concurred, saying “Frederick County has many historic resources of national significance. We acknowledge that it is our duty to be thoughtful stewards of these resources, and the county is proud to have been a part of this preservation effort.”

Connecting Already Preserved Battlefield Areas

Protection of this property at the heart of the Third Winchester battlefield is particularly significant since it links areas previously protected by the Battlefields Foundation and CWPT. Its addition to the existing preserved landscape creates a 567-acre battlefield park that stretches from Interstate 81 in the west to Millbrook High School in the east.

“The landscape that has been preserved here at Third Winchester is irreplaceable,” said Hawke, who administers the American Battlefield Preservation Program, an arm of the Park Service responsible for issuing federal matching grants for historic preservation. “This land retains enough of its historic character that the men who fought here almost exactly 145 years ago today would recognize its features. It is an unparalleled resource for understanding the battle’s history.”

CWPT’s Sedgwick was enthusiastic about the additional public interpretation opportunities that the newly preserved acreage provides. “Since 2007, when we opened a five-mile educational walking and biking trail on our adjacent property, the Third Winchester battlefield has become a tremendous resource for the surrounding community. I look forward to working cooperatively with our partners at the Battlefields Foundation to expand our understanding of this battlefield through study, and to create one seamless battlefield park.”

Dr. Hess, chairman of SVBF pointed out that the protection of the Huntsberry property went a long way toward completing the preservation puzzle at Third Winchester. “This land is the largest remaining undisturbed portion of the battlefield,” he said. “Now that it is protected, Third Winchester is ready to become a genuine destination for heritage travelers eager to better understand American history.”

Virginia’s Ongoing Efforts to Protect Civil War Battlefield Resources

While acknowledging that the preservation ceremony was scheduled to coincide with the battle’s 145th anniversary tomorrow, Kilpatrick also looked toward the future, when our nation will commemorate the sesquicentennial of the Civil War. “There is no time more appropriate to encourage the study of the American Civil War than during this significant period,” she said. “And there is no place more appropriate to do so than on the battlefields themselves, which provide a deeper level of understanding than any book or museum exhibit can hope to. While today is indeed a celebration, it is also a reminder that our work is not complete. Other landscapes, no less hallowed than this one, still deserve our attention.”

Senator Webb agreed, declaring, “No state is richer in significant historic Civil War-era landmarks than Virginia, and I am proud of the work that the Commonwealth has undertaken to safeguard its heritage. Our time to protect these sites is limited. I will continue my efforts in Congress to ensure such historic landscapes are preserved for future generations.”

At Third Winchester, intense fighting raged across an area covering almost eight square miles. Of these nearly 5,000 acres of core battlefield, only 830 are permanently protected. Throughout the Shenandoah Valley, more than 16,000 acres of battlefield land are vulnerable to development, and similar situations exist elsewhere in Virginia and across the country.

Preservation Fits with Landowner Legacy

The land’s previous owner, the Huntsberry family, has roots in the Shenandoah Valley stretching back centuries. The property was originally granted to ancestor Jacob Huntsbarger by Lord Fairfax in 1762. Civil War-era maps clearly show the Huntsberry House as a battlefield landmark, and the building’s remains can sill be found on the property today.

Bob Huntsberry, a co-manager of his great-grandfather C.E. Huntsberry’s estate, which sold the property to preservationist interests, fondly remembered childhood summers spent on the land. “This is an important place for my family—and growing up, we knew that it was historically important, too,” he said last year, when the preservation initiative was announced. “We felt pretty strongly that it needed to be preserved so we are very happy that it will end up in good hands and that people will someday be able to come and learn about what happened here.”

Third Battle of Winchester

The Third Battle of Winchester, or Opequon, was a significant action of Union Maj. Gen. Philip Sheridan’s devastating Shenandoah Campaign—which ultimately decimated the Valley’s agricultural bounty when farms as far south as Staunton were put to the torch. More than 54,000 troops were engaged in the battle, including two future Presidents — Rutherford B. Hayes and William McKinley.

In the early morning hours of September 19, 1864, Sheridan’s troops marched west from encampments around Berryville, ultimately stacking up in the Berryville Canyon along the modern-day alignment of eastbound Va. Route 7. The traffic jam created by slow-moving supply wagons delayed the deployment of the Federal army east of Winchester and foiled Sheridan’s plan to surprise and wrest the city from Gen. Jubal Early’s Confederates.

As Early moved troops south from Stephenson’s Depot to meet the Union attack, Sheridan sent portions of his army north of the Berryville Pike (Va. Route 7) to confront the southerners’ movement. The ensuing fighting at First Woods, Middle Field and Second Woods along Redbud Run—including the Huntsberry property—was fierce, close, and devastating. Nearly 1,500 men were killed or wounded in this area alone and one soldier remembered the area as “that basin of Hell.”

In the 1992 National Park Service Study of Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley, historian David W. Lowe wrote, “Third Winchester was the largest and most desperately contested battle of the Civil War in the Shenandoah Valley, resulting in more than 9,000 casualties. The Union 19th Corps sustained 40 percent casualties (2,074 men) and lost every regimental commander during its assaults on the Middle Field and Second Woods…The Middle Field ranks with some of the most sanguinary fields of the Civil War, witnessing more than 3,000 casualties.”

Future Benefits of Preservation

Containing almost a half-mile of Redbud Run, a tributary of Opequon Creek and, in turn, the Potomac River, the property also has ecological significance. Protecting its sloping, forested banks will enhance water quality at the site and in downstream watersheds, including Chesapeake Bay.

The newly preserved property will remain in agricultural use while archaeological and cultural resource studies are conducted. Eventually, the land will be interpreted and fully opened to visitors.

A map of the property may be downloaded from the news areas of www.shenandoahatwar.org/news/news_list.php and www.civilwar.org/news.

National Park Service 1992 study of the Shenandoah Valley’s Civil War battlefields: www.cr.nps.gov/hps/abpp/shenandoah/svs0-1.html

National Park Service 1992 study of the Third Battle of Winchester: http://www.nps.gov/history/hps/abpp/shenandoah/svs3-12.htm

About the Shenandoah Valley Battlefield Foundation (SVBF)

Created by Congress in 1996, the Shenandoah Valley Battlefields National Historic District encompasses Augusta, Clarke, Frederick, Highland, Page, Rockingham, Shenandoah, and Warren counties in Virginia and the cities of Harrisonburg, Staunton, Waynesboro, and Winchester. As authorized by the U.S. Secretary of the Interior, the Shenandoah Valley Battlefields Foundation serves as the non-profit manager of the Shenandoah Valley Battlefields National Historic District, partnering with local, regional, and national organizations and governments to preserve the Valley’s battlefields and interpret and promote the region’s Civil War story. The Shenandoah Valley Battlefields website is located at www.shenandoahatwar.org.

About the Civil War Preservation Trust (CWPT)

With 55,000 members, CWPT is the largest nonprofit battlefield preservation organization in the United States. Its mission is to preserve our nation’s remaining Civil War battlefields and to promote appreciation of these hallowed grounds through education and heritage tourism. Since 1987, the organization has helped save more than 28,000 acres of battlefield land, including nearly 1,000 acres in historic Frederick County, Virginia. In 2007, CWPT opened a popular walking and biking trail on its 222-acre Third Winchester property. The CWPT website is located at www.civilwar.org.

For information about making a tax-deductible donation to this project, please contact Tom Robinson at the Shenandoah Valley Battlefields Foundation at 540-740-4545 x204 or David Duncan of the Civil War Preservation Trust at 202-367-1861 ext. 202.

This is an outstanding example of the good things that can happen when preservation organizations and governmental entities join forces to work together to save critical battlefield land. Kudos to all involved, and especially to Sen. Jim Webb, who has been out in the forefront of efforts to save the battlefield at Winchester and to fight the construction of a mammoth Wal-Mart store at the gateway to the Wilderness battlefield. Preservationists appear to have a real friend in Senator Webb.

Continue reading

Thanks to reader Todd Berkoff for bringing this to my attention.

From yesterday’s edition of the Culpeper Star-Exponent:

A less commercialized future for Willow Run

ROB HUMPHREYS, RHUMPHREYS@STAREXPONENT.COM , (540) 825-0771 EXT. 128
Published: September 17, 2009

Willow Run, billed three years ago as a massive retail destination planned for eastern Culpeper County, has fallen victim to the recession.

Instead, 442 acres of the property along U.S. 29 will likely transfer into a conservation easement with the Virginia Department of Historic Resources.

A separate piece of nearby land at Beverly’s Ford — arguably the Civil War’s most fought-over river crossing — could also be preserved through the DHR.

Both properties are on the agenda for today’s joint meeting of the State Review and Historic Resources boards in Richmond.

“We won’t know for a while” whether the easement application goes through, said Chuck Gyory, who owns the Willow Run property along with his brother Pete. “It’s a very complex process.”

When landowners agree to easements with the state, they retain their property but forfeit development rights in return for tax credits. Future owners must follow the same rules.

In this case, the easements are significant for two reasons:

– Land could be saved that witnessed heavy troop movements and fighting during the Battle of Brandy Station and several other Civil War skirmishes.

– In a more modern context, it shows just how far the local economy has plummeted.

The Gyory property
Willow Run, which supports a commercial greenhouse operation and sits southeast of Culpeper Regional Airport, made headlines three years ago as “the next big thing” in commercial real estate. Protect your property against fire with the help of critical infrastructure pros at Sinisi

In August 2006, Fairfax-based USA Development Inc. submitted plans to the county that would have transformed Willow Run into more than 3 million square feet of retail space — rivaling Fredericksburg’s Central Park.

Site plans included: shops, gas stations, 16 restaurants, a movie theater, ice-skating facility, three hotels, 300-loft style apartments, office space, a lighted golf course, retirement center, water park, equestrian village, private school and 9,078 parking spaces.

At the time, Culpeper County’s planning director said it would be one of the largest commercial developments in the state. Bill Chase, who represents the Stevensburg District on the Board of Supervisors, had called it “the right thing for the right place.”

Proffers to the county would have included road improvements, $8,000 per residential unit, and construction of a large-scale water and sewer system along Mountain Run.

The plans, of course, never materialized. When the real estate market crashed, Willow Run — for many years the site of Culpeper Fest — became just another piece of open farmland.

“We realized it wasn’t going to be viable about a year ago,” Chuck Gyory said, “and the developer just couldn’t do it, which is understandable.”

Gyory, 66, president of the Culpeper Chamber of Commerce in the early 1990s, has mixed emotions about the turn of events.

“I think that property was ideally suited for a spectacular development,” he said. “It’s also ideally suited as a farm for scenic value.”

Gyory’s family, which sold the nursery in 2006, will still own the Willow Run property, which is being used to make hay. The greenhouse’s current owners are moving to another location in October, so Gyory is trying to find a business that will occupy the industrial buildings already on site.

As for why the family decided to apply for a historical easement, Gyory pointed to a combination of reasons.

“It’s time to retire,” he said, “and I know the economic situation is not going to improve for quite a few years. It just makes sense, and we’ll be able to keep our very pretty farm.”

The Stilwell property
The Stilwell family owns a large piece of property just north of Willow Run, at the confluence of the Hazel and Rappahannock rivers.

Their 208 acres is the second tract up for consideration at today’s state board meeting.

Contacted by phone Wednesday, Bill Stilwell chose not to comment for this story, only saying that the easement deal has yet to go through.

The Stilwell property is especially important for preservation purposes, according to historian Clark “Bud” Hall, because it embraces Beverly’s Ford, a strategic point where Union and Confederate soldiers repeatedly crossed the Rappahannock.

“The Gettysburg campaign,” Hall said, “opened at Beverly’s Ford when Federal cavalry attacked on the morning of June 9, 1863,” during the Battle of Brandy Station.

The battle saw considerable cavalry fighting in the area of both the Stilwell and Gyory properties. Six months later, that area of the county housed 20,000 troops from the Union’s Sixth Corps during the winter encampment of 1863-64.

Both properties are “extraordinarily significant,” and keeping them free from development is a “huge plus,” said Hall, a founding member of the Civil War Preservation Trust and the Brandy Station Foundation. Hall, a retired Marine and former FBI manager, is considered the leading historian on Culpeper’s role in the Civil War.

Preservation
Much of the Brandy Station battlefield, which incorporates a wide geographic area, has been preserved through land acquisitions by the CWPT and BSF.

In the past 20 years, both organizations have pushed to save parts of the battlefield that have been threatened by development — specifically, residential housing, a corporate office complex and a proposed Formula One racetrack.

And while a campaign was never waged to fight the Willow Run retail development, preservationists like Hall are happy with the result.

“This is a really big deal,” he said. “If, in fact, these easements go through, major historic resources of Culpeper County will be protected in perpetuity. … It benefits all of us, and the landowners are to be heartily commended for seeking easements on their magnificent properties.”

A massive shopping center is off the books
As part of its rezoning request in August 2006 with Culpeper County, here’s what Fairfax-based USA Development planned on 513 acres occupied by the Willow Run Co. nursery in Brandy Station:
» 3 million sq. ft. of retail
» 2,500-seat multiplex theatre
» 16 restaurants
» 300 loft-style apartments
» three gas stations
» three hotels
» water park
» equestrian center
» three banks
» private school
» lighted 18-hole golf course
» ice-skating rink
» Dave and Buster’s restaurant
» retirement center
» 9,078 parking spaces

The developer’s proposed proffers (or incentives) to the county in the Willow Run case included:
» construction of a private K-12 school
» providing a landscaping plan for each phase of development
» providing a 900,000-gallon-per-day wastewater treatment plant
» providing numerous transportation improvements, according to VDOT standards
» contributing $8,000 per residential unit
» reserving 25 acres for acquisition by Culpeper Regional Airport
» community recreational amenities to include: a water park, 8-foot-wide pedestrian pathways, athletic fields, equestrian trails and a natural stream valley with pedestrian walking trails

Sources: usadevelopmentservices.com and rezoning application on file with Culpeper County

Wow…that was a close one. This would have been a commercial development of immense proportions RIGHT on the edge of, and encompassing a part of, the Brandy Station battlefield. I have been down to Beverly Ford with Bud Hall twice, both from the north side, where the easement will be granted, and the old road trace is still there. So are the bluffs that hid the Federal cavalrymen on the night of June 8. The ford itself is pristine, and the thought of a gigantic commercial development there is chilling. The Stillwell property is the connector between the St. James Church line and Fleetwood Hill and is a critical piece of ground in terms of preserving the battlefield.

Kudos to these two landowners for doing the right thing.

Continue reading

We’re home from our banzai run. We left on Friday, headed for my home town of Reading, PA. My mother’s 85th birthday is tomorrow–happy birthday, mom!–so we went in to celebrate the occasion a little early. Yesterday morning, we took off for Culpeper County, VA for the 20th anniversary picnic commemorating the founding of the Brandy Station Foundation. It had rained hard the whole time we were in Pennsylvania, and I was scared that the weather would not cooperate for the picnic. Fortunately, my fears turned out to be groundless, because it was a gorgeous day in central Virginia, about 80 degrees, not humid, and gentle breezes. The weather was just ideal.

The picnic was held on the grounds of Berry Hill Farm, which is south of the village of Brandy Station proper. The ford over Mountain Run where Col. Sir Percy Wyndham’s brigade of David M. Gregg’s Third Cavalry Division crossed while on the way to Fleetwood Hill is on the property. The house was destroyed by John Pope’s soldiers in 1862 and was rebuilt in 1866, and it’s a real show place.

More than 150 people attended, including all of the past presidents and most of the past and present board members of the BSF. Fellow blogger Craig Swain attended, so I finally got to meet him in person, and my friend Prof. Chris Stowe of the Army Command and General Staff College branch at Fort Lee in Petersburg, Virginia also made the trek and attended. As always, it was good to see and visit with Chris.

It was a well-done event that turned into an excellent fundraiser for the BSF’s good work. My role was to deliver a 15 minute talk on the history of the preservation of the Brandy Station, battlefield, a great but mostly unknown story that I intend to tell in book-length form. For the local newspaper’s coverage of the story, click here.

Eight of us–including Bud, Susan, me, Jens and Mary Tholand (Mary is a board member of the BSF), Mike and Caryn Block (Mike is also a board member), and old friend and cavalry nut Todd Kern–then had a wonderful meal at Pelham’s Pub at the Inn at Kelly’s Ford after the event, watching the horses and cows grazing in the fields by Kelly’s Ford that saw so much violence and bloodshed during the course of the war. Then, Susan and I spent the night in the General Hooker Suite at the Inn. We then drove home today, making a very brief stop at the Fort Necessity National Battlefield on the way home. We put 1000 miles on Susan’s car this weekend. No wonder I’m tired tonight….

Here are some images from the weekend for your perusal…

This is Clark B. “Bud” Hall, the guiding light behind the preservation of the battlefield at Brandy Station, addressing the crowd.

Me, addressing the crowd during my short speech.

Bud, BSF board member and fellow Phillies fan Mike Block, and me.

A great group of friends after the picnic: Todd Kern, Bud Hall, Kimberly Abe, me, Susan, Mike Block, and Caryn Block. A good time was had by all.

The house at Berry Hill Farm. It’s a beautiful home.

The main house at the Inn at Kelly’s Ford, taken by Susan this morning. The front portion of the house is the original house, which was there at the time of the March 17, 1863 Battle of Kelly’s Ford. I am advised that there is battle damage to the house from the many actions that occurred at Kelly’s Ford during the Civil War. The Inn itself is spectacular.

It was a great trip, and it was my honor and pleasure to help advance the cause of preserving a battlefield that means as much to me as this one does.

Continue reading