I thought I was going to have to do another talk on Saturday morning (and had told David H. that I was prepared to do so), in case the cause of the “audio difficulties” didn’t show up. In some ways, it’s too bad he did.

Eric

J.D.

You are probably right. Trying to preserve history unfortunately comes down to too many hard choices due to too few dollars, in a race against the clock of “progress” which threatens to obliterate the past if one doesn’t move fast enough.

John

J.D.

Interesting points. You are right, they would be chasing the wrong goal wasting money on a post-war train depot. As for a Vistor’s Center, I can’t help but wonder if by not developing one they are losing potential visitors. More casual tourists would be prone to visit there if “there was something there to see” (words from my imaginery stereotypical tourist) which a Visitor’s Center implies for many with a marginal interest in the battle. You know the type–Mom, Dad and Kids drop by Little Bighorn Battlefield, go to the bathroom, walk through the museum, climb Last Stand Hill and leave, all in 30-40 minutes. With Trevilian Station, more visotors in turn would bolster their case with those local elements who denigrate the battlefield’s potential positive economic impact.

Sort of like what I was telling you about with what happened here with the River’s Bridge Battlefield. Our State Parks closed the small museum/visitor’s center there due to cost-cutting and, unless you are a student of Sherman’s March through South Carolina, there is less of an incentive for those passing nearby to visit than there once was.

John