I’m back from Gettysburg. It was a fun but terribly exhausting weekend. We were really kind of overprogrammed for the time we were there. Friday was an incredibly long day. We were up at 5:00 AM for a 6:00 departure to take Dale Gallon to tour the Trevilian Station battlefield. It took 3 1/2 hours to get down there, we spent a little more than 3 hours on the battlefield, and then another 3 1/2 hours to drive back to Gettysburg. All told, it was nearly a twelve hour day, followed by another very long day yesterday. Today, I had a six hour drive home after about four hours of battlefield stomping.
One thing really struck me during my time at Gettysburg this trip, something I’ve never really noticed before. The National Park Service is spending oodles of money at Gettysburg cutting down trees that have grown up there where there weren’t trees during the war, and in re-planting some historic tree lots, such as orchards, that were there at the time of the battle but which have been lost over the years. Now, don’t get me wrong–I love the vistas and I love being able to see things the way they were at the time of the battle. Acres and acress of trees have been cleared out between Devil’s Den and the Slyder farm, which opens the place up and gives an entirely different perspective on things. I do love it.
The park is also spending vast amounts of money restoring historic fence lines. Worm rail fences are being restored, as well as plank and board fences that were torn down or eliminated decades ago are being rebuilt and replaced on the field. Again, the restoration of these fences so as to restore the historic appearance of the battlefield is important work, and I don’t mean to downplay it. However, none of it does a thing to preserve an inch of threatened land, and none of it does a thing to preserve more of our heritage for future generations.
At the same time, there are stark contrasts.
Late on the afternoon of July 2, a nasty little cavalry engagement took place at Hunterstown, about six miles from Gettysburg. The combatants were Custer’s Michigan Cavalry Brigade (supported by Elon Farnsworth’s brigade) and Wade Hampton’s Confederate cavalry brigade. Until about five years ago, the battlefield was pretty much completely pristine. Only one small Twentieth Century structure had been built on the battlefield, and the rest was open farm fields with period homes and barns.
About five years ago, a power plant was built on a portion of the battlefield. It’s huge, and it’s one of the worst eyesores I’ve ever seen. In an effort to try to screen the thing, they built huge earthen berms in front of it. All of it has dramatically changed the lay of the land. However, the core of the battlefield remains intact and still pristine. To my great sadness, I learned today that there is apparently a movement afoot to built cheesy little tract homes on a portion of the battlefield.
There have been a number of efforts to try to acquire preservation easements for the pristine ground, all of which have been rebuffed. I am scared that this little gem of a battlefield will be obliterated in the name of progress much sooner than later, and there doesn’t seem to be much of anything that anyone can do about it.
The contrast between the failure to preserve this ground and the huge sums of money that are being spent on tree cutting and planting and on restoring historic fence lines–purely cosmetic stuff–is stark. Then there are national parks like the Petersburg National Battlefield where there is essentially no budget at all for anything. Several years ago, Chris Calkins told me that he had to limit visitors to making ten copies at the park library because that was all the budget he had available for that sort of thing. Again, the contrast is shocking. All of this really makes me wonder whether the folks responsible for this stuff really and truly have their priorities straight. I don’t think they do.
Is it ego run amok? Is the ego of the Gettysburg superintendent so immense that he needs to create this sort of a vast monument to himself?
Scridb filterComments are closed.
Eric:
Couldn’t agree with you more. The rate at which previously undeveloped sites are being lost is disturbing, even at places in close proximity to well known and preserved battlefields, such as Gettysburg. Alas, no site is immune to the bull dozer. I hate to think of the restoration of existing sites and the preservation of undeveloped fields as being mutually exclusive. That having been said, I too applaud the terrain restoration taking place at Gettysburg. As an example, the removal of trees between Confederate Avenue at the Louisianna and Mississippi monuments, the Trostle farm and the monuments to Father Corby and the First Minnesotta has completely restored the line of site between Barksdale’s starting point and his objective, making his movement much easier to understand and explain. I hope the Park Service will keep this up, but it sure would be nice to have the funds (and the foresight) to restore AND preserve.
Randy
I think it sometimes comes down to ownership and taking responsibility, as well as understanding the responsibilities given to the NPS during the budget process.
Would I like to have more ground around Gettysburg preserved? Absolutely. Do I give that responsibility to the NPS, and particularly Gettysburg NMP, no. Do they have a role? Absolutely.
But when Gettysburg NMP, or any other national park for that matter, spends part of their operational budget to better preserve the history they have (and certainly this tree-clearing applies), then I cannot particularly find fault with them.
I’d be concerned to know where the Friends have been with these opportunities more than worrying about the G’burg NPS administration.
Dave
Eric,
Maybe I’m missing something here — from what you’ve written, it would seem to me that the Gettysburg superintendent should be applauded for the restoration work he has undertaken within the confines of the GNBP. That’s his responsibility, right? And if he’s fortunate enough to have been allocated the dollars, then he needs to use them.
That said, is the Hunterstown battleground part of the GNBP? I’ve always assumed that privately owned tract housing could never be built on government-owned parkland. If true, then what authority or control does the GNBP superintendent have over what is transpiring on that acreage? Please let us know if my assumption is incorrect.
Regards, Paul
PS. Dahlgren clippings are en route to you. Hope you find a nugget or two!
While I agree that the contrast is stark, it is a bit unfair to blame the loss of the Hunterstown Battlefield on the NPS. Hunterstown is not within the authorized boundaries of GNMP and therefore the money being spent on the park itself cannot be used to preserve land. Only Congress can authorize the purchase by the NPS and they pretty much have a moratorium on land purchases by the NPS that are not within the present boundaries.
The big question is where are the friends group and CWPT on this issue?
Your point about Petersburg is quite accurate. Gettysburg seems to get a large budget in contrast to the other battlefield parks. Its getting so that Pamplin Park is supplanting the PNB in terms of interpreting the battles south and east of the city.
Dave,
I’m with you entirely on this. I think that the Friends group is in thrall to the superintendent, which is why I refuse to join it.
Eric
Chuck,
Your point about the Friends group and CWPT is well-taken.
The Friends do what the Superintendent says. If he said “fart the Star Spangled Banner”, that’s what they would do. CWPT is spread a bit thin, but my guess is that they would support such a campaign. That’s based on prior discussions a couple of years ago.
Eric
Paul,
H-town is outside the park boundary, although it could easily be added. It’s just outside.
There are certainly opportunities for groups like the Friends to step up to the plate, and they have failed to do so.
The same issues, by the way, hold true with the pristine little battlefield at Fairfield.
Eric
Randy,
Agreed.
Eric