Manassas Tree Issue

[Busterbuttonboy]

Residents protest loss of trees at battlefield
By the Associated Press
July 9, 2008
MANASSAS, Va. - Some Prince William County residents and lawmakers are upset that preservation efforts at Manassas National Battlefield Park are leading to the destruction of many trees.

Authorities at the Civil War battlefield have cut down 130 acres of trees in a section of the park named Deep Cut.

Park Superintendent Ed Clark says they need clear vistas to help visitors understand and appreciate the historical site. He says they're working to preserve the park's viewsheds to help show why the battle played out the way it did.

But county Supervisor Wally Covington says he's not satisfied with efforts to preserve trees. He's asking for a tree count for the entire county.



Besides trees, county archaeologist Justin Patton says they have to contend with buildings and expanding roads to preserve battlefield views.

http://www.dailypress.com/news/local/virginia/dp-dc--battlefieldtrees0709jul09,0,3847386.story

Drew Gruber

[Busterbuttonboy]

Re: Manassas Tree Issue

County Seeks to Prevent Fading of Battlefield Views


Who's Blogging» Links to this article
By Kristen Mack
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, July 6, 2008; Page PW04

Preserving Prince William's battlegrounds is no longer enough. The county also wants to protect views from the Manassas National Battlefield Park.

Prince William has never identified views of military significance at the park.

A $60,000 study, funded by the American Battlefield Protection Program, has allowed the county to identify which views are important and determine the integrity of those that remain.

Work was completed in March and presented to residents in a public meeting last month. The Board of County Supervisors will hear a status report Tuesday at its meeting.

Staff members from the park and the county's planning department have been documenting "view sheds" with written descriptions, photography and geographic information systems mapping. They will prepare a preservation plan and recommend ways to enhance view sheds.


The park has 15 historically based view sheds. It also contains 10 public vantage points, including Henry Hill, where the visitors center sits. The first and second battles of Manassas are represented.

Threats to the views include towering signs and high-voltage power lines above the trees. There is also pressure to expand routes 29 and 234 within the park because of rush-hour congestion.

Also on Tuesday's meeting agenda, the Buckland Preservation Society will ask Prince William to endorse its application to the battlefield program. Grant money is used to help nonprofit groups acquire and preserve land in Civil War battlefields.

Some of the first shots of the Second Battle of Manassas were fired from the bridge over Broad Run at Buckland. On Oct. 19, 1863, Confederates routed Union cavalry at Buckland, including troops commanded by Union Gen. George Armstrong Custer.

Prince William has identified Buckland as the only historic overlay district in the county. The preservation society, which has received a $65,000 grant to conduct an archaeological assessment of the battlefield, is requesting only an endorsement from the county, not sponsorship or matching funds. The grant will be administered by the Virginia Department of Historic Resources.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/03/AR2008070303766.html

Drew Gruber

[Slouch]

Re: Manassas Tree Issue

Environmental groups and historic preservation groups need to stop fighting seperate land preservation battles and merge together. This merger would double our efforts to preserve land. Most battlefield sites include areas that are environmentally sensitive, such as streams, wetlands, woodlands, habitats, etc.

I for one would not have any problem walking through a preserved battlefield and see trees that were not there during the battle. Id rather see farby trees than houses and strip malls.

Mike

[Vicksburg Dave]

Re: Manassas Tree Issue

I for one would not have any problem walking through a preserved battlefield and see trees that were not there during the battle.

Have you ever been to Vicksburg?

Most of these groups are opposed to cutting even a small number of trees. They do not give a darn about history or remembering those who died at those sites. It's all about the trees. In fact, if you scratch the surface of many of those so called environmental groups you find folks who think the battlefield parks are a bad idea altogether. If they are so concerned about the trees, then they should purchase their own land and plant trees on it, and not try to change the mission of the parks that are by congressional mandate supposed to be returned to their Civil War era vistas.

[Busterbuttonboy]

Re: Manassas Tree Issue

One of the tricks of the preservation trade is to often use or play the enviromental card. And vice versa. These two entities often cooperating in the same park as we see here need to present a united front when fighting anything. - Take Cedar Creek for example-
However the age old debate comes in, whats the mission of the park? Is that parks focus military or enviromental resources? An visitation, does the military park draw more fisherman and dog walkers then historians?
Drew

[shubal]

Re: Manassas Tree Issue

What Drew and Mike said above...

I think many environmentalists are on the same page as preservationists but there does indeed need to be more communication. In the growing urban areas of the east and south, Open Space and Wildlife Corridors are the words to remember. Bottom line, battlefields are open space and wildlife corridors.


http://www.nps.gov/gett/parknews/get...ield-rehab.htm
Here's an interesting explanation of what is going on on the field at Gettysburg. Wildlife-wise, a lot of woods are being cut, some are being added, and most interestingly, hedges, stone walls, and fence lines are being added. For wildlife that likes fields, these latter points are most interesting.

Here's one from Manassas that isn't quite as user friendly, but its still interesting (look at the pdf's on the right). The one I looked at brings up the point about removing exotic species from the park. Quite a challenge but a good one for our native plants and animals.
http://www.nps.gov/archive/mana/admi...tion/admin.htm

[Corporal Jay]

Re: Manassas Tree Issue

Personally, I am OK with the removal of trees for historic viewsheds as long as new trees are being planted in areas where they did exist during the battle (like the Gettysburg example above). The removal of some of these trees may actually help to stimulate the wildlife population and new growth of other species of plants.

[Arkaos]

Re: Manassas Tree Issue

I know, Pea Ridge NMP, for the most part has remained out of the spotlight when it comes to cutting trees. The park has cut down about 30 acres of trees to open up long closed fields and cut down lots of others to thin the forest but the Sierra Club supported them on cutting down trees to restore the battlefield. They told the park they were all in favor of it. There was a congressional hearing about cutting tress in the park but no one was opposed to park doing this. In fact, the few people who bothered to show up just wanted the wood for firewood.

The park has planted 2,500 trees in areas that should have been forested and are not, but they are counting on only 10% of those trees surviving the deer eating them. I know what Dave is talking about with Vicksburg as I have had many friends who have worked there keep me informed about that issue and to me there is a lot of misinformed people in that area.

I think Peter hit the nail on the head with the communication part and I feel that the national environmental groups are on board with everything the NPS is doing in its restoration efforts, but the people on the local level are still in the dark.

Steve

[Vuhginyuh]

I normally oppose all cutting…but in a historic (and prehistoric) setting I say saw away. Hell, it would make me happy to slash and burn for a couple of years, replant with indigenous growth and close the places down to humans for several decades just to see what happens.

A couple of local cases come to mind; the first being Ft Fisher. The oak growth on the land face all but destroyed the works. The exposed roots and dense leaf canopy limited the growth of valuable ground cover and obviously accelerated erosion. The scant patches of the original clover floor were in jeopardy as well. Clear cutting has allowed the staff to stabilize and reinforce the works.

Another example of growth management is on and around Moore’s Creek National Battlefield. In 1776 the terrain was primordial wet and dry Long-leaf pine savanna, scattered dense lowland pocosin, dry Carolina Bays and 1500 year old Pond and Bald cypress. A mere shadow of the original flora survives, but the park and some very kind adjacent land owners are slowly converting the acres back to the aboriginal forest. Invasive and non-native broadleaf wood is cut, fields are flooded and secondary stands of Long-leaf pine have been allowed to burn. The bunchgrass is flourishing and the dibble has not been allowed to rust. Low and behold the turkeys are back and so are the bear. If you are good you can spot ol’Bob White with younguns in tow.

None of our grandchildren will grow old enough to see the final product but it’s good to me to know that it has started.

______________

Garrison Beall