Tom and All
"1) all discovered artifacts will be permanently preserved,"
- I agree.
"2) Several sites will undergo a thorough and professional archaeological study at the company's expense, "
- Yes companies should be more willing to do this.
"3) Additional lands could easily be deeded over to the battlefield if they are indeed found to be archaeologically significant, and that additional lands not owned by the battlefield could end up having usage restrictions attached to their deeds - "
- The property is within the study area and core areas of the battle. While archaeological evidence is nice, has it been hunted? Is it the location of a flanking maneuver? Will the additional lands be joined? Or islands? With berms a pit, the cultural landscape will be lost- forget about the civil war for a moment. It’s the valley.
Back to the berms.
"berms reducing the visible footprint of the existing quarry on the site."
- these berms 30 or was it 40 feet tall and vegetated will be, 1100 feet from the plantation house. Not mention yes will block the view of the quarry but then we will have berms. Unnatural, unsympathetic, berms in a second of historically, rolling valley land.
- Will the berms create any runoff or environmental issues which will cause damage to the Cedar Creek, its tributaries and the Shenandoah’s in the future? That no one can answer because the studies haven’t been done. Was it considered during the hearings?
- Will the berms be in direct violation to any conservation easements currently on the Cedar Creek battlefield? Adjacent properties? etc? Has the CCBF addressed this with their agreed proffer? No
"Of course the foundation could have continued to stonewall like the Belle Grove and NTHP and run the very real risk of being labeled by the county supervisors as being unreasonable and non-responsive."
- Cedar Creek is one of the few parks in the country which are run by multiple organizations. Were they supposed to cooperate together? Yes. Do we have evidence of this? No. Maybe this is the reason the National Trust/BG have taken the stand, to show us that the CCBF acted alone. Does this mean the CCBF presented itself at the hearings and in private as the sole steward of the property? Ahhh. All the mention the CCBF gives its counterparts are post negations and post rezoning.
I don’t debate that the situation concerning 300 M, would have won out over battlefield preservation. But by deciding to enter the negation when they did, and how they did, they may have made the county officials, the mining company feel like they were the only stewards.
Am I saying that 8 acres isn’t a victory? No. Am I saying, I don’t support the CCBF? No I have and I will continue to in the future. What I am saying is that we lost a cultural landscape. Purchasing or negotiating for acres, is not a concession. The preservation of a cultural landscape, decisions which cannot be done behind the backs of other organizations which are suppose to be together for the profit of the park.
Tom, this was not an attack on you personally. I am only trying to highlight the areas which I believe they failed.
Last edited by Busterbuttonboy; 06-23-2008 at 03:51 PM.
3rd Regiment USV- Buffington's Boys
Atlantic Guard Soldiers Aid Society
Backus's Bodacious Battery- PNB Artillery Crew
"...mow hay, cut wood, prepare great food, drink schwitzel, knit, sew, spin wool, rock out to a good pinch of snuff and somehow still find time to go fly a kite." N.B.
Now thats living history.