More Sacred Land on the Verge of Destruction

VMIKeydet

Private
Joined
Nov 6, 2020
A considerable portion of the New Market Heights Battlefield, where 14 USCT's earned the Medal of Honor, is on the verge of being lost forever: https://richmond.com/news/local/gov...cle_e92dd1be-3124-5e34-94ce-4e685ed2889f.html

A solar farm has taken over the Savage's Station battlefield: https://freebeacon.com/culture/solar-farms-spark-civil-war-in-virginia/

Haw's Shop to be completely annihilated: https://emergingcivilwar.com/2021/05/28/preservation-setback-at-the-haws-shop-battlefield/


These are all from within the last five months. I regularly receive emails from the American Battlefield Trust wanting me to donate to save some small corner of Gettysburg where Union Infantry may have passed through for hundreds of thousands of dollars while actual battlefield land is being destroyed. There's no denying the Trust's success in saving huge swaths of battlefields from destruction, but we've seen more losses and less victories over the last few years. I believe part of the problem arises from the merger of the Civil War Trust and the Association for the Preservation of Civil War Sites - With two organizations, each held the other's feet to the fire. Now we have one organization with an embarrassingly large payroll and little accountability.

I was also upset to see the Trust requested and received a PPP loan during the pandemic (Pp. 12-13 https://www.battlefields.org/sites/...tlefield Trust - Non-UG - M2019 FINAL (S).pdf) while at the same time its "Chief Historian" was soliciting money so he could take two separate trips to Kentucky and North Carolina. The majority of the "work" done on those trips involved filming actual historians who had knowledge of particular sites. The Trust had very recently held its annual conference in Kentucky. Why was this not done then?

On page 5 of the link above, you'll see that the Trust spent $5 million in 2019 on payroll and travel alone. On page 7 here, you'll see that eleven employees made a combined $2.2 million: https://www.battlefields.org/sites/...RUST_TAX RETURN_CLIENT PD 990_2019 public.pdf

My argument is not that there are corrupt or bad people at the Trust. My point is that it has become a bloated DC company that has strayed from its original purpose. It made its name from doing the right thing. Now it can pay fat salaries and rest on its laurels until its members hold it accountable. I'm tired of seeing fields destroyed where so many men and boys paid the ultimate sacrifice. In my humble opinion, the country's foremost preservation group losing three in less than half a year is unacceptable.
 
A considerable portion of the New Market Heights Battlefield, where 14 USCT's earned the Medal of Honor, is on the verge of being lost forever: https://richmond.com/news/local/gov...cle_e92dd1be-3124-5e34-94ce-4e685ed2889f.html

A solar farm has taken over the Savage's Station battlefield: https://freebeacon.com/culture/solar-farms-spark-civil-war-in-virginia/

Haw's Shop to be completely annihilated: https://emergingcivilwar.com/2021/05/28/preservation-setback-at-the-haws-shop-battlefield/


These are all from within the last five months. I regularly receive emails from the American Battlefield Trust wanting me to donate to save some small corner of Gettysburg where Union Infantry may have passed through for hundreds of thousands of dollars while actual battlefield land is being destroyed. There's no denying the Trust's success in saving huge swaths of battlefields from destruction, but we've seen more losses and less victories over the last few years. I believe part of the problem arises from the merger of the Civil War Trust and the Association for the Preservation of Civil War Sites - With two organizations, each held the other's feet to the fire. Now we have one organization with an embarrassingly large payroll and little accountability.

I was also upset to see the Trust requested and received a PPP loan during the pandemic (Pp. 12-13 https://www.battlefields.org/sites/default/files/atoms/files/American Battlefield Trust - Non-UG - M2019 FINAL (S).pdf) while at the same time its "Chief Historian" was soliciting money so he could take two separate trips to Kentucky and North Carolina. The majority of the "work" done on those trips involved filming actual historians who had knowledge of particular sites. The Trust had very recently held its annual conference in Kentucky. Why was this not done then?

On page 5 of the link above, you'll see that the Trust spent $5 million in 2019 on payroll and travel alone. On page 7 here, you'll see that eleven employees made a combined $2.2 million: https://www.battlefields.org/sites/default/files/atoms/files/AMERICAN BATTLEFIELD TRUST_TAX RETURN_CLIENT PD 990_2019 public.pdf

My argument is not that there are corrupt or bad people at the Trust. My point is that it has become a bloated DC company that has strayed from its original purpose. It made its name from doing the right thing. Now it can pay fat salaries and rest on its laurels until its members hold it accountable. I'm tired of seeing fields destroyed where so many men and boys paid the ultimate sacrifice. In my humble opinion, the country's foremost preservation group losing three in less than half a year is unacceptable.
What are your stats on "more losses and less victories"? Significant large parcels have been getting saved with ABT money at Champion Hill (one done, one underway, both heart of the battlefield), Cold Harbor/Gaines's Mill, and Perryville (heart of the battlefield) - just to name a few. They've saved 88 acres at New Market Heights, including 22 acres added earlier this year. And in the past few years they saved a huge parcel at Glendale.

As for Savage's Station, I don't know the exact significance of this parcel (a lot of the important land disappeared decades ago - split by a massive interstate), but according to the article "... Richmond Battlefield Association, an organization devoted to buying private land that is unprotected by Virginia’s historic registry. ... attempted to purchase Savage’s Station, but other projects took precedent. 'Lots of regrets now—we should have moved heaven and earth to preserve that land' Ramsey said." The ABT frequently works with local groups, so it looks like more than the ABT were "to blame".

You're obviously entitled to your opinion but I really hope that this post doesn't achieve the opposite of what you claim to want, by convincing others to withhold their donations from good projects.
 
What are your stats on "more losses and less victories"? Significant large parcels have been getting saved with ABT money at Champion Hill (one done, one underway, both heart of the battlefield), Cold Harbor/Gaines's Mill, and Perryville (heart of the battlefield) - just to name a few. They've saved 88 acres at New Market Heights, including 22 acres added earlier this year. And in the past few years they saved a huge parcel at Glendale.

As for Savage's Station, I don't know the exact significance of this parcel (a lot of the important land disappeared decades ago - split by a massive interstate), but according to the article "... Richmond Battlefield Association, an organization devoted to buying private land that is unprotected by Virginia’s historic registry. ... attempted to purchase Savage’s Station, but other projects took precedent. 'Lots of regrets now—we should have moved heaven and earth to preserve that land' Ramsey said." The ABT frequently works with local groups, so it looks like more than the ABT were "to blame".

You're obviously entitled to your opinion but I really hope that this post doesn't achieve the opposite of what you claim to want, by convincing others to withhold their donations from good projects.
For as general as you claim my stats to be, yours are even more so. I have provided three examples in the last five months where the Trust failed to save battlefield land. I have also included a public document showing the payroll for that organization. Both are concerning. The Gaines' Mill purchase was amazing, and we're all very fortunate for that. But the three recent losses are also huge. The Trust is, at present at least, failing us.

When the RBA, an organization led by volunteers and with very little funding, couldn't make the purchase at Savage's Station, the Trust should've stepped in. It failed to do so, and we've lost part of a battlefield because of it. This is simple to me. We can't use past successes as excuses for present failures.
 
While I would have to go back and look for actual examples, it does seem like a lot of effort and money is being put into less than significant plots of land in places like Gettysburg which is hardly in need of drastic preservation efforts. Meanwhile, places like Haw's shop that was in pristine condition are being swallowed up by development. Not far away, Savage's station had already been impacted by the building of 295, but enough was intact to warrant a stronger effort to preserve it in my opinion. Same goes for New Market Heights. These three battlefields are also close to large population centers and would be easily accessible. There is also definitely something to be said about management of funding mentioned above as well. Hate to say it, but it seems like a lack of oversight. A lot of funds being allocated for salaries and unnecessary trips that would be better used in purchasing/saving land, especially places like Haw's Shop! Such a shame. It was in beautiful condition! All I can do is be grateful that I was able to visit it several times before it's demise.
 
For as general as you claim my stats to be, yours are even more so. I have provided three examples in the last five months where the Trust failed to save battlefield land. I have also included a public document showing the payroll for that organization. Both are concerning. The Gaines' Mill purchase was amazing, and we're all very fortunate for that. But the three recent losses are also huge. The Trust is, at present at least, failing us.

When the RBA, an organization led by volunteers and with very little funding, couldn't make the purchase at Savage's Station, the Trust should've stepped in. It failed to do so, and we've lost part of a battlefield because of it. This is simple to me. We can't use past successes as excuses for present failures.
I listed specific, large parcels at three (four) battlefields that have been saved by ABT. In addition, I added 88 acres (including 22 just this year) at one of the three battlefields you're going on about. Nobody's using "past successes as excuses for present failures" [if that is in fact what they are]. Neither should anybody use "present failures" [if that's in fact what they are] as an excuse to prevent future successes.

Statements such as "the Trust is, at present at least, failing us" are flat out untrue. Both Champion Hill parcels are 2021. As I keep pointing out, 22 acres of one of your named sites is 2021. In 2021 they've been raising money to save properties at Mansfield, Deep Bottom (39 acres - I'm sure you've heard of it) and the Wilderness (36 acres). In 2021 Reams Station, Mill Springs, Port Hudson, and Raymond. This past December they saved 22 acres at Williamsburg. That's a lot of current "failures", eh. The fact that you may not have an affinity for the western battlefields doesn't speak too strongly about a commitment to preservation, but the fact that you simply don't mention 2021 efforts in the very geographic area you point to is baffling.

Now, speaking of specifics and out of curiosity, what occurred during the battle on the Savage's Station parcel and what do you know about it being brought to the ABT's attention?
 
While I would have to go back and look for actual examples, it does seem like a lot of effort and money is being put into less than significant plots of land in places like Gettysburg which is hardly in need of drastic preservation efforts. Meanwhile, places like Haw's shop that was in pristine condition are being swallowed up by development. Not far away, Savage's station had already been impacted by the building of 295, but enough was intact to warrant a stronger effort to preserve it in my opinion. Same goes for New Market Heights. These three battlefields are also close to large population centers and would be easily accessible. There is also definitely something to be said about management of funding mentioned above as well. Hate to say it, but it seems like a lack of oversight. A lot of funds being allocated for salaries and unnecessary trips that would be better used in purchasing/saving land, especially places like Haw's Shop! Such a shame. It was in beautiful condition! All I can do is be grateful that I was able to visit it several times before it's demise.
Feel free to give me examples. I've named several parcels that have real historic importance - just for example, look at a map and see the location of the Champion Hill properties. With all due respect, you're cherry picking ones you personally place higher than others. A lot of other people might make the opposite choices. You're also not mentioning several just this year that would seem to fit your list. You have "faves" but we all do. A lot of this work also involves complications, partnerships, lobbying, markting, and complex legal arrangements. It's not simply putting up a GoFundMe page.
 
I listed specific, large parcels at three (four) battlefields that have been saved by ABT. In addition, I added 88 acres (including 22 just this year) at one of the three battlefields you're going on about. Nobody's using "past successes as excuses for present failures" [if that is in fact what they are]. Neither should anybody use "present failures" [if that's in fact what they are] as an excuse to prevent future successes.

Statements such as "the Trust is, at present at least, failing us" are flat out untrue. Both Champion Hill parcels are 2021. As I keep pointing out, 22 acres of one of your named sites is 2021. In 2021 they've been raising money to save properties at Mansfield, Deep Bottom (39 acres - I'm sure you've heard of it) and the Wilderness (36 acres). In 2021 Reams Station, Mill Springs, Port Hudson, and Raymond. This past December they saved 22 acres at Williamsburg. That's a lot of current "failures", eh. The fact that you may not have an affinity for the western battlefields doesn't speak too strongly about a commitment to preservation, but the fact that you simply don't mention 2021 efforts in the very geographic area you point to is baffling.

Now, speaking of specifics and out of curiosity, what occurred during the battle on the Savage's Station parcel and what do you know about it being brought to the ABT's attention?
If a preservation organization's losing three battlefields in five months while receiving PPE funds and paying its "Chief Historian" almost $200,000 isn't failing at its job, then we're simply not going to see eye-to-eye here.
 
If a preservation organization's losing three battlefields in five months while receiving PPE funds and paying its "Chief Historian" almost $200,000 isn't failing at its job, then we're simply not going to see eye-to-eye here.
They don't bat 1.000. Neither do you or anybody else. You keep ignoring the numerous specific parcels I listed for just this year - including 22 acres at one of the alleged "failures" you list - not because you have an answer but because it's inconvenient to the agenda. Hopefully other posters won't be misled into ensuring that there are real "failures" by withholding donations for the many worthwhile projects that are underway and the others that will come up. Keep your money away from saving those parcels - well done.
 
They don't bat 1.000. Neither do you or anybody else. You keep ignoring the numerous specific parcels I listed for just this year - including 22 acres at one of the alleged "failures" you list - not because you have an answer but because it's inconvenient to the agenda. Hopefully other posters won't be misled into ensuring that there are real "failures" by withholding donations for the many worthwhile projects that are underway and the others that will come up. Keep your money away from saving those parcels - well done.
Your devotion to the Trust is deep. Mine once was as well, but they've lost me. I hope they will soon right the ship! I'll happily support them again if that day comes.

Here are organizations I recommend that fully devote themselves to battlefield preservation:

http://www.saverichmondbattlefields.org/
https://www.cvbt.org/
https://scbattlegroundtrust.org/
http://www.georgiabattlefields.org/home.aspx
https://www.shenandoahatwar.org/
http://www.shaf.org/
http://www.tcwpa.org/

Please feel free to share any others!
 
Your devotion to the Trust is deep. Mine once was as well, but they've lost me. I hope they will soon right the ship! I'll happily support them again if that day comes.

Here are organizations I recommend that fully devote themselves to battlefield preservation:

http://www.saverichmondbattlefields.org/
https://www.cvbt.org/
https://scbattlegroundtrust.org/
http://www.georgiabattlefields.org/home.aspx
https://www.shenandoahatwar.org/
http://www.shaf.org/
http://www.tcwpa.org/

Please feel free to share any others!
I support others as well, but some of these projects need the national political and economic clout that ABT brings to the table. They work in conjunction with other orgs, as well, such as CVBT. It's not "devotion" on my part nearly as much as just watching a succession of preservation wins - many where it looked like the developers had all the loaded dice.
 
Non profits are a good racket. Some are started with the motive of doing certain work and others are started to separate people from their money in order to provide a nice income for those who run it. Some start with the first motive and move on to the second.
This is an aside from the Civil War but, as someone with a degree in non-profit marketing and as someone who has spent most of my working life with non-profits, I don't think that you have an accurate appraisal. Non-profits have to pass stringent regulations and reviews. The only ones that I know of that provide a good living are the family foundations--and these don't solicit funds but give money away. Most non-profits are running on pretty lean finances and their outgo usually far exceeds their income.

I am speaking of the 501(c)3 organizations, the type that usually comes to mind. However there are more than 25 types on non-profits, each with its own eligibility qualification and behavioral limits. There is a pretty good overview at: https://www.upcounsel.com/types-of-nonprofits

Such organizations are also called "Not-For-Profit" because they are forbidden to make a profit. For some, such as some of the huge universities, this means plowing proceeds back into the organization. For others, such as humane societies, this isn't an issue.

As is the case of corporate enterprises, some are more competent than others. In both cases, the organization either fails or control is taken over by more qualified & skilled workers.
 
If you are distressed with the Trust, take action! Each non-profit is governed by a board of directors (or trustees). It is their responsibility to see that the organization is on track and in compliance. The list of members may be on the ABT's website, obtained via Google or (certainly) on Guidestar. I believe that ABT publishes its 990 online and that list will be there as well. Go over that list and if you have some connection with one of the directors, contact him/her; if not, contact the Chair. Make sure that you can document your concerns or your letter will be dismissed as that of a disgruntled flake. Most non-profits don't want a public bruhaha and this may be enough.

If not, or you don't care about tip-toes, go directly to the IRS: https://www.nonprofitexpert.com/non...ow-do-i-file-a-complaint-against-a-nonprofit/
 
I'm tired of seeing fields destroyed where so many men and boys paid the ultimate sacrifice. In my humble opinion, the country's foremost preservation group losing three in less than half a year is unacceptable.

A few important things to keep in mind...

1. An organization with funds for purchasing sites for preservation is only part of the equation. Is the owner of the land willing to sell? If the value is too lucrative for their development plans and/or they just don't care about history (or at least not about the Civil War) then your offer to buy for preservation is largely irrelevant. There are usually few legal hurdles to develop a battlefield. Private property rights are nearly always given legal preference over historic or archaeological importance.

2. If the owner is willing to sell are they asking a reasonable price? How do you even determine a "reasonable price" when the value you care about is based on historical value?

3. No matter how much money you raise, the amount you have at any given time is finite and nearly always less than you need for all you want to do. If you can spend the same amount of money to save 100 acres at battlefield A, 50 acres at battlefield B, and 10 acres at battlefield C which of the three do you spend that money on? Is it based on saving the most acreage, the most important battlefields, or the most intact battlefields?

4. Lots more people know about Gettysburg and Vicksburg than Haw's Shop or New Market Heights. While acquiring a little more acreage at Gettysburg probably isn't important from a historic preservation standpoint, it is the kind of thing that is probably important to keep many of their donations coming in so they can save the more obscure places.

I have no strong feelings one way or the other about how ABT/CWBT run things. I just want to point that sometimes failing to save a historic site isn't due to negligence or mismanagement by interested nonprofits.

its "Chief Historian" was soliciting money so he could take two separate trips to Kentucky and North Carolina. The majority of the "work" done on those trips involved filming actual historians who had knowledge of particular sites. The Trust had very recently held its annual conference in Kentucky. Why was this not done then?

I doubt anyone here has the answer. Your best best is, as another post suggested, ask their Board of Directors.

Depending on where you're going in NC and KY and how you're getting there (driving vs flying) doing both in one trip isn't necessarily much of a savings if your home base is the DC area.
 
A considerable portion of the New Market Heights Battlefield, where 14 USCT's earned the Medal of Honor, is on the verge of being lost forever: https://richmond.com/news/local/gov...cle_e92dd1be-3124-5e34-94ce-4e685ed2889f.html

A solar farm has taken over the Savage's Station battlefield: https://freebeacon.com/culture/solar-farms-spark-civil-war-in-virginia/

Haw's Shop to be completely annihilated: https://emergingcivilwar.com/2021/05/28/preservation-setback-at-the-haws-shop-battlefield/


These are all from within the last five months. I regularly receive emails from the American Battlefield Trust wanting me to donate to save some small corner of Gettysburg where Union Infantry may have passed through for hundreds of thousands of dollars while actual battlefield land is being destroyed. There's no denying the Trust's success in saving huge swaths of battlefields from destruction, but we've seen more losses and less victories over the last few years. I believe part of the problem arises from the merger of the Civil War Trust and the Association for the Preservation of Civil War Sites - With two organizations, each held the other's feet to the fire. Now we have one organization with an embarrassingly large payroll and little accountability.

I was also upset to see the Trust requested and received a PPP loan during the pandemic (Pp. 12-13 https://www.battlefields.org/sites/default/files/atoms/files/American Battlefield Trust - Non-UG - M2019 FINAL (S).pdf) while at the same time its "Chief Historian" was soliciting money so he could take two separate trips to Kentucky and North Carolina. The majority of the "work" done on those trips involved filming actual historians who had knowledge of particular sites. The Trust had very recently held its annual conference in Kentucky. Why was this not done then?

On page 5 of the link above, you'll see that the Trust spent $5 million in 2019 on payroll and travel alone. On page 7 here, you'll see that eleven employees made a combined $2.2 million: https://www.battlefields.org/sites/default/files/atoms/files/AMERICAN BATTLEFIELD TRUST_TAX RETURN_CLIENT PD 990_2019 public.pdf

My argument is not that there are corrupt or bad people at the Trust. My point is that it has become a bloated DC company that has strayed from its original purpose. It made its name from doing the right thing. Now it can pay fat salaries and rest on its laurels until its members hold it accountable. I'm tired of seeing fields destroyed where so many men and boys paid the ultimate sacrifice. In my humble opinion, the country's foremost preservation group losing three in less than half a year is unacceptable.
What appalled me at New Market was that the Interstate ran right through the middle of the battlefield.
 
What appalled me at New Market was that the Interstate ran right through the middle of the battlefield.

I-81 was built around 1959. It was constrained by topography as was the battle a century earlier. It illustrates the impracticality of preserving every place an ACW battle was fought.

However, New Market Heights (mentioned by the OP) is a different battle, also know as Chaffin's Farm, during the Petersburg Campaign/Siege:
https://www.battlefields.org/learn/maps/new-market-heights-september-29-1864
 
What appalled me at New Market was that the Interstate ran right through the middle of the battlefield.
Placement of public enterprises--and even a lot of private, corporate ones--is a sore point with heritage groups. I should guess that placement of that interstate was the subject of court battles--but the courts almost always come down on the side of "public good". The sad truth is that the number of people who wish to honor and preserve special historic sites is dwarfed by the number of people who want a fast, convenient route for their cars. 😡
 
The sad truth is that the number of people who wish to honor and preserve special historic sites is dwarfed by the number of people who want a fast, convenient route for their cars. 😡
I don't think it's a sad truth. People have to live their lives, day to day. Most of the important battlefields are preserved, that's enough.
 
I don't think it's a sad truth. People have to live their lives, day to day. Most of the important battlefields are preserved, that's enough.
Perhaps I ought to have begun that sentence with "IMO". While it is impossible to preserve the past entirely because the present would be littered by and encumbered by it, it is my opinion that the past serves as a sort of map to the future. That is, a battlefield in the midst of a current community is an ever-present reminder that war can happen. Running a highway right through it was thoughtless: it is an inconvenience as well as a safety hazard (the builders might have erected "cat walks" or tunnels for battlefield visitors).

Some sites are "sacred" simply because of their nature. Cemeteries come to mind immediately. There is a cemetery in southern Maine in which an amusement park infringes on it--to the degree that there is a "fun slide" running only inches over a tomb stone. And Maine has one of the strictest cemetery codes in the country! Now, that is sad.

The important battlefields only? But who decides which sites are more worthy than others? What measurement is used? Perhaps the number killed--or the fame of the particular generals? My guess it that it is the fiscal clout of the developers vs. the preservationists.

Yes, its a sad truth. It is sad that history is disposable--and it is sad that too many can't understand that they probably will have to reinvent some important wheels.
 
Back
Top