August 2008 - Civil War News - Cedar Creek Preservation Coalition Suffers Bitter Split By Deborah Fitts - MIDDLETOWN, Va. — In the wake of a decision to expand mining on the Cedar Creek battlefield, anger and recriminations have split the coalition of preservation groups that own portions of the fought-over land.

Cedar Creek Preservation Coalition Suffers Bitter Split
By Deborah Fitts
(August 2008)

MIDDLETOWN, Va. — In the wake of a decision to expand mining on the Cedar Creek battlefield, anger and recriminations have split the coalition of preservation groups that own portions of the fought-over land.

“In my 20-plus years in historic preservation, I’ve never seen anything like this before,” said Howard Kittell, executive director of the Shenandoah Valley Battlefields Foundation. “I hope we can figure out how to move forward and work together.”

At issue are the actions of the Cedar Creek Battlefield Foundation (CCBF), which in April surprised the rest of the coalition by striking a solo deal with the mining company that owns much of the battlefield’s core area.

In May the Frederick County Board of Supervisors voted 4-3 to rezone 394 acres of battlefield from agricultural use to mining. At the hearing, CCBF did not oppose the expansion. (See July CWN story.)

Kittell said CCBF’s deal with the quarry, Belgium-based Carmeuse Lime & Stone (formerly O-N Minerals Chemstone), not only gave the supervisors a reason to approve the expansion, but it also gave Carmeuse an excuse not to work with the coalition.

“I am really disappointed in what happened here,” Kittell said. What CCBF did “basically stopped any opportunity for compromise.” The coalition had worked for months to promote a plan that would have allowed Carmeuse to expand in one area, but not in an area where key fighting took place.

CCBF’s deal with Carmeuse requires the mining company to foot the bill for archeological and cultural-resource studies, hand over any artifacts found to CCBF, move piles of spoil and build berms as high as 30 feet, planted with trees, to conceal the mining operation from foundation land. CCBF owns about 300 acres in two tracts on either side of historic Belle Grove manor.

The legal contract also requires Carmeuse to give to CCBF an 8-acre parcel long earmarked for preservation that includes the remnants of mill buildings associated with Belle Grove. And, depending on archeological discovery, Carmeuse may give the foundation another 40 acres or so if it is deemed to have “historical significance.”

“In our opinion it was a win-win situation,” said Suzanne Chilson, executive director of CCBF.

In a four-page press release June 26 defending their position, CCBF asserted that the deal with Carmeuse “was a very significant, unconditional preservation achievement that has been ignored or overlooked by the entities who could have assisted, but choose now to disparage the efforts.

“Other organizations had the opportunity to meet with the quarry but they declined to do so,” the release went on, adding, “CCBF stands as the only organization that moved rapidly and firmly to secure preservation concessions that would otherwise not have been secured.”

Chilson asserted that a first rough draft of the foundation’s agreement with Carmeuse was obtained by Preserve Frederick, a key member of the coalition, “and they spread it around to everyone.” Asked why CCBF made no attempt to discuss the deal formally with the rest of the coalition members, she replied, “There really wasn’t time.”

The foundation earned the special enmity of coalition members Belle Grove Inc. and the National Trust for Historic Preservation. The former operates the 1797 house-museum and the latter owns it.

The Trust announced June 18 that CCBF would no longer have the use of Belle Grove property for the foundation’s annual October reenactment, for many years a major event on the reenacting calendar and fundraiser for the foundation.

Because of CCBF’s deal with Carmeuse, said Robert Nieweg, director of the Trust’s Southern Field Office, “The National Trust and Belle Grove felt we had no choice but to distance ourselves from CCBF and from involvement in their event.

“We regret if it causes them hardship, but the public should understand that the approval of the quarry expansion threatens our mission. It poses a very significant threat to our property and the ability to interpret the plantation.”

He added, “When backroom deals are being struck without any notice to us, and when they directly, adversely impact our mission, we have no choice but to distance ourselves from the foundation.”

CCBF’s Chilson, however, noted that the foundation board had voted months ago not to use the Belle Grove land this year anyway. (Belle Grove estimates the total land leased to CCBF at about 70 acres, including Belle Grove’s 50-acre front pasture and a 20-acre site used for cavalry camping and parking.)

Since 1999 CCBF had paid over $68,000 to Belle Grove, Chilson said, and the cost was too steep. Asked why CCBF had not told Belle Grove of the decision not to use the land this year, she replied, “They didn’t ask.”

The CCBF reenactment will go ahead as usual, Oct. 18 and 19. Belle Grove will also offer its usual events that same weekend, when the manor house will be interpreted to the time of the battle. The Frederick Ladies Relief Society and other units will occupy the lawn to demonstrate camp and social life. The house will be open for tours.

The rent that CCBF paid annually for the three-day weekend “didn’t cover our cost,” stated Belle Grove’s executive director, Elizabeth McClung.

McClung said Belle Grove had set a flat yearly rate of $5,000. CCBF kept all admission fees for the weekend, plus reenactor and vendor fees, so Belle Grove did not make its usual $8 per person, according to McClung.

“It is a very lucrative operation for them [CCBF] and probably their main source of income throughout the year,” she said. This October Belle Grove will charge admission, but reduce the ticket to $5, “to make it affordable.”

McClung added that it was “very disappointing when one nonprofit that is part of a partnership acts unilaterally and without communication” to the others. “We feel CCBF sadly neglected to call on the resources and strengths of their partners, and did not communicate during a crucial time when we were all working to provide comprehensive protection of the battlefield and the viewshed.”

As for CCBF’s assertion that coalition partners were aware of the foundation’s deal before it was completed, McClung said that wasn’t true. “It came as a complete shock to all of us.”

“CCBF took away the quarry’s motivation to talk with other preservation groups,” McCung added. “We think that really they settled for crumbs from the table, instead of sitting down with all of us to come up with an equitable solution for everyone.”

Nieweg, of the National Trust, offered a hope that two prominent Virginia legislators, Sen. John Warner and Rep. Frank Wolf, might get involved and “take whatever steps are available” to stop the mining expansion.

“This is obviously a crisis situation,” Nieweg said. “This is a foreign-based company stepping in and destroying our heritage.”

Several representatives of the nonprofits offered a hope that the coalition could be mended. Together, five groups — the National Trust, Belle Grove Inc., CCBF, the Shenandoah Valley Battlefields Foundation and Shenandoah County — preserve 1,100 acres inside the new Cedar Creek and Belle Grove National Historical Park. They have agreed to manage those lands and help shape the park’s future.

Stepping into the turmoil, park superintendent Diann Jacox said she was working to schedule a meeting in September at which the partners will sit down with a three-member team of facilitators.

Also see CCBF president Joseph W.A. Whitehorne’s letter to the editor.