- (December 2006) WASHINGTON, D.C. - More than a decade after a groundbreaking congressional study that identified 384 of the most significant Civil War battlefields, a National Park Service (NPS) mapping team is updating the study with extensive new information - including in many cases realigning the boundaries of the battle action.

Paul Hawke, Chief of NPS's American Battlefield Protection Program (ABPP), said improved information about the battles, alterations to the integrity of some battlefields, and a new, uniform survey methodology have resulted in significant changes and improvements to the original study.

The new methodology alone, formulated by NPS mapping expert David Lowe, has resulted in considerable additions to battlefield "study" areas, which delineate corridors where the armies maneuvered to and from the fighting, as well as where they camped, set up field hospitals, and other activities associated with the fighting.

"So you see that these amoebas have grown little spider legs," Hawke said of the battlefield maps.

The surveys also create boundaries for battle "core" areas (land where fire was given or received), and the potential National Register of Historic Places boundary, should a listing for the battlefield be sought in the future.

The new studies are a result of congressional action in 2002 seeking a resurvey of the battlefields, which were first studied in 1992 by the congressionally chartered Civil War Sites Advisory Commission. Hawke explained that Congress "wanted to know what's changed" since the initial surveys, in order to ascertain whether the millions of federal dollars being spent on battlefield protection were worthwhile.

Congress has approved the expenditure of about $30 million from the Land & Water Conservation Fund in recent years to protect Civil War battlefields. A total of $10 million required a two-to-one local match, while the other $20 million required a one-to-one match.

"So you're looking at some sizeable money," Hawke said. "Has it been wasted or has it gone to good use? I think you'll see it's gone to good use, and a lot of people deserve a lot of credit for it."
The new field surveys began in late summer 2005 and are nearly completed on a first phase that comprises 194 of the 384 sites. The project employed $250,000 appropriated by Congress last year. For convenience, the battlefields chosen were closest to ABPP headquarters in Washington, including those in Virginia, Tennessee, Kentucky, Ohio, Maryland, Indiana, Pennsylvania and Washington itself.

No further appropriation has been made to date for the rest of the sites, but Hawke said he was hopeful one would be forthcoming.

The eight-month-long first phase has been accomplished by a team of just five surveyors: Lowe, Kathleen Madigan and Tanya Gossett of NPS, plus two contractors, Lisa Rupple and Joe Brent. Hawke attributed the team's efficiency to being able to build on the original survey, which took two years and employed nearly 90 people.

The first phase will be completed by Christmas, Hawke predicted. The surveys will be released on a state-by-state basis and will be available to the public.

"I think the result we'd hope for is that local communities will take a look at what's going on, and some that have been lagging behind (in preserving their battlefields) will do more than they're doing, and those that are already doing a lot will be spurred on to do even more," Hawke said.

He said there the new surveys had prompted "talk" about adding more battlefields to the original 384. The original survey was done by a commission that has gone out of existence, however. If other sites are now deemed worthy, he said, they will carry "an asterisk" in the new report. The battle of Brown's Bridge in Arkansas is one such site.

One thing about his team's findings has raised Hawke's eyebrows.

"What's surprising us is the total lack of interest" by groups and communities in nominating their battlefields to the National Register, he said. In all of Virginia, for instance, which has about 90 battlefields, only nine non-federal battlefields have been nominated.

Hawke noted that National Register status protects a site from any development project that involves federal funding. In addition, public recognition is also a significant reward. "Just having that listing means that anyone who wants to know what's important in your state should be able to go to the National Register and find out."

Editor's Note: Surveyor David Lowe wrote the September 2006 Preservation News column about defining core battlefields.

Our email address is: mail@civilwarnews.com