Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [TalkAntietam] Spinning Wheels on South Mountain

Expand Messages
  • Rawlings, Kevin
    Tim, I would be interested in hearing what your views and/or vision for the best way to preserve the South Mountain battlefields above and beyond what I have
    Message 1 of 6 , Apr 30, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      Tim,

      I would be interested in hearing what your views and/or vision for the best
      way to preserve the South Mountain battlefields above and beyond what I have
      looked at from the various sites you have been kind enough to include. If
      you want to take this to private e-mail that is fine also. I am truly
      interested in what you have to say and your philosophy of what it is going
      to take. At the time I left CMHL they wanted to get away from the emphasis
      the Civil War as the reason we formed CMHL and concentrate on other things
      like Tea Shops and backing various sundry candidates in Middletown.

      Kevin

      -----Original Message-----
      From: tjrhys62 [mailto:tjreesecg@...]
      Sent: Friday, April 30, 2004 1:11 PM
      To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: [TalkAntietam] Spinning Wheels on South Mountain


      Continuing South Mountain thread of recent days, anyone wishing to
      delve further into preservation status should have a look at today's
      posting on The Civil War Bookshelf at http://cwbn.blogspot.com/. It
      pays to research and think these things out before assuming that
      progress is being made.

      Tim



      ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Buy
      Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark Printer
      at MyInks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US & Canada.
      http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511
      http://us.click.yahoo.com/mOAaAA/3exGAA/qnsNAA/GmiolB/TM
      ---------------------------------------------------------------------~->



      Yahoo! Groups Links
    • richard@rcroker.com
      It looks like I might be doing a radio tour promoting my book signing at Antietam in the next couple of months and had hoped that I could use that
      Message 2 of 6 , Apr 30, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        It looks like I might be doing a "radio tour" promoting my book signing at
        Antietam in the next couple of months and had hoped that I could use that
        opportunity to pile on on the South Mountain issue (and maybe do some good).
        But it appears to be so complicated that I wouldn't have time to say any
        more than "build us a park."

        If this happens, I may want to speak with one or two of you beforehand, just
        to get a better feel for what's going on.

        I know Antietam has made some great progress lately, but still needs some
        help. Maybe I should just stick to that.

        Richard
        ----- Original Message -----
        From: "Rawlings, Kevin" <kevin.rawlings@...>
        To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
        Sent: Friday, April 30, 2004 2:44 PM
        Subject: RE: [TalkAntietam] Spinning Wheels on South Mountain


        > Tim,
        >
        > I would be interested in hearing what your views and/or vision for the
        best
        > way to preserve the South Mountain battlefields above and beyond what I
        have
        > looked at from the various sites you have been kind enough to include. If
        > you want to take this to private e-mail that is fine also. I am truly
        > interested in what you have to say and your philosophy of what it is going
        > to take. At the time I left CMHL they wanted to get away from the
        emphasis
        > the Civil War as the reason we formed CMHL and concentrate on other things
        > like Tea Shops and backing various sundry candidates in Middletown.
        >
        > Kevin
        >
        > -----Original Message-----
        > From: tjrhys62 [mailto:tjreesecg@...]
        > Sent: Friday, April 30, 2004 1:11 PM
        > To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
        > Subject: [TalkAntietam] Spinning Wheels on South Mountain
        >
        >
        > Continuing South Mountain thread of recent days, anyone wishing to
        > delve further into preservation status should have a look at today's
        > posting on The Civil War Bookshelf at http://cwbn.blogspot.com/. It
        > pays to research and think these things out before assuming that
        > progress is being made.
        >
        > Tim
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
      • tjrhys62
        Hi Kevin, No need to go private. Everyone has a stake in this. You too, Richard. First let s get our terms straight. South Mountain means Turner s and Fox s
        Message 3 of 6 , Apr 30, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          Hi Kevin,

          No need to go private. Everyone has a stake in this. You too,
          Richard.

          First let's get our terms straight. "South Mountain" means Turner's
          and Fox's gaps exclusively. Crampton's Gap was a separate ball game,
          so said Lee and McClellan. South Mountain is the truly endangered
          battlefield as you know so well.

          The time for philosophy has unfortunately long since passed. Now
          it's a matter of setting aside what remains not already spoken for.
          As Dimitri has underscored time and again, "state battlefields"
          and "battlefield parks" cannot exist unless the land is brought into
          the public domain. That accomplished, a public mandate for access
          and amenities must be charted and funded, staffing hired and
          assigned, and a viable management plan enacted.

          H.B. 1183, by which SMSB was created (sort of), excludes everything
          traditionally associated with the "battlefield park" model laid down
          by the NPS, i.e., no visitors center, no site historian, nothing
          concrete reflective of a real public battlefield. The bill's wording
          makes this amply clear. By that measure H.B. 1183 is inherently
          flawed prior to passage, a virtual battlefield.

          So where to from here? Were I a pessimist I'd say it's far too late.
          But a few unlikely steps would go a long way toward the real thing:

          1) CMHL must deed all its current holdings to the State of Maryland,
          to be folded into existing mountain purview. It's preposterous for
          any preservation group to claim property management in perpetuity.
          The "White House" property on the National Pike would be of no use
          unless it fell contiguous to current state property. CMHL can either
          run tea rooms and act as a local PAC or it can focus on its
          incipient battlefield raison d'etre. It's too small, too incompetent
          to do both.

          2) The current Program Open Space effort to acquire easements should
          be abandoned. This may work well for keeping ag land under crop, but
          it does nothing for cultural sites. The money has all but dried up
          anyway due to Gov. Erlich's austerity program. Lean times, lean
          minds.

          3) South Mountain State Battlefield, such as it is, HQed at
          Washington Monument State Park, should be frozen in place, audited
          for to-date expenditure (no more repro cannons, office
          embellishments, or other wasteful personal toys), reviewed for
          viable management plan, and re-defined according to historical
          documentation. Though seemingly self-serving, my next book (only 70
          pages) lays out the latter in excruciating detail.

          4) Existing and potentially acquired state lands must be re-
          evaluated as being either forestry or battlefield land determined by
          accessibility, safety, and security. If suitable contiguous public
          lands cannot be practically united into a developable battlefield
          entity, suited to people walking it, then you have no state
          battlefield. Pipe dreams won't work.

          5) No state park ranger should hold a seat on the CMHL board of
          directors, a clear conflict of interest. Crackpot hobbyists should
          not be allowed to act as state-sponsored historical consultants.
          This sounds harsh, but it's the blunt truth. Park rangers and
          hobbyists are virtual historians by self-proclamation.

          6) Policy must be hammered out with Appalachian Trail Conference to
          determine what can and cannot be done contiguous to their holdings.
          They were there first circa 1930s. Divergent authorities MUST
          confer.

          7) A panel of legitimate, specialized campaign historians should be
          established as state consultants. Only they can accurately
          determine, without personal bias, where the battlefield lies, the
          descending order of importance assigned to each segment, and how
          best to publicly access each if indeed they be public lands.

          7) Last but hardly least (you may not like this one), if it is
          determined that insufficient land, fiscal commitment, and/or
          planning resources do not exist to pursue the SMSB concept, then it
          should be abandoned. End of story.

          In counterpoint I would add that many, in addition to myself, have
          long wondered why a) a 1998 initiative started for the Crampton's
          Gap battlefield was diverted to create an ersatz SMSB, b) why staff
          and funding for Gathland State Park didn't re-materialize after the
          last state budget crunch, and c) why CMHL has proclaimed long and
          loudly that "we're not interested in Crampton's Gap." My wife Jan
          served on the CMHL board when these words were uttered, she
          resigning thereafter.

          I would point out that the only battlefield land lying within a
          state park on South Mountain lies at Crampton's Gap. It's time to
          get the foxes out of the hen house, then we can see if anything can
          be salvaged. It isn't much I'm afraid, but it's all we've got after
          years of intrigue, incompetence, and pseudo-intellectual looting.

          For years people like me have tried it their way, careful not to
          tread on sensitive egos or pompous allegations of expertise. No more
          Mr. Nice Guy! What's your take on all this, Kevin? How about the
          rest of you? Don't leave me out here alone for another year. Sorry
          to be so long-winded. These are complex issues, made more so by
          divergent motives.

          Tim

          --- In TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com, "Rawlings, Kevin"
          <kevin.rawlings@s...> wrote:
          > Tim,
          >
          > I would be interested in hearing what your views and/or vision for
          the best
          > way to preserve the South Mountain battlefields above and beyond
          what I have
          > looked at from the various sites you have been kind enough to
          include. If
          > you want to take this to private e-mail that is fine also. I am
          truly
          > interested in what you have to say and your philosophy of what it
          is going
          > to take. At the time I left CMHL they wanted to get away from the
          emphasis
          > the Civil War as the reason we formed CMHL and concentrate on
          other things
          > like Tea Shops and backing various sundry candidates in Middletown.
          >
          > Kevin
          >
          > -----Original Message-----
          > From: tjrhys62 [mailto:tjreesecg@e...]
          > Sent: Friday, April 30, 2004 1:11 PM
          > To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
          > Subject: [TalkAntietam] Spinning Wheels on South Mountain
          >
          >
          > Continuing South Mountain thread of recent days, anyone wishing to
          > delve further into preservation status should have a look at
          today's
          > posting on The Civil War Bookshelf at http://cwbn.blogspot.com/.
          It
          > pays to research and think these things out before assuming that
          > progress is being made.
          >
          > Tim
          >
          >
          >
          > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------
          -~--> Buy
          > Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark
          Printer
          > at MyInks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US & Canada.
          > http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511
          > http://us.click.yahoo.com/mOAaAA/3exGAA/qnsNAA/GmiolB/TM
          > -------------------------------------------------------------------
          --~->
          >
          >
          >
          > Yahoo! Groups Links
        • Rawlings, Kevin
          Tim, Hope you have not given up on me. I have been running here at work the last several days and have not had time to respond like I wanted. The White House
          Message 4 of 6 , May 5 11:15 AM
          • 0 Attachment
            Tim,

            Hope you have not given up on me. I have been running here at work the last
            several days and have not had time to respond like I wanted.

            The "White House" property is no longer owned by CMHL, but is owned by a
            person who does reside on the current BOD. Since the Iron Brigade site is
            now owned by the State (CMHL donated it to the State), I would opine that
            the property is contiguous. I believe he joined the board after his purchase
            of the property. The owners are required to open the house for tours one
            weekend out of the year for walk throughs by the public per Maryland
            Historic easements or requirements ( I can't think of the entity on the tip
            of my tongue just now). Not that this is currently happening for all I know.
            The guy that bought it is a little strange.

            I agree with your statement about Al having a conflict of interest sitting
            on CMHL's board and brought that up when I rejoined the board. I was
            promptly told by Bill Wilson I was a troublemaker and my opinion was of no
            account as the rest of the board saw no conflict. As far as "crackpot
            hobbyist" I take it you refer to George B. or Steve S.? If you meant George,
            I don't know if I would go so far as calling him a crackpot, but he did
            manage to damage his creditability, especially with the State, by having the
            media tantrum he had. It did not help that Bill Wilson and his minions
            helped to undermine George at the same time and eventually knifed him in the
            back. The tea shop owner at the Lamar House is a good friend of Bill's and
            he was very instrumental in overriding our opposition to it. Because of our
            opposition to the tea shop, Bill managed to convene illegally a special
            board meeting and removed George from the organization. Following that
            meeting several of us were told we were next if continued to oppose Bill's
            agenda as Executive Director. One of the items Bill pushed long and hard on
            was to have the Executive Director's position to have a BOD vote. Currently
            he and his wife Molly both sit on the Board.

            Now I was on the BOD when you say the CMHL said it was not interested in
            Crampton's Gap. What I remember being discussed was the several groups that
            were involved in Crampton's Gap/Gathland, including Paul Gilligan's new
            group. We agreed we would only serve to muddy the waters by adding another
            group to the mix and decided to stay out of any involvement with Crampton's
            Gap/Gathland. We figured we had all we could do to just take care of Fox's
            and Turner's Gaps and our addition to Crampton's Gap/Gathland would involve
            too many cooks' hands in the soup. We had also gotten fed up with Paul's "I
            want to be involved with you/I don't want to be involved with you" stances
            on any wind direction that happen to be blowing any given day. There was
            already group infrastructures for Crampton's Gap/Gathland/Burkettsville
            where there was none at the other gaps. That is the way I remember it unless
            there were some things said afterwards that I was not privy to. It was not
            because we were uninterested in Crampton's Gap.

            My opinion of Greenbriar Lake being associated with the budget of the SMSB
            is preposterous and should be its own entitiy. Unfortunately, the turf
            politics from within the State Parks will not allow that separation and thus
            lake tourism requiring picnic tables and such will take precedent over
            historic and battlefield needs and the budget for SMSB will continue to
            starve, unless I am off the mark.

            I don't know what the score is or what is needed any longer. I threw up my
            hands in fustration with the turn of events at CMHL and kept to myself for
            the last several years. But I don't like what I see happening on South
            Mountain and have slowly begun to get back involved. But as of this writing,
            I am not sure with whom or what group. I just know I cannot sit on the
            sideline and tsk-tsk all that is wrong or incompetent that I see. I am
            involved with George and a new group at this time but I am not even sure
            what we are working at is doable or right. I am not even sure another group
            is the answer. My feeling of "I have done my time in the trenches, let
            someone else carry the burden awhile" on top of working on another book,
            just does not leave enough time in the day or the week.

            On a side note, did Joe Hooker spend some time recuperating in Middletown
            after Antietam? If he did, do you know where he stayed? I believe Hayes
            stayed at the Rudy House (504 Main Street?).

            Good seeing you and Jan the other night in Boonsboro. The book you have
            coming out on the Maryland Campaign, is that the 70 page book you are
            talking about or is it a longer book?

            All the best,
            Kevin
          • tjrhys62
            Kevin, Ah, power democracy. You gotta love it. Thanks for the update on CMHL holdings or lack thereof. The White House property, now being out of CMHL
            Message 5 of 6 , May 5 1:53 PM
            • 0 Attachment
              Kevin,

              Ah, power democracy. You gotta love it. Thanks for the update on
              CMHL holdings or lack thereof.

              The "White House" property, now being out of CMHL ownership as you
              say, remains private whether or not it falls contiguous to state
              land. By "Iron Brigade site" I take it you mean the ground on the
              high side of the pike, that traversed solely by the 6th & 7th
              Wisconsin. This too is situated far from any state land to which it
              could be attached in any SMSB context. In between lie fee-simple
              sale lots. See what I mean? If the current owner of the WH property
              were to deed it to the state, then perhaps a narrow public ingress
              might be established, accessible from the WH.

              Easements would have no effect, they being essentially public money
              dolled out to private property owners to keep it private. No state
              battlefield here. Half-measures, such as loosely agreed present-
              owner covenants to traverse, are not long-term binding. And as you
              observe, "strange guys" are not to be depended upon when hairs get
              split. These wholly private lands, CMHL owned or otherwise, cannot
              be construed as a portion of SMSB unless deeded into public domain.

              Regarding Ranger Al Preston, in recent years I've caught him in so
              many lies I resigned from work at Gathland in 2002 and cut off all
              communication. In the meantime he spews misinformation abroad about
              the battlefield, me, and Burkittsville in his dubious capacity as
              titular head of SMSB. Within the past month two such instances have
              come to my attention. Nothing like official clout to lend
              credibility to untruth.

              I think you've learned the hard way that anyone using preservation
              logic and common sense will inevitably fall afoul of the anointed in
              DNR and CMHL. Strange bedfellows. Both have conflicting agendas
              irrespective of what they tout publicly. Al just wants to play with
              his cannon (excuse the expression) on as much battlefield land as he
              can access, and Bill Wilson desperately wants to be Czar. I'm
              reliably informed that Wilson showed up uninvited at the autumn
              meeting of the Friends at Gathland, quickly got into a shouting
              match with a state rep from Annapolis, then vigorously shoved her to
              the floor. Yep, a woman. Nice guy.

              George isn't the crackpot hobbyist I had in mind, but he'll do. Over
              the years George proved to me in spades that he too had an agenda. I
              omit details herein. At an SMSB hearing George angrily asserted that
              it was he who had started the initiative for SMSB. In reply Park
              Manager Dan Speddon said that it was a shame that the two guys who
              really did start it-¬óBill van Gilder and myself-¬ówere no longer
              involved. We both backed away when our initiative for Crampton's Gap
              was pirated for creation of SMSB. Bill washed his hands of the whole
              thing in disgust.

              In my personal opinion George needs a shrink, though he has my
              sympathy for a Wilson knife job comparable to your own. It was
              George and his disciples who diverted state attention/funding from
              Crampton's many years ago. I pulled his knife from my back and kept
              going. Then Bill put one in his. Do I detect a pattern here? Sounds
              like a bag of weasels to me. Meanwhile lands formerly of little or
              no interest as house sites have leaped in value to the point where
              preservationists would have to pay out developers' prices tantamount
              to extortion. In this respect it's now too late for purchase,
              notably by a state government well in the hole.

              There was never more than one group infrastructure marginally
              concerned (purportedly) with CG, that being Paul Gilligan's jumped
              up SM Heritage Society, basically a band wagon without wheels.
              George had maintained that CG needed no attention because
              surrounding land was all in ag easement. It wasn't and never had
              been. Paul really wasn't interested either, being far more eager for
              public office and local land control. His favorite expression
              is "capture properties," which he hasn't a clue what to do with
              after capture--including his own dilapidated farm. Paul shot himself
              in the foot so many times in recent years he can scarcely walk now.
              The Mid-Maryland Land Trust showed him the door (like George with
              CMHL) and the Heritage Society is poised to do the same now that his
              mandatory 12-year board seat has expired. Gilligan's island is
              sinking fast. Talks to himself a lot. He and CMHL won't have to do
              battle anymore. Nothing left to fight over anyway. They cancelled
              each other out.

              What all this adds up to is nearly two decades of political
              intrigue, behind-the-scenes maneuvering, and internecine warfare as
              egos angled for supremacy. Forget the who-struck-John of it. Really
              doesn't matter anymore who's to blame. The end result is the same:
              Nothing permanent.

              It should now be amply clear what H.B. 1183 was all about. It was,
              and remains, a bureaucratic shell game crafted to funnel additional
              funds into SM Recreation Area coffers for unrelated uses such as
              Greenbrier Lake diversions you cited. Oh, and Al got a repro cannon,
              limber, implements, new weapons and uniforms to wear, framed CW
              prints for his office, and a new patrol vehicle out of the bargain.
              Remind me sometime to fill you in on Al's purchase of an original
              Mississippi Rifle using his state credit card to its limit as a down
              payment. The state yanked his card when they found out. Curiouser
              and curiouser. Al(ice) in wonderland.

              Speddon has been bellyaching about his budget for years. SMSB was
              the answer to his prayers. While I was working at Gathland even his
              rangers and other DNR personnel were vocal about misuse of funds--
              out of Dan's earshot of course. Where I come from this is called
              malfeasance, unlawful, and arrogantly hypocritical to public
              mandate. In the early stages of SMSB consideration Delegate Sue
              Hecht said it best: "DNR is a law unto itself."

              Don't feel bad if you don't know the score. No one else does either.
              Truth is private groups can have no impact, because they were and
              are an integral part of the problem from the start. It all boils
              down to a simple mantra. If it isn't publicly owned, don't call it a
              public battlefield. Someone will call you on it.

              You, George and whoever can form another group if you like. But
              you'll run into the same old wall of lies, hubris, and unmitigated
              spin. True enough; you've done your bit insofar as the powers that
              be would allow. It will probably take class action public interest
              lawsuits to put cake under the SMSB icing. But neither of us has the
              time or bucks to spend the next five years in court. Barring that,
              public demand for state comptroller's audit of SMSB might do the
              trick.

              For what it's worth, I've learned to join nothing, work
              independently, and to get as much documented information out to the
              public as possible so well-informed decisions can be made on a far
              broader plane. The next book (the 70-pager out next month) lays down
              the law according to Lee and Mac concerning the Md. Campaign.
              Thereafter if government cranks want to continue their backroom
              games, they will do so with everybody else knowing the score and
              looking on with jaundiced eye. Got fungus? Shine a harsh light on
              it. Eventually it will wither and die. But by then it will be far
              too late for the battlefield. Manipulators win; public loses, again.

              In reply to your question, Joe Hooker was taken to the Pry House
              (Mac's HQ) with his painful foot wound and treated their for awhile,
              somewhere upstairs. His disposition thereafter eludes memory, but
              I've never read anything about his treatment in Middletown. You are
              spot on about RB Hayes at the Rudy House. His wife Lucy came over
              from Ohio to look after him personally, distrustful of army medics.
              Smart lady. Maybe she should have been the 19th president.

              Good to see you too. Love the beard. Very extinguished, sorry
              distinguished. Juuust kidding. Hang in there, by your finger nails
              if necessary. Yours is a purer faith.

              Tim

              --- In TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com, "Rawlings, Kevin"
              <kevin.rawlings@s...> wrote:
              > Tim,
              >
              > Hope you have not given up on me. I have been running here at work
              the last
              > several days and have not had time to respond like I wanted.
              >
              > The "White House" property is no longer owned by CMHL, but is
              owned by a
              > person who does reside on the current BOD. Since the Iron Brigade
              site is
              > now owned by the State (CMHL donated it to the State), I would
              opine that
              > the property is contiguous. I believe he joined the board after
              his purchase
              > of the property. The owners are required to open the house for
              tours one
              > weekend out of the year for walk throughs by the public per
              Maryland
              > Historic easements or requirements ( I can't think of the entity
              on the tip
              > of my tongue just now). Not that this is currently happening for
              all I know.
              > The guy that bought it is a little strange.
              >
              > I agree with your statement about Al having a conflict of interest
              sitting
              > on CMHL's board and brought that up when I rejoined the board. I
              was
              > promptly told by Bill Wilson I was a troublemaker and my opinion
              was of no
              > account as the rest of the board saw no conflict. As far
              as "crackpot
              > hobbyist" I take it you refer to George B. or Steve S.? If you
              meant George,
              > I don't know if I would go so far as calling him a crackpot, but
              he did
              > manage to damage his creditability, especially with the State, by
              having the
              > media tantrum he had. It did not help that Bill Wilson and his
              minions
              > helped to undermine George at the same time and eventually knifed
              him in the
              > back. The tea shop owner at the Lamar House is a good friend of
              Bill's and
              > he was very instrumental in overriding our opposition to it.
              Because of our
              > opposition to the tea shop, Bill managed to convene illegally a
              special
              > board meeting and removed George from the organization. Following
              that
              > meeting several of us were told we were next if continued to
              oppose Bill's
              > agenda as Executive Director. One of the items Bill pushed long
              and hard on
              > was to have the Executive Director's position to have a BOD vote.
              Currently
              > he and his wife Molly both sit on the Board.
              >
              > Now I was on the BOD when you say the CMHL said it was not
              interested in
              > Crampton's Gap. What I remember being discussed was the several
              groups that
              > were involved in Crampton's Gap/Gathland, including Paul
              Gilligan's new
              > group. We agreed we would only serve to muddy the waters by adding
              another
              > group to the mix and decided to stay out of any involvement with
              Crampton's
              > Gap/Gathland. We figured we had all we could do to just take care
              of Fox's
              > and Turner's Gaps and our addition to Crampton's Gap/Gathland
              would involve
              > too many cooks' hands in the soup. We had also gotten fed up with
              Paul's "I
              > want to be involved with you/I don't want to be involved with you"
              stances
              > on any wind direction that happen to be blowing any given day.
              There was
              > already group infrastructures for Crampton's
              Gap/Gathland/Burkettsville
              > where there was none at the other gaps. That is the way I remember
              it unless
              > there were some things said afterwards that I was not privy to. It
              was not
              > because we were uninterested in Crampton's Gap.
              >
              > My opinion of Greenbriar Lake being associated with the budget of
              the SMSB
              > is preposterous and should be its own entitiy. Unfortunately, the
              turf
              > politics from within the State Parks will not allow that
              separation and thus
              > lake tourism requiring picnic tables and such will take precedent
              over
              > historic and battlefield needs and the budget for SMSB will
              continue to
              > starve, unless I am off the mark.
              >
              > I don't know what the score is or what is needed any longer. I
              threw up my
              > hands in fustration with the turn of events at CMHL and kept to
              myself for
              > the last several years. But I don't like what I see happening on
              South
              > Mountain and have slowly begun to get back involved. But as of
              this writing,
              > I am not sure with whom or what group. I just know I cannot sit on
              the
              > sideline and tsk-tsk all that is wrong or incompetent that I see.
              I am
              > involved with George and a new group at this time but I am not
              even sure
              > what we are working at is doable or right. I am not even sure
              another group
              > is the answer. My feeling of "I have done my time in the trenches,
              let
              > someone else carry the burden awhile" on top of working on another
              book,
              > just does not leave enough time in the day or the week.
              >
              > On a side note, did Joe Hooker spend some time recuperating in
              Middletown
              > after Antietam? If he did, do you know where he stayed? I believe
              Hayes
              > stayed at the Rudy House (504 Main Street?).
              >
              > Good seeing you and Jan the other night in Boonsboro. The book you
              have
              > coming out on the Maryland Campaign, is that the 70 page book you
              are
              > talking about or is it a longer book?
              >
              > All the best,
              > Kevin
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.