Recent comments

  • Had a Good Laugh Yet Today? Congress Wants You to Believe that the Lower Taunton River is “Wild and Scenic”   5 years 38 weeks ago


    Bob -- two points on the Taunton:

    1. As was covered in a previous thread of yours, in the law, you are either a 'Wild' or a 'Scenic' but not a 'Wild & Scenic' river. It is called the "Wild & Scenic Rivers System," a system that also includes 'Recreational' as a category. What is the proposed category for the Taunton??

    2. It would be fun sometimes -- considering the poliitical atmosphere that is created in the NPS Boston office just a few miles away on an issue like this one with a congressman with the seniority and disposition of Barney Frank -- if you could get the NPS staffers who actually floated the river a lot, and met with local advocates and the congressman, to be interviewed in your column.

    somebody from NPS Boston like Steve Golden or Bob McIntosh, whoever is the mid-level coordinators or program leaders of the project, the step above the person who writes the report. Many of these studies are generated by the close relationship between these NPS staff in Massachusetts, and the interaction and coaching goes on for years before a proposal gets to Congress. The thinking of a Golden or a McIntosh on how they approach these resources, how they see them as comparable to other rivers in the W & S System, would be very useful for those of us who really would like to know what the emerging philosphy is inside the NPS. Are program criteria applied the same way today, for example, as they were earlier, in their opinion? I am sure there are questions you could ask, and only get an answer like "read the study" from these guys, so some of the broader background and day to day experience would seem valid. And all paid for by you, the taxpayer, so one would think they would love to share their thinking and experience !

    The last I heard, the Taunton in MA is the largest source of pollution to Narragansett Bay, the most precious environmental resource in Rhode Island. How 'wild' is that !

  • Is the Bear "Hunt" in Katmai National Preserve Sporting or Ethical?   5 years 38 weeks ago

    Kurt,

    Can you please give us an update on this shameful action ? My hopes are that the NPS has come to its senses and will not allow this again at a site where the NPS itself has brought people to the bears world and the bears have graciously accepted them !

  • National Park Service Agrees, Conditionally, to Keep Yellowstone's Sylvan Pass Open For Snowmobiling   5 years 38 weeks ago

    This is ridiculous. The money they will use for this initiative could be better spent helping the bison and elk herd.

  • Is the Bear "Hunt" in Katmai National Preserve Sporting or Ethical?   5 years 38 weeks ago

    I just don't know when we, as a society will ever fully develop as an intelligent species. This display of inhumane killing is exactly what is wrong with hunting. People think it is their right to do this and will defend it bigtime.
    If we can't protect a beautiful bear in preserve like Katmai then we might as well ban bear hunting altogether.
    Bunch of fat idiots shooting a bear with a bow and gun at close range is sick. [Edited].

  • Why Stop At Golden Gate National Recreation Area? What Other NRAs, Monuments, Etc., Should Be Renamed?   5 years 38 weeks ago

    Sometimes a resource is not always seen, like how some hot springs have An important pre-historic Native american quarry worth protecting. Moreover, a park does not have to be big it just has to be important and of national importance or awareness. But people associate the phrase National Park with a lot of things, which is why there are so many names. The Names are for what the park protects, not what it is.

  • Had a Good Laugh Yet Today? Congress Wants You to Believe that the Lower Taunton River is “Wild and Scenic”   5 years 38 weeks ago

    If you read the study, the most important thing about the river is how untouched it really is. The study also mainly focuses on the upper part which as undeveloped has some very important Archeological sites. In the end, the study should have only recommended the upper part not the lower.

  • Cedar Breaks National Monument   5 years 38 weeks ago

    During the heat of summer, camping at Cedar Breaks National Monument at over 10,000 feet offers welcome relief from the extreme temperatures experienced at lower elevations. In fact, nighttime temperatures can go below freezing, even during July. The night sky at this elevation is outstanding.

    Looking at the above photo, and assuming it was taken recently, then I assume that the photo is looking towards the southeastern horizon. The brightest star is the planet Jupiter, and the constellation is Sagittarius. The time of the photograph is about 10 PM.

    Owen Hoffman
    Oak Ridge, TN 37830

  • Why Stop At Golden Gate National Recreation Area? What Other NRAs, Monuments, Etc., Should Be Renamed?   5 years 38 weeks ago

    To clarify for ALL readers, the Pelosi bill is not merely a name change, but strikes every occurrence of the word "recreation" out of the enabling legislation of the GGNRA.

    That Pelosi staffers call this a "name change," merely cosmetic to "raise the status" of the park, with no impact on the administration of the park, is simply laughable.

    These folks are serious about making recreation take a backseat to preservation/restoration. Somehow, I missed the rationale that explains why Bay Area residents are in less need of recreation than they were in 1972.

  • Interior Officials Want to Allow Concealed Carry in the National Parks   5 years 38 weeks ago

    That reminds me of what a very close old friend exclaimed when he was told he would then be shot back at,
    "Finally, things are gettin' interesting!"

  • Former NPS Director George Hartzog Passes   5 years 38 weeks ago

    I had the great privilege of driving George Hartzog to his dialysis and doctors appointments during the last seven months of his life. This proved to be one of the great experiences of my life. Though many years my senior, Mr. Hartzog insisted on me calling him George. This took some time getting used to, but he made it clear in no uncertain terms that “Mr.” was unacceptable. I learned early on that when George Hartzog had made up his mind of something, he generally held to it.

    I never knew George in his younger years, but I often mused to myself about what he must have been like. I saw pictures of him and his lovely wife Helen and their family from years ago and I read about his life at the helm of the National Park Service, but it was the stories he told, such wonderful stories, which brought me to the conclusion that he must have been a man’s man.

    One such story involved his early days in the park service when he found a bear caught in a trap and rushed back to the park office to get help. He returned with an experienced ranger who proceeded to tell him to go down hill and keep the bear occupied while the ranger crept up from above to cut the bear out of the trap. The bear of course by now was quite out of his mind with rage over his situation. I can just imagine young George facing down that bear, knowing he was about to be let loose with a down-hill slope leading straight to him! Fortunately for all, the bear simply ambled off into the brush after being set so painfully free.

    There were many other bear stories, fish stories, and mountain climbing stories. But some of the most impressive were his exploits on Capitol Hill and the White House. I was in awe of the masterful way in which he was able to get his way in both of those arenas, and the way in which he would not budge when a principle was at stake. At one point he was ordered by a white house official to do something that he simply had no authorization from Congress to do. He refused. He said, “Sir, I will be happy to do anything that you ask me to do as long as the list of penalties of doing so does not end with the words ‘shall be incarcerated.’”

    I must say though, that what impressed me the most was the man that I got to know in those last seven months in the car and at his appointments. There was never a person that he passed without an acknowledgement and a respectful greeting. It did not matter who was he was addressing, he was always attentive and careful to let them know he valued their presence. And this came at a time in his life in which he was almost constantly in extreme pain. Don’t get me wrong, George could not be dissuaded when he had made up his mind and would not tolerate bureaucratic rules stopping him. I recall once being called to the hospital to take George home. I was happy to help, but when I arrived George was ready to go whether or not the hospital was ready for him to leave. I wheeled him up to the nurse’s station, but they had other ideas. Needless to say, after respectfully declining to comply with their requests, we were off.

    When George was 17 years old he was the youngest licensed Methodist minister in South Carolina. One day in the car I asked him if he ever regretted not going into the ministry full time. He said that perhaps there were times when he wondered about that, but that he had concluded that his work in the park service was fulfilling God’s calling in his life to help take care of His creation. He had a great conviction that God ruled in the affairs of men, and he conveyed many stories of how that had impacted his life right up to being the Director of the National Park Service. We had many wonderful conversations discussing matters of faith. And though of decidedly different political persuasions, of which he was in no way shy to state his opinion, we found a great common ground in the life and person of Jesus Christ. More than once he told me that though he loved his family and friends, he sometimes wondered if it might be better to go on to be with the Lord in light of the intensity of the pain he had to live with day to day. His was a sure conviction of the reality that heaven was at hand, and though sad to say good-bye, he was ready.

    And so he left us on Friday June 27th 2008. I had taken him to dialysis that day. He was not himself when I came to pick him up. But often the dialysis tended to disorient him. This day however was different. Though his vital signs were OK, he was not responding when we spoke. It took three of us to get him out to and into the car. When we got back to the house his daughter Nancy was providentially there and went with him to the hospital, from which he did not return.

    Several days later, I returned to the dialysis center to thank those who had so faithfully and lovingly cared for him over the months. I talked to the nurse, Irene, and one of the attendants that had been particularly fond of George. As I told them of what happened after we left dialysis that day and thanked them for their kindness to him, they were visibly moved. Irene proclaimed that he was now was in heaven. The other attendant through tears told me he was like a father to her.

    What a wonderful tribute. After a life of working with the powerful and proving to be no small participant in that world, he was one who took the time and the care to reach out to all those whom God in His providence had placed in his path regardless of their station or position in life. This is a life well lived and well loved.

  • National Park Service Struggles to Restore and Protect Historic Sightlines at Manassas National Battlefield Park   5 years 38 weeks ago

    Maybe the cooperating natural history association at Manassas could have the trees put into a wood chipper and sell the stuff by the bag in their gift shop for use in barbecue grills. I'd buy it. They could call it Stonewall's Chips or Smoke of the Battlefield. It'd make for mighty tasty chicken and ribs.

  • Interior Officials Want to Allow Concealed Carry in the National Parks   5 years 38 weeks ago

    One last item that requires clarification---

    I'm there with you on the concealed carry permit in Chicago. There would be less shooting and armed robberies if there was a good chance the victim was carrying. The offender would think twice about pulling a gun on someone if he knows there is a good chance he will get shot. Besides, look at how well dictator Daley's law of no registered handguns in Chicago has done. Shootings and shooting related homicides are up!

    Crime statistics published for the City of Chicago will verify that the overall crime rate, rates pertaining to violent crime and the murder rate for the city have been in a steady decline for well over a decade. It is unfortunate that the publicity of gang-related shootings and drive-by shootings are what garner the headlines. Some of this is directly related to the general public's bloodlust, but more to the point is that these incidents make good lead stories and headlines when the victims of these gun-toting idiots are innocent bystanders, and more specifically, innocent, non-gang member neighborhood children, whose only "crime" was being trapped living in an urban war zone. Let's not get all carried away with the lame old notion that "if the shooter knew the victim was carrying they would have thought twice or never pulled their weapon out in the first place". That statement is just pure nonsense, and has no basis in the reality of the urban gang mentality. These morons know full well that other gang members are packin'. If you, in your heart of hearts, honestly believe that the fear of immediate retribution, or future retaliation for that matter, serves as even the slightest deterent in preventing these incidents, then you must be living in the same La-La Land that others believe I inhabit.

  • National Park Quiz 2: Straddlers   5 years 38 weeks ago

    i love it

  • National Park Service Struggles to Restore and Protect Historic Sightlines at Manassas National Battlefield Park   5 years 38 weeks ago

    I think I see what Mr. Flint is getting at--if the locals are so worried about losing trees, then they should have protested when the developers came in and built the thousands of townhouses and McMansions that crowd the Manassas landscape. I was just at this battlefield on Saturday for the First Manassas Anniversary event, and I could not believe how the area has become wall to wall developments. It's a relief to actually get to the park to enjoy some open space. I think the locals are rather hypocritical if they are upset about the park cutting down trees to restore a historical landscape but they didn't say anything about developers stripping the landscape bare.

  • Why Stop At Golden Gate National Recreation Area? What Other NRAs, Monuments, Etc., Should Be Renamed?   5 years 38 weeks ago

    The last few comments have made my point for me. No one knows what the designations mean. There is not hierarchy of parks and a national "park" is not an elevation of any kind. It is a name change and nothing more unless the legislation specific to the park also changes. As noted, Congress, courts, and the 1978 Redwood Act as amended specify that all units are managed the same. National Recreation Areas are not managed for any less preservation than national parks or monuments. Santa Monica Mountains NRA is among the most diverse ecosystems in the country and has more plant and bird species and more endangered species than most of the national "parks." Why do some people seem to care about these designations so much? They are not denoters of size, amenities, location, staff, budget, or anything other than the political whim of the Congress when designated. The names are tools to designate to the public what they own and what constitute the greater collection of treasures in the National Park System. It is no wonder visitors are confused when the BLM and Forest Service also manage national recreation areas and national monuments and many privately owned properties are National Historic Landmarks. If we are to ahve our National Park System survive it needs to be supported by the public. The public will not support what it cannot understand. The preservation of these natural and historical areas is more important than what you call them. Therefore, they should be called something that can be easily understood.

  • Running Rapids at Big South Fork National River and Recreation Area   5 years 38 weeks ago

    Interesting video. I'll be headed to Big South Fork and Obed National Scenic Riverway tomorrow.

  • Why Stop At Golden Gate National Recreation Area? What Other NRAs, Monuments, Etc., Should Be Renamed?   5 years 38 weeks ago

    This is quite the education.

    with national parks exemplifying, protecting and celebrating the rarity or uniqueness of a diverse landscape, ecosystem (or ecosystems) or historical resource. Monuments should protect a single resource as designated by the president under the Aniquties Act. The current restrictive guidelines for national parks should remain, while each designation should have specific guidelines governing what is allowed and what isn't, with, perhaps, natonal recreation areas being the least restrictive. I think parks, seashores, historical sites and historical parks etc. should be focused primarily on resource protection, while recreation areas should emphasize recreation over protection.

    I was under the ill-informed impression that this is how it was. Certainly seems like this is how it should be.

    When I stop to think about two of my favorite NPS units - Congaree and Sleeping Bear - it seems like Sleeping Bear has far more of the park-like attributes than Congaree. You have two islands (one a wilderness), a self-guided scenic drive, touristy gimmicks (the Dune Climb), and a lot of diverse ecosystems. Throw in the historical aspect and Sleeping Bear is about as "Parky" as you can get. I love Congaree and want it to have the highest level of protection it can have, but you are correct it is less of a park by your definition of park.

  • Why Stop At Golden Gate National Recreation Area? What Other NRAs, Monuments, Etc., Should Be Renamed?   5 years 38 weeks ago

    Absolutely. This is the ideal time to have this conversation. The watering-down issue is interesting because this often occurs in wilderness designation. For example, conservationists may only be successful in gaining Congressional support for a wilderness designation if the grazing rights holder can drive his motorized ATV into the wilderness to access his allotment, certainly violating the spirit, if not necessarily the letter, of the Wilderness Act. In general, it seems NPS unit designations and the guidelines governing them should be consistent. A good example of that, if I remember correctly, occurred at Mojave National Preserve, which many wanted to be a national park, but because Congress would only protect the area if hunting was allowed, it was designated a national preserve, not a national park. That is as it should be.

    I agree that reordering the designations to develop more consistent guidelines is necessary. People should have a general idea of what to expect when they go to a national park, monument, national historical park, etc., with national parks exemplifying, protecting and celebrating the rarity or uniqueness of a diverse landscape, ecosystem (or ecosystems) or historical resource. Monuments should protect a single resource as designated by the president under the Aniquties Act. The current restrictive guidelines for national parks should remain, while each designation should have specific guidelines governing what is allowed and what isn't, with, perhaps, natonal recreation areas being the least restrictive. I think parks, seashores, historical sites and historical parks etc. should be focused primarily on resource protection, while recreation areas should emphasize recreation over protection. So, if people want dogs at Golden Gate, it should remain an NRA.

    National parks especially should emphasize conservation and protection over recreation with recreation included, of course. But the public should know what to expect when they go there, including what kind of resources they may encounter when they arrive. I think it's confusing when someplace as expansive and resource-diverse as Dinosaur National Monument is a monument, while a place like Black Canyon, which has a couple of hiking trails, a few overlooks and the nearly-impenitrable gorge itself, is a national park. The key to solving the park designation debate is resource diversity. Black Canyon, as cool as it is, is just not in the same league as Grand Canyon or Rocky Mountain national parks, or Dinosaur, which are all expansive, rare and diverse. Cedar breaks should remain a national monument because a very similar landscape is protected in Bryce Canyon NP (which, it could be argued, should be greatly expanded) down the road, and even with Ashdown Gorge Wilderness added, Cedar Breaks simply in my opinion wouldn't be diverse enough to earn park status.

    How do you define resource diversity? I'm not expert enough to give a definitive answer to that. However, I do know this: When a park exists to protect a few hot springs or a section of a deep gorge, as with Black Canyon, it's just not enough. If it's a truly unique canyon system, maybe so. Maybe a national park just has to feel big, wild, grand and truly unique. That's a cop out, for sure, but diversity of resources certainly contributes to such grandness. Regardless, Congress should revisit this issue and the public should debate it in attempt to make the park system more consistent and all our national parks worthy of the designation.

  • Cape Hatteras National Seashore Settlement Won't Ban ORV Use, But Will Restrict Travel   5 years 38 weeks ago

    The problem stems from mis-use of a great resource. I have been going to the CHNS since 1978 and have seen alot of changes. Many of those have been for the worse. Topping that list is the over crowding in many areas. This leads to abuse of the areas. Im all for restrictions in these areas durring the peak season months. I feel way too may people feel its their right and dont understand its a privladge. Respect the areas and these problamatic disruptions and wildlife damage would be much less of an issue. I have seen many stupid people doing stupid things and love to see rangers doing their job and throwing the book at these people. Please reguard this seashore as a gift and respect all people and wildlife in thses areas. Just use common sense and read the posted areas. Obay all laws and treat her with respect!!

  • Dying in the Parks: Park Service Concerned About Suicides   5 years 38 weeks ago

    A friend of mine and I, cycling Colorado National Monument last November, were the ones who found the 63-year-old man with the gunshot wound to his head at Cold Shivers Point. As an Associated Press story elucidated recently, Colorado National Monument is becoming quite the popular suicide spot. I'm a former journalist in Grand Junction, and reporting on this issue brought several interesting problems to light. Colorado National Monument's superintendent now considers the monument an "urban" park, with many of the accompanying problems: Traffic jams, drugs, conflicts with cyclists, late-night parties in culverts under the park highway, graffiti, and suicides. This at a monument with scenery not unlike that of Arches and Canyonlands national parks nearby. But, the monument borders both Grand Junction and Fruita -- their subdivisions abut the park boundary -- in an area booming with nearby oil and natural gas development. Monument resources and staff are feeling the stress and strain of the boom. The monument is truly one of the most spectacular places on the Colorado Plateau, and it would be shameful for its wild beauty to be sullied by crime and other problems most often found in cities. Its staff deserves the resources it needs to reign in the problem as best they can, and step up ranger patrols as needed.

  • Why Stop At Golden Gate National Recreation Area? What Other NRAs, Monuments, Etc., Should Be Renamed?   5 years 38 weeks ago

    Some good points, SaltSage236.

    Of course, if you're going to tinker with the designations, would you go so far as to tinker with the management guidelines? After all, all 391 units are supposed to be managed, unless otherwise legislatively directed, according to the National Park Service Organic Act of 1916 and the Redwoods Amendment of 1978. There are cases -- Golden Gate is a good one currently on the radar screen -- where "upgrading" to a "national park" could possibly restrict some activities that currently are permitted there. Do you continue to allow those activities and water-down the preservation/conservation mandate , or risk raising the ire of a segment of visitors?

    Or, would you take advantage of reordering the designations to develop more consistent (nationwide) guidelines for management of the various categories of "national parks"? Why let one national seashore allow personal watercraft while another cannot? Ditto with biking, snowmobiling, etc., etc.

    And, then, of course, there are those parks that some believe deserve national park status while others more than likely will disagree. How should those conflicts be resolved?

    With the transition to a new administration, I think it could be argued that this is the perfect time to be discussing and addressing these issues.

  • Why Stop At Golden Gate National Recreation Area? What Other NRAs, Monuments, Etc., Should Be Renamed?   5 years 38 weeks ago

    The "national park" designation for a piece of the public estate should (and often does) carry with it the distinction of truly being one of the nation's natural or historic crown jewels -- an often broad range of protected natural resources and unspeakable beauty, or a place, such as Mesa Verde, that protects an area that speaks deeply about a region's and culture's history. A "national park" should be a truly glorious example of America's natural heritage and a place that protects unique and uniquely spectacular natural features and is immediately recognizable as being an identifying mark of America's natural landscape.

    Perhaps its time for Congress to more narrowly define what should and should not be a national park. Certainly, Golden Gate NRA should NOT be a national park, and neither should Cedar Breaks. Congress should drop the "national park" moniker on a few parks and declare them national monuments (yes Congress has the power to do that, too, as they did with Congaree in 1976). Hot Springs National Park, hardly worthy of national parkhood, would be a great national historic site. Black Canyon of the Gunnison National Park would only be worthy of park status if it included the Gunnison Gorge National Conservation Area on its western border. Wind Cave should lose park status, too, and become a monument like its equally significant neighbor, Jewel Cave. Park designations for Cuyahoga Valley and Dry Tortugas should also be reconsidered. And, Congaree National Park, the only "national park" in my home state of South Carolina, would probably be best managed as a national monument, the way it began.

    A few other units of federal land (not necessarily NPS-managed) truly do deserve national park status: Dinosaur National Monument (especially if the wildlands on its northeastern borders were included; the northern reaches of Utah's Glen Canyon NRA that are managed by and border Canyonlands National Park; Colorado National Monument and the adjacent McInnis Canyons National Conservation Area, which together I think should be called "Uncompahgre National Park" ; Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument in Utah; Grand Canyon-Parachant National Monument, which should be included in Grand Canyon National Park; the Guadalupe Ranger District of New Mexico's Lincoln National Forest, which connects Carlsbad Caverns and Guadalupe Mountains national parks, should be included in one of those two parks; all the wilderness areas surrounding Rocky Mountain National Park, all of which should be included in that park; and finally, New Mexico's Bandelier National Monument, which should be expanded to include Valles Caldera National Preserve and Kasha Katuwe-Tent Rocks National Monument and be called "Bandelier National Park."

    Going to a national park should capture the imagination and adventurous spirit of all who go there, and inspire visitors to revere and respect the wild, beautiful and unique landscape within a national park's borders.

  • NPCA, TWS Presidents Meet With Canadian Ambassador To Seek Solution to Development in Flathead Valley   5 years 38 weeks ago

    This is a very wonderous part of North America where wildlife actually have large areas of mostly undeveloped habitat for migration and genetic diversity ! It must be saved as it truly is the crown jewel area of the lower 48.
    Canada and the United States created these parks and now they must create a safe haven surrounding them. These parks are not "islands". To support the very large diversity of life found here, the surrounding areas must also be protected from harmful development of all kinds.
    The total environmental assessment must be made looking at BOTH sides of the border ! This ecosystem simply has to be protected. Thank goodness the NPCA and the Wilderness Society are putting their efforts toward saving this priceless place as they have their work cut out for them on both sides of the border.

  • Why Stop At Golden Gate National Recreation Area? What Other NRAs, Monuments, Etc., Should Be Renamed?   5 years 38 weeks ago

    Here, here. There should be only two kinds of units: National Parks, National Historical Parks. No right-minded organization would allow its brand to be as diluted as the NPS has with 19 different kinds of units. These "holier than thou" esoteric discussions of what is, and is not. a "national park" are ridiculous. THE PUBLIC DOES NOT CARE! With the current designation confusion the public cannot find the units of the National Park System and that is not good for the system as a whole. We all know the names are arbitrary - hence Congresswoman Pelosi's effort and Congaree and Cuyahoga Valley national parks. Time to think like Coca-Cola: one brand name for all the units.

  • National Park Service Struggles to Restore and Protect Historic Sightlines at Manassas National Battlefield Park   5 years 38 weeks ago

    Quite the dilemma. As a nature-lover and ecologist, my NPS traveling is largely limited to the nature-centric parks. Those parks preserve the nature of a place, unsullied by human hands. On the other hand, it seems to me a battlefield park is in place to preserve a landscape that was quite heavily sullied by human actors acting out one of our nation's darkest plays. And then you have Rushmore and the capital monuments that are human artifacts commemorating heroes and great deeds. All of these are preserved for unique reasons. I don't want to see trees cut down in Olympic National Park any more than I want a sculptor adding his own favorite president to Borglum's quartet in the Black Hills, or - getting to the matter at hand - forest overrunning the battlefield at Manassas.

    As a card-carrying tree-hugger, it pains me to see mature hickories felled. Yet I am also the great-grandson of a young boy who lied about his age to fight for the Army Of Northern Virginia during its death throes in the spring of 1865. My father 's study had a full bookcase devoted to the civil war, Bruce Catton proudly occupying a shelf and a half. When my dad took me to Sharpsburg, I'm glad he could show me the bridge over Antietam Creek and explain why so much blood was shed there. Standing on the battlefield at Sayler's Creek (a VA State Park), my eyes want to become my great-grandfather's eyes and see what he saw, the enduring devotion to his family's farmland where the battle developed, the love for the State of Virginia, and his pride in the nearly-defeated but ever noble General Lee. Moments like that can be enhanced immeasurably by historical authenticity of the landscape. For that I would sacrifice a hickory.