Harpers Ferry National Historical Park

National Park Service • U.S. Department of the Interior

Draft 

General Management Plan / Environmental Impact Statement 

Harpers Ferry National Historical Park 

Jefferson County, West Virginia; Loudoun County, Virginia; and Washington County, Maryland 

____________________________________________________________________________________ 

Harpers Ferry National Monument was authorized by an act of Congress on June 30, 1944, and became Harpers 

Ferry National Historical Park on May 29, 1963. The last comprehensive management plan for the national 

historical park was completed in 1980. Much has changed since 1980 — visitor use patterns and types of use have 

changed, people want to bring new recreational activities to the national historical park, and an additional 1,240 

acres were authorized for addition to the national historical park in 2004. Each of these changes has implications 

for how visitors access and use the national historical park and the facilities needed to support those uses, how 

resources are managed, and how the National Park Service manages its operations. 

This document examines three alternatives for managing Harpers Ferry National Historical Park for the next 20 

years. It also analyzes the impacts of implementing each of the alternatives. The “no-action” alternative 

(alternative 1), continues existing NPS management and trends and serves as a basis for comparison in evaluating 

the other alternatives. In Alternative 2 Harpers Ferry National Historical Park would present 250 years of history 

at the site through exhibits at a new visitor center that provides an orientation to the site and encourages visitors 

to explore areas of the park that illustrate themes in park history. The park would be more easily accessible by 

round-the-park trail and an expanded transportation system that reaches most park locales in West Virginia. Park 

staff would bring life to the park by scheduling more festivals, events, and tours, and increasing the visibility of 

national historical park staff. Park offices would remain on Camp Hill in historic structures and a satellite 

maintenance facility would be constructed somewhere near the Murphy Farm or Schoolhouse Ridge to obviate 

the need for enlarging the existing facility. A public/private consortium would be sought to rehabilitate the 

historic Shipley School. In Alternative 3, Harpers Ferry National Historical Park would become a gateway to the 

West Virginia, Maryland, Virginia region as well as the park through a cooperative visitor center complex at 

Cavalier Heights. Through the use of partners and concessioners the park would increase its ability to bring life 

and activity to all areas of the park. This partnership would allow additional interpretation, preservation of 

additional historic resources, and maintenance of facilities as well as a seamless transportation system that serves 

both the park and the local community. A round-the-park trail would also connect the park to the regional trail 

system. A new headquarters building and maintenance facility would be constructed outside Camp Hill to allow 

restoration of the historic structures for interpretive purposes and the landscape to the Storer College period. The 

Shipley School would be removed and the site landscaped. 

The no-action alternative would result in the eventual preservation and maintenance of historic structures, the 

preservation of archeological resources that would otherwise be lost due to use or development, and the 

identification and preservation of cultural landscapes. Alternative 1 would have a minor adverse impact on the 

gateway communities, a long-term negligible impact on the regional economy, and a minor adverse impact on 

NPS staff and the maintenance of the national historical park. Alternative 2 would have a more beneficial impact 

on the gateway communities and regional economy through enhanced educational and recreational opportunities 

for visitors and an expanded bus service increasing visitation to all areas of the national historical park. 

Alternative 3 would place more emphasis on inviting local business and public/ private organizations into the 

national historical park as partners or concessioners. By enhancing partnership opportunities, there would be a 

long-term minor to moderate beneficial impact on visitor experience and long-term minor beneficial impacts on 

NPS management. 

This Draft General Management Plan / Environmental Impact Statement has been distributed to other agencies and 

interested organizations and individuals for their review and comment. The public comment period for this 

document will last for 60 days after the Environmental Protection Agency’s notice of availability has been 

published in the Federal Register. Readers are encouraged to send comments on this draft plan to the National 

Park Service Planning, Environment and Public Comment (PEPC) website at <http://parkplanning.nps.gov> (see 

accompanying transmittal letter). Comments may also be sent to: Superintendent, Harpers Ferry National 

Historical Park, National Park Service, P.O. Box 65, Harpers Ferry, WV 25425. Before including your address, 

phone number, e-mail address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware 

that your entire comment — including your personal identifying information — may be made publicly available at 

any time. Although you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from 

public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. 

U.S. Department of the Interior • National Park Service 

SUMMARY 

Harpers Ferry National Monument was 

authorized by an act of Congress on June 30, 

1944, and became Harpers Ferry National 

Historical Park on May 29, 1963 (Public Law 

78-386). 

The last general management plan for the 

national historical park was completed in 

1980. Much has changed since 1980 — visitor 

use patterns and types of use have changed, 

people want to bring new recreational 

activities to the national historical park, and 

an additional 1,240 acres was authorized for 

addition to the national historical park in 

2004. Each of these changes has implications 

for how visitors access and use the national 

historical park and the facilities needed to 

support those uses, how resources are 

managed, and how the National Park Service 

(NPS) manages its operations. A new plan is 

needed to: 

Clearly define resource conditions and 

visitor experiences to be achieved in 

Harpers Ferry National Historical Park. 

Provide a framework for NPS managers to 

use when making decisions about how to 

best protect national historical park 

resources, how to provide a diverse range 

of visitor experience opportunities, how to 

manage visitor use, and what kinds of 

facilities, if any, to develop in the national 

historical park. 

Ensure that this foundation for decision 

making has been developed in consultation 

with interested stakeholders and adopted 

by the NPS leadership after an adequate 

analysis of the benefits, impacts, and 

economic costs of alternative courses of 

action. 

This Draft General Management Plan / 

Environmental Impact Statement presents 

three alternatives, including the National Park 

Service’s preferred alternative, for future 

management of Harpers Ferry National 

Historical Park. The alternatives, which are 

based on the national historical park’s 

purpose, significance, and special mandates, 

present different ways to manage resources 

and visitor use and improve facilities and 

infrastructure at the national historical park. 

The three alternatives are the no-action 

alternative (continue current management), 

alternative 2 (the NPS preferred alternative), 

and alternative 3. 

Additional actions and alternatives were considered. However these actions and alternatives were dismissed from further analysis. 

These dismissed actions and alternatives are 

presented, along with rationale for dismissing 

them from analysis, in the “Alternatives, 

Including the Preferred Alternative” chapter 

(see page Error! Bookmark not defined.). 

ALTERNATIVE 1: THE NO-ACTION 

ALTERNATIVE (CONTINUE 

CURRENT MANAGEMENT) 

Under the no-action alternative, Harpers 

Ferry National Historical Park would continue the current management strategies and 

practices now in place. Management would 

continue to follow the intent and spirit of the 

1980 Development Concept Plan, the last 

parkwide plan. There would be no change in 

facilities beyond regular maintenance and 

projects already initiated. Visitors would not 

notice any changes in appearance or operations because management would continue to 

offer the same visitor experiences and 

preserve the national historical park's existing 

cultural, natural, and scenic values. No action 

does not imply or direct the discontinuation 

of any existing programs or services. 

Continuing existing management conditions 

and trends (alternative 1) would result in a 

iii
SUMMARY

number of impacts: inefficient staff offices 

that are dispersed in historic structures 

throughout the national historical park, a 

continuing lack of activity and “life” in Lower 

Town, a mainly self-guided pedestrian 

experience with a lack of amenities (trails, 

restrooms, drinking water) at many park 

locations, and inadequate visitor 

orientation/information facilities. 

Overall impacts on historic structures, archeological resources, and cultural landscapes 

would not be adverse. No impacts on natural 

resources (water, floodplains, soils, cave and 

karst resources, vegetative communities, fish 

and wildlife, special status species, soundscapes, or lightscapes) above the level of 

minor impact were identified. A minor adverse impact on the visitor experience would 

continue. A minor long-term adverse impact 

on the gateway communities, a long-term 

negligible adverse impact on the regional 

economy, and a minor long-term adverse 

impact on NPS operations were also 

identified. 

ALTERNATIVE 2 (PREFERRED 

ALTERNATIVE) 

Each of the action alternatives (alternatives 2 

and 3) presents a scenario for management 

and development of Harpers Ferry National 

Historical Park. This vision is a possible future 

but depends upon the availability of funding 

to make it a reality. Selection of a preferred 

alternative does not guarantee that funding 

will become available for implementation. 

Alternative 2, the National Park Service 

preferred alternative, would provide greater 

visitor enjoyment, increased access to park 

locales, more varied interpretation, and new 

life and excitement to Harpers Ferry National 

Historical Park. 

Under alternative 2, visitors would enter 

Harpers Ferry National Historical Park at 

Cavalier Heights where a visitor contact 

station would be enlarged to function as a 

visitor center. This facility would provide 

orientation for park visitors and information 

on the park’s many resources. It would be the 

starting point for an expanded transportation 

system that would allow visitors to reach areas 

of the park such as the Murphy Farm, 

Schoolhouse Ridge and Camp Hill that were 

previously difficult to access without a car. It 

would also be a stop on the new around-thepark trail that would allow visitors to hike to 

all areas of the park. 

Leaving their personal vehicles at Cavalier 

Heights, visitors could ride the transportation 

system to Lower Town where visitors would 

be immersed in a 19th century environment. 

Preserved historic buildings, period shops, 

exhibits, and outdoor furnishings would 

complement the interpretation provided by 

rangers and possible period artisans/ 

demonstrators that would bring life to this 

area. Traveling exhibits would be sought to 

supplement interpretation provided within 

the park. A smaller information center and 

bookstore would remain but possibly in new 

locations. Park artifact storage would be 

removed from the historic structures and the 

space converted to office use or other types of 

storage. 

The Federal Armory would retain its current 

access. A study of the feasibility of returning 

John Brown’s Fort to its original location 

would be undertaken. The train station would 

become a secondary portal to the site with 

proposed excursion trains arriving from 

Washington several days of the week. 

The armory canal would be restored and 

rewatered with the turbine also restored for 

interpretive purposes. The power plant would 

be rehabilitated for exhibits. 

Virginius and Halls Islands would be 

preserved as an archeological preserve with 

ruins stabilized and outlined and wayside 

exhibits explaining the history and industrial 

development that was here. 

iv 
Summary 

Camp Hill would be managed with a campus 

atmosphere reminiscent of the Storer College 

era. Additional signs and waysides would 

allow visitors to get the feel of the site. 

Museum exhibits now in Lower Town would 

be moved to one or more of the Storer College 

structures to better explain the importance of 

Harpers Ferry to the story of the civil rights 

movement in America. Several historic 

buildings from the military occupation of 

Camp Hill would be restored and adaptively 

used for park headquarters. The historic 

Shipley School on Camp Hill would be made 

available for rehabilitation by a proposed 

public/private partnership to allow its 

preservation and use. 

The historic Grandview School would be 

rehabilitated and enlarged for use by the 

park‘s protection division. 

The Nash farm would be preserved as a dairy 

farm of the 1940s with its structures adapted 

for use as an environmental education center 

and outdoor laboratory managed by the 

National Park Service or an affiliated 

organization. 

Bolivar Heights would be actively managed to 

maintain a battlefield landscape appearance. 

Occasional programs would be supplemented 

by new signs and wayside exhibits. Restrooms, 

an enlarged parking area, and drinking water 

would be provided. 

At the Murphy farm, the civil war earthworks 

and the foundations of John Brown’s fort 

would be stabilized, and the 

Chambers/Murphy house studied to 

determine the best use for it. A bus stop and 

trail to the earthworks and foundations would 

be developed. Restrooms and drinking water 

would also be developed at the site. 

Schoolhouse Ridge would also be managed as 

a battlefield landscape with agricultural leases 

helping to maintain the 1862 appearance. The 

nonhistoric campground would be removed 

and the Harpers Ferry Caverns restored to a 

more natural appearance. Nonhistoric 

structures would be removed. Onsite 

interpretation and occasional demonstrations 

with a military focus would be provided. Bus 

parking and trails would be developed. A 

possible tunnel under route 340 would be 

developed in consultation with the State to 

facilitate the round-the-park trail. 

Schoolhouse Ridge would also be a likely 

location for a satellite maintenance facility 

easing pressure to enlarge the existing facility 

on Camp Hill. 

At the Potoma Wayside upgraded takeout 

facilities would be developed to facilitate river 

use. The takeout would be hardened and 

restroom facilities provided. To the extent 

possible, parking would also be upgraded. 

Interpretation would be provided by the 

concessioner. 

 On Loudoun Heights the Sherwood House 

would be removed and the site developed as a 

Civil War overlook. All Civil War camps and 

earthworks would be stabilized as necessary. 

The majority of the site would be maintained 

for its natural resources. Short Hill would be 

managed similarly. 

Maryland Heights would undergo 

stabilization of earthworks and fortifications 

as necessary and restoration of line of fire 

vistas. Historic roads would continue to be 

used and maintained. A higher level of 

interpretation would be achieved through 

wayside exhibits, site brochures and 

occasional ranger-guided hikes. 

Alternative 2 would result in the following 

impacts: continuation of dispersed NPS 

headquarters among several buildings, the 

rehabilitation of the historic Shipley school or 

site, an overall increased preservation of 

national historical park historic resources, a 

consolidated visitor center on Cavalier 

Heights providing information/orientation/ 

education before entry into the historic areas, 

increased bus and trail access to other 

national historical park locations for visitors, 

v
SUMMARY

greatly improved visitor experiences both in 

Lower Town and elsewhere within the 

national historical park, additional visitor 

amenities (trails, restrooms, and drinking 

water) at some locations, and increased 

educational opportunities at an environmental 

education center at the Nash Farm. 

Overall impact on historic structures, 

archeological resources, and cultural 

landscapes would not be adverse. No impacts 

on water resources, floodplains, soils, 

vegetative communities, fish and wildlife, or 

lightscapes would be expected to have more 

than a minor impact. A minor to moderate 

beneficial impact on cave resources, no impact 

on special status species, and a minor adverse 

impact on state-listed species would be 

expected. Both short-term minor to moderate 

adverse impacts and long-term moderate 

beneficial impacts on soundscapes were 

identified. A minor to moderate beneficial 

impact on the visitor experience and shortterm minor adverse/long-term minor 

beneficial impacts on NPS operations would 

be expected. Implementing alternative 2 

would have a long-term, moderate beneficial 

effect on the economy of the gateway 

communities and a long-term minor beneficial 

effect on the regional economy. 

ALTERNATIVE 3 

Alternative three provides a similar park 

experience but depends more on partnerships 

with businesses and organizations to make it 

happen. Visitors would enter Harpers Ferry 

National Historical Park at a new combined 

park/regional visitor center on Cavalier 

Heights serving both the national historical 

park and the surrounding region. Information 

on other activities or attractions in the 

Harpers Ferry area would also be available in 

a jointly run facility. Park visitors and the local 

community could both take advantage of the 

expanded transportation system that would 

form a loop through Harpers Ferry and 

Bolivar. That system would be smaller than 

the system in alternative 2 and would not 

provide access to the less visited areas of the 

park. Cavalier Heights would also be a stop on 

the round-the-park trail that would provide 

connections to the greater trail systems being 

developed in the tri-state region. 

As with alternative 2 visitors would take the 

park transportation system to Lower Town 

where historic buildings would be preserved 

and private businesses would provide much of 

the interest and excitement by selling period 

goods and services. Visitors could watch as 

artisans and craftspeople make items for sale. 

Reproduced period sounds, backyard 

vignettes and programs along with store 

personnel in period dress would help to set 

the stage for visitors. Much of the interpretation in Lower Town could be done by the 

store owners as a part of their operation. 

Special programs and demonstrations could 

have a fee requirement. Park artifact storage 

would be removed from the historic structures and the space converted to leased office 

space or business storage if the need is 

identified. 

The Federal Armory would be accessible by a 

new trail, possibly along the river wall, with a 

viewing platform on the railroad embankment 

providing an overview of the site for the 

disabled. As with alternative 2, the train 

station could become a secondary portal to 

the site should excursion trains prove feasible. 

No study of returning John Brown’s fort to its 

original location would be undertaken. 

The armory canal would be restored but not 

rewatered. Visitors would be able to walk a 

trail down into the canal from end to end. The 

power house could become a facility for 

training in preservation methods possibly 

managed by the Historic Preservation 

Training Center or used by that center while 

working in the Harpers Ferry National 

Historical Park. 

Virginius and Halls Islands would be managed 

similarly to alternative 2 with archeological 

vi 
Summary 

resources outlined and interpreted through 

wayside exhibits and signs. A stop on the 

transportation system route would allow 

easier access to the islands near the old pulp 

mill. 

Camp Hill would be managed with a campus 

atmosphere reminiscent of the Storer College 

era. Additional signs and waysides would 

allow visitors to get the feel of the site. 

Museum exhibits now in Lower Town would 

be moved to one or more of the Storer College 

structures to better explain the importance of 

Harpers Ferry to the story of the civil rights 

movement in America. Several historic 

buildings from the military occupation of 

Camp Hill would be restored for exhibits. 

Park headquarters would then move out of 

these structures into a new headquarters 

building elsewhere within the national 

historical park. The Shipley School on Camp 

Hill would be made available for rehabilitation 

by a proposed public/private partnership to 

allow its preservation and use. The park 

maintenance operation would be removed 

from Camp Hill and replaced with a leased 

facility somewhere outside the park boundary. 

As with alternative 2, the Grandview School 

would be rehabilitated and enlarged for use by 

the park’s protection division. 

The Nash Farm would be preserved as a dairy 

farm of the 1940s with its structures adapted 

for use by an independent educational 

organization dedicated to an environmental 

ethic. 

Bolivar Heights would be maintained under a 

formal cooperative agricultural lease designed 

to maintain its open battlefield character. 

Regularly scheduled fee-based living history 

programs would be provided by partnerentities. New interpretive signs and waysides 

would be installed and restrooms and potable 

water provided. 

The Chambers/Murphy farmhouse would 

either be leased out as a bed and breakfast 

operation or be rehabilitated for exhibits. The 

John Brown Fort foundations would be 

stabilized, as would the civil war earthworks 

on the site. A trail, potable water, and 

restroom facilities would be provided. 

 Schoolhouse Ridge would be managed 

similarly to alternative 2. Agricultural leasing 

would help to keep the general 1862 

landscape appearance. The campground 

would be removed and the Harpers Ferry 

Caverns restored. Entry to the caverns could 

be allowed through a permit process. 

Nonhistoric structures would be removed. 

Onsite interpretation and programs would be 

available, conducted by park staff, volunteers, 

and possibly concessioners. Access would be 

by personal vehicle only. A possible tunnel 

under route 340 would be developed in 

consultation with the State to facilitate the 

round-the-park trail. 

Provide restroom facilities at Potoma 

Wayside. To the extent possible, parking 

would also be upgraded. Any interpretation 

would be provided by the concessioner. 

On Loudoun Heights, the Sherwood House 

would be removed. All Civil War camps and 

earthworks would be stabilized as necessary. 

The majority of the site would be maintained 

for its natural resources. Natural resources 

research capabilities by other agencies or 

universities would be encouraged. Short Hill 

would be managed similarly. 

Maryland Heights would undergo 

stabilization of earthworks and fortifications 

as necessary and tree removal to provide vistas 

down onto Harpers Ferry. Historic roads 

would continue to be used and maintained. 

The park would work with the state and 

county to provide more parking along the 

Harpers Ferry Road. 

Alternative 3 would result in the following 

impacts: a more efficient rehabilitated NPS 

headquarters, a new emphasis on working 

with commercial enterprises to lease undervii
SUMMARY

viii 

used historic structures and provide 

improved/additional visitor interpretation/ 

education as a means of bringing additional 

life to the national historical park, possible 

loss of visitor access to some leased structures, 

rehabilitation of the historic Shipley School 

through a public-private agreement, the 

construction of a combined NPS/state visitor 

center to provide information/orientation for 

both the national historical park and the 

region, provision of bus service for better 

visitor access to Camp Hill, provision of better 

or additional interpretation of NPS locations 

outside of Lower Town/Camp Hill, the provision of visitor amenities (trails, restrooms, 

drinking water) at many new locations, additional educational opportunities at an independently run Educational Institute at Nash 

Farm, better preservation of collections 

storage in a new facility, and an overall 

increase in preservation of national historical 

park historic resources. 

Overall impact on historic structures, 

archeological resources, and cultural 

landscapes would not be adverse. No impacts 

on water, floodplains, soils, cave and karst 

resources, vegetative communities, fish and 

wildlife, special status species, or lightscapes 

would be expected to have more than a minor 

impact. Both short-term minor to moderate 

adverse impacts and long-term moderate 

beneficial impact on soundscapes would be 

expected. A minor to moderate beneficial 

impact on the visitor experience, a long-term 

moderate beneficial effect on the economy of 

the gateway communities, a long-term minor 

beneficial effect on the regional economy, and 

short-term minor adverse/long-term minor 

beneficial impacts on NPS operations would 

be expected. 

THE NEXT STEPS 

After the distribution of the Draft General 

Management Plan / Environmental Impact 

Statement there will be a 60-day public review 

and comment period after which the NPS 

planning team will evaluate comments from 

other federal agencies, organizations, 

businesses, and individuals regarding the draft 

plan and will incorporate appropriate changes 

into a Final General Management Plan / 

Environmental Impact Statement. The final 

plan will include letters from governmental 

agencies, any substantive comments on the 

draft document, and NPS responses to those 

comments. Following distribution of the Final 

General Management Plan / Environmental 

Impact Statement and a 30-day no-action 

period, a record of decision approving a final 

plan will be signed by the NPS regional 

director. The record of decision documents 

the NPS selection of an alternative for 

implementation. Once it is signed, the plan 

can then be implemented. 

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PLAN 

The approval of this plan does not guarantee 

that the funding and staffing needed to implement the plan will be forthcoming. The 

implementation of the approved plan will 

depend on future funding, and it could also be 

affected by factors such as changes in NPS 

staffing, visitor use patterns, and unanticipated environmental changes. Full implementation could be many years in the future. 

Once the General Management Plan has been 

approved, additional feasibility studies and 

more detailed planning, environmental documentation, and consultations would be completed, as appropriate, before certain actions 

in the preferred alternative can be carried out. 

Future program and implementation plans, 

describing specific actions that managers 

intend to undertake and accomplish in the 

national historical park, will tier from the 

desired conditions and long-term goals set 

forth in this general management plan. 
CONTENTS 

CHAPTER 1: PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PLAN 

INTRODUCTION 3 

Background and History 3

Key Areas in the National Historical Park 4

Lower Town 4 

Federal Armory 4 

Potomac River Frontage 11 

Virginius Island 11 

Hall’s Island 11 

Camp Hill 11 

Loudoun Heights 11 

Maryland Heights 11 

Short Hill 12 

Cavalier Heights 12 

Bolivar Heights (including Elk Run Natural Area) 12 

Union Skirmish Line 12 

Schoolhouse Ridge 12 

Murphy Farm 12 

Nash Farm 12 

Potomac Terrace 13 

Shenandoah City 13 

Potoma Wayside 13 

Bull Falls Area 13 

Other NPS Sites or Facilties in the Harpers Ferry Area 13

Appalachian National Scenic Trail 13 

Potomac Heritage National Scenic Trail 14 

Lewis and Clark National Historic Trail 14 

Harpers Ferry Interpretive Design Center 14 

Mather Training Center 15 

National Capital Region Museum Collection Curatorial Facility 15 

Purpose of the Plan 15

Need for the Plan 15

The Next Steps 16

Implementation of the Plan 16

GUIDANCE FOR THE PLANNING EFFORT 17 

Purpose and Significance 17

Purpose 17 

Significance 17 

Primary Interpretive Themes 18

Servicewide Laws and Policies 18

Boundary Adjustments 19

RELATIONSHIP OF OTHER PLANNING EFFORTS TO THIS GENERAL MANAGEMENT PLAN 30 

PLANNING ISSUES AND CONCERNS 31 

Trespass 31

Boundary Adjustment 31

Cooperation with Local Communities 31

ix 
CONTENTS

Better Access to NPS Sites 32

Protection of National Historical Park Resources 32

More Interpretation of Civil War Sites 32

Staff Housing 32

Lack of Staff 32

Nonnative Species 32

Maintenance Yard Location 32

Static Visitation 33

IMPACT TOPICS — RESOURCES AND VALUES AT STAKE IN THE PLANNING PROCESS 34 

Impact Topics to Be Considered 34

Cultural Resources 34 

Natural Resources 35 

Visitor Use and Experience 36 

Socioeconomic Environment 36 

NPS Operations 36 

Impact Topics Dismissed from Further Consideration 37

Ethnographic Resources 37 

Museum Collections 38 

Indian Trust Resources 38 

Air Quality 38 

Geological Resources 39 

Wilderness and Wild and Scenic Rivers and American Heritage Rivers 39 

Prime or Unique Farmlands 39 

Natural or Depletable Resources Requirements and Conservation Potential 40 

Energy Requirements and Conservation Potential 40 

Urban Quality and Design of the Built Environment 40 

Environmental Justice 40 

CHAPTER 2: ALTERNATIVES, INCLUDING THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE 

INTRODUCTION 45 

User Capacities 45

Facility Management Zone 46 

Historic Structure Zone 46 

Visitor Portal Zone 47 

Adaptive Use Zone 47 

Cultural Landscape Zone 47 

Archeological Preservation Zone 48 

Scenic/Natural Preservation Zone 48 

Preservation Treatments in Relation to the Alternatives 48

Management Prescriptions 49

Formulation of the Alternatives 53

Identification of the Preferred Alternative 58

Development of Cost Estimates 58

Cost Estimate Components 58

Annual Operating Costs 59 

One-Time Costs 59 

NPS Facilities Model 59 

Land Acquisition 59

ALTERNATIVE 1: NO ACTION 60 

x
Contents 

General 60

Site-Specific Actions 60

Lower Town 60 

Potomac Frontage 63 

Virginius and Hall’s Islands 63 

Camp Hill 63 

Bolivar Heights 64 

Schoolhouse Ridge 64 

Nash Farm 64 

Potomac Terrace 64 

Cavalier Heights 64 

Murphy Farm 65 

Maryland Heights, Loudoun Heights, and Short Hill 65 

Potoma Wayside 65 

Cost Estimates 65

ALTERNATIVE 2: PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE 67 

General 67

Management Zoning 67

Historic Structure Zone 67 

Adaptive Use Zone 68 

Cultural Landscape Zone 71 

Archeological Preservation Zone 72 

Visitor Portal Zone 73 

Facility Management Zone 74 

Scenic/Natural Preservation Zone 74 

Cost Estimates 75

ALTERNATIVE 3 77 

General 77

Management Zoning 77

Historic Structure Zone 77 

Adaptive Use Zone 78 

Cultural Landscape Zone 81 

Archeological Preservation Zone 82 

Visitor Portal Zone 83 

Facility Management Zone 83 

Scenic/Natural Preservation Zone 84 

Cost Estimates 84

MITIGATIVE MEASURES COMMON TO ALL ACTION ALTERNATIVES 86 

Cultural Resources Mitigation 86

Natural Resources Mitigation 88

Nonnative Species 88 

Soils 88 

Threatened and Endangered Species and Species of Concern 88 

Vegetation 88 

Wildlife 89 

Water Resources 89 

Wetlands 89 

Sustainable Design and Aesthetics 89

ENVIRONMENTALLY PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE 90 

ADDITIONAL STUDIES AND IMPLEMENTATION PLANS NEEDED 92 

xi
CONTENTS

ALTERNATIVES AND ACTIONS CONSIDERED BUT DISMISSED FROM DETAILED EVALUATION 95 

CHAPTER 3: AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

INTRODUCTION 113 

Location and Setting 113

Climate 113

CULTURAL RESOURCES 114 

Overview 114

Prehistoric Background 114 

Early European Settlement 115 

Industrial Development 115 

John Brown’s Raid and the Civil War 116 

African American History 117 

Historical Relevance of Floods 118 

National Register Designations 119

The National Historical Park’s Cultural Resources 119

Historic Structures 119 

Cultural Landscapes 122 

Archeological Resources 124 

NATURAL RESOURCES 128 

Overview 128

Water Resources (including Wetlands) 128

Water Quality 128 

Wetlands 129 

Floodplains 129 

Soils 130

Caves 130

Vegetative Communities 131

Native Plants 131 

Nonnative Plants 132 

Fish 132

Wildlife 133

Native Animals 133 

Nonnative Animals 134 

Special Status Species 134

Federally Listed Species and Species of Concern 134 

State-Listed Species in the National Historical Park 135 

Soundscapes 136

Lightscapes 137

VISITOR EXPERIENCE 138 

Visitation Statistics 138

Orientation and Wayfinding 140

Interpretation and Education 140

SOCIOECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT 142 

Growth: A Regional Perspective 142

Regional Population 142 

Regional Employment 142 

County Influence 143

Jefferson County, West Virginia 143 

xii
Contents 

Loudoun County, Virginia 144 

Washington County, Maryland 144 

Gateway Communities 145

Town of Bolivar, West Virginia 145 

Town of Harpers Ferry, West Virginia 146 

The National Historical Park’s Effect on Local and Regional Economy 147

Visitor Spending 148

Local National Historical Park Expenditures 149

Contribution to Infrastructure 150

Harpers Ferry Commercial District Economic Indicators 151

NPS OPERATIONS 152 

CHAPTER 4: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

INTRODUCTION 155 

Methods and Assumptions for Analyzing Impacts 155

Duration of Impacts 156 

Location 156 

Cultural Resources 156

Cultural Resources Listed or Eligible to Be Listed in the National Register of Historic 

Places 156 

Natural Resources 156

Water Resources 157 

Floodplains 157 

Soils 158 

Cave and Karst Resources 158 

Vegetation 158 

Wildlife 159 

Special Status Species 159 

Soundscapes 159 

Visitor Experience 160

Socioeconomic Environment 161

NPS Operations 161

Cumulative Impact Analysis 162

Actions outside Harpers Ferry National Historical Park 162 

Actions inside Harpers Ferry National Historical Park 164 

Future Actions 166 

Impairment of National Historical Park Resources 166

IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE 1 — NO ACTION 168 

Cultural Resources 168

Historic Structures 168 

Archeological Resources 170 

Cultural Landscapes 171 

Natural Resources 173

Wetlands and Water Resources 173 

Floodplains 174 

Soils 174 

Cave and Karst Resources 175 

Vegetative Communities 175 

Fish and Wildlife 176 

xiii
CONTENTS

Special Status Species 177 

Soundscapes 177 

Lightscapes 178 

Visitor Experience 178

Lower Town 178 

Federal Armory 179 

Virginius and Hall’s Islands 179 

Camp Hill 179 

Cavalier Heights 179 

Maryland Heights, Loudoun Heights, and Short Hill 179 

Schoolhouse Ridge 179 

The Murphy Farm 180 

The Nash Farm 180 

Socioeconomic Environment 180

NPS Operations 182

Unavoidable Moderate to Major Adverse Effects 183

Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of Resources 183

Relationship of Short-term Uses of the Environment and the Maintenance and Enhancement of 

Long-term Productivity 183

IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE 2 – PREFERRED 184 

Cultural Resources 184

Historic Structures 184 

Archeological Resources 186 

Cultural Landscapes 188 

Natural Resources 190

Wetlands and Water Resources 190 

Floodplains 191 

Soils 192 

Cave and Karst Resources 193 

Vegetative Communities 193 

Fish and Wildlife 194 

Special Status Species 196 

Soundscapes 197 

Lightscapes 197 

Visitor Experience 198

Lower Town 198 

Federal Armory 198 

Potomac Frontage/Armory Canal 198 

Virginius and Hall’s Islands 198 

Bolivar Heights 198 

Camp Hill 199 

Cavalier Heights 199 

Maryland Heights, Loudoun Heights, and Short Hill 199 

Schoolhouse Ridge 199 

The Murphy Farm 199 

The Nash Farm 200 

Socioeconomic Environment 200

NPS Operations 202

Unavoidable Moderate to Major Adverse Impacts 203

Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of Resources 203

xiv
Contents 

Relationship of Short-term Uses of the Environment and the Maintenance and Enhancement of 

Long-term Productivity 203

IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE 3 205 

Cultural Resources 205

Historic Structures 205 

Archeological Resources 207 

Cultural Landscapes 208 

Natural Resources 211

Wetlands and Water Resources 211 

Floodplains 212 

Soils 212 

Cave and Karst Resources 213 

Vegetative Communities 214 

Fish and Wildlife 214 

Special Status Species 216 

Soundscapes 216 

Lightscapes 217 

Visitor Experience 218

Lower Town 218 

Federal Armory 218 

Potomac Frontage/Armory Canal 218 

Virginius and Hall’s Islands 218 

Bolivar Heights 218 

Camp Hill 219 

Cavalier Heights 219 

Maryland Heights, Loudoun Heights, and Short Hill 219 

Schoolhouse Ridge Battlefield 219 

The Murphy Farm 219 

The Nash Farm 219 

Socioeconomic Environment 220

NPS Operations 222

Unavoidable Moderate to Major Adverse Effects 223

Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of Resources 223

Relationship of Short-term Uses of the Environment and the Maintenance and Enhancement of 

Long-term Productivity 223 

CHAPTER 5: CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION 

PUBLIC AND AGENCY INVOLVEMENT 227 

Public Meetings and Newsletters 227

Agencies and Organizations to Which This Document Was Sent 227

Section 7 Consultation (Endangered Species Act) 231

Section 106 Consultation 232 

APPENDIXES, SLEECTED REFERENCES, PREPARERS AND CONSULTANTS, AND 

INDEX

APPENDIX A: LEGISLATION 239 

APPENDIX B: LAWS AND EXECUTIVE ORDERS 247 

APPENDIX C: THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES 250 

xv
CONTENTS

xvi

APPENDIX D: GENERAL SPECIES LISTS, HARPERS FERRY NATIONAL HISTORICAL

PARK 262 

APPENDIX E: DEMOGRAPHIC TRENDS FOR BOLIVAR, WEST VIRGINIA, AND

HARPERS FERRY, WEST VIRGINIA 265 

APPENDIX F: SECTION 106 CONSULTATION 275 

SELECTED REFERENCES 284 

PREPARERS AND CONSULTANTS 287 

INDEX 288 

Maps 

Region 5

Park 7

Lower Town 9

Alternative 1, No Action 61

Alternative 2 69

Alternative 3 79

Tables 

Table 1. Servicewide Mandates and Policies Pertaining to Harpers Ferry National Historical Park 

21

Table 2. List of Exhibits and User Capacity 46

Table 3. Management Prescriptions 50

Table 4. Actions Common to all Alternatives 54

Table 5. Summary of Alternatives 97

Table 6. Summary of Impacts 107

Table 7. Summary of Costs by Alternative 110

Table 8. Federally Listed Species 134

Table 9. State Listed Species 136

Table 10. National Historical Park Visitation 138

Table 11. Visits and Spending by Visitor Segment (2003) 148

Table 12. Economic Impacts of Visitor Spending by Sector (2003) 149

Table 13. Annual Expenditures for FY 1999 to FY 2004 for Harpers Ferry National Historical 

Park 149

Table 14. FY 2004 Accumulative Gross Annual Salaries of Employees at Harpers Ferry National 

Historical Park by Communities in Which They Reside 150

Table 15. Future Resource Compliance Required for Implementation of Specific Actions of the 

Preferred Alternative (Alternative 2) 233
GUIDE TO THIS PLAN 

This Draft General Management Plan / 

Environmental Impact Statement presents and 

analyzes three alternative future directions for 

the management and use of Harpers Ferry 

National Historical Park. Alternative 2 is the 

National Park Service's preferred alternative. 

The potential environmental impacts of all 

alternatives have been identified and assessed. 

General management plans are intended to be 

long-term documents that establish and 

articulate a management philosophy and 

framework for decision making and problem 

solving in the national park system units. 

General management plans usually provide 

guidance during a l5- to 20-year period. 

Actions directed by general management 

plans or in subsequent implementation plans 

are accomplished over time. Budget 

restrictions, requirements for additional data 

or regulatory compliance, and competing 

national park system priorities prevent 

immediate implementation of many actions. 

Major or especially costly actions could be 

implemented 10 or more years into the future. 

However, it should be understood that all 

actions are subject to funding and may never 

be implemented. 

This Draft General Management Plan / 

Environmental Impact Statement is organized 

in accordance with the Council on Environmental Quality's implementing regulations for 

the National Environmental Policy Act, the 

NPS Management Policies 2006 and Director's 

Order #12, "Conservation Planning, Environmental Impact Analysis, and Decision 

Making." 

Chapter 1: Purpose and Need for the Plan 

sets the framework for the entire document. It 

describes why the plan is being prepared and 

what needs it must address. It gives guidance 

for the alternatives that are being considered, 

which are based on the national historical 

park's legislated mission, its purpose, the 

significance of its resources, special mandates 

and administrative commitments, servicewide mandates and policies, and other 

planning efforts in the area. 

The chapter also details the planning opportunities and concerns that were raised during 

initial public meetings (referred to as 

"scoping" meetings throughout this 

document) and initial planning team efforts; 

the alternatives in the next chapter address 

these issues and concerns to varying degrees. 

This chapter concludes with a statement of 

the scope of the environmental impact 

analysis — specifically what impact topics 

were or were not analyzed in detail. 

Chapter 2: Alternatives, Including the 

Preferred Alternative, begins by describing 

the management prescriptions that will be 

used to manage the national historical park in 

the future. (Management prescriptions are 

general directions or guides for management 

of resources, interpretation, and appropriateness of facilities within certain areas of the 

national historical park). Chapter 2 also 

describes current management and trends in 

the national historical park (alternative 1, the 

no-action alternative). Then alternatives 2 (the 

preferred alternative) and 3 are presented. 

Mitigation measures proposed to minimize or 

eliminate the impacts of some proposed 

actions are described just before the discussion of future studies and/or implementation 

plans that will be needed. The evaluation of 

the environmentally preferred alternative is 

followed by summary tables of the alternative 

actions and the environmental consequences 

of implementing those alternative actions. The 

chapter concludes with a discussion of alternatives or actions that were dismissed from 

detailed evaluation. 

Chapter 3: the Affected Environment 

describes those areas and resources that 

xvii 
GUIDE TO THIS PLAN

would be affected by implementing actions in 

the various alternatives, such as cultural 

resources, natural resources, visitor use and 

experience, NPS operations, and 

socioeconomic environment. 

Chapter 4: Environmental Consequences 

analyzes the impacts of implementing the 

alternatives on topics described in the 

"Affected Environment" chapter. Methods 

that were used for assessing the impacts in 

terms of the intensity, type, and duration of 

impacts are outlined at the beginning of the 

chapter. 

Chapter 5: Consultation and Coordination 

describes the history of public and agency 

coordination during the planning effort. It 

also lists agencies and organizations who will 

be receiving copies of the document. 

The Appendixes present supporting 

information for the document, along with 

references, and a list of the planning team and 

other consultants.

xviii 
Chapter 1

Purpose of and Need For the Plan

INTRODUCTION 

BACKGROUND AND HISTORY 

Harpers Ferry National Historical Park lies at 

the confluence of the Potomac and Shenandoah rivers, where the states of West Virginia, 

Virginia, and Maryland converge (see Vicinity 

and Regional maps). Historic Lower Town is 

at the point of the peninsula formed by the 

two rivers. The national historical park was 

established primarily to preserve historic 

resources and to commemorate the historic 

events that occurred at Harpers Ferry for the 

benefit and enjoyment of all people. 

Harpers Ferry National Monument was 

authorized by Congress in 1944 (PL 78-386). 

The name was later changed to national 

historical park in 1963. Today, the national 

historical park contains 3,645 acres, with most 

of it in West Virginia, but with other sections 

in Maryland and Virginia. 

During its earliest period the town of Harpers 

Ferry was an important manufacturing and 

commercial town, using the two rivers for 

water power and transportation. The Federal 

Armory was established on June 15, 1796, by 

President George Washington. When production began in 1801, it became the nation's 

second Federal Armory. 

By the 1850s, Harpers Ferry had become 

militarily significant because of the U.S. 

Armory and Arsenal and geographically 

significant due to the B&O Railroad and C&O 

Canal. 

In 1859 Harpers Ferry was the scene of the 

electrifying John Brown Raid, a significant 

event in the days leading up to the Civil War. 

Strategically important, due to its location at 

the gateway into the Shenandoah Valley, 

Harpers Ferry changed hands officially eight 

times during the war. The town's capture by 

Confederate troops under the command of 

"Stonewall” Jackson in 1862, together with 

12,693 surrendered Union soldiers, was a dramatic prelude to the great battle at Antietam 

Creek that ended the South's first invasion of 

the North. It was the largest number of Union 

soldiers surrendered during the Civil War. 

The Union army quickly reoccupied Harpers 

Ferry and in 1862-64 converted the position 

into a fortress with strong field fortifications 

overlooking the town on the summits of 

Bolivar Heights, Loudoun Heights, and 

Maryland Heights. In July 1864, the Union 

Army repelled an attack here by Lt. General 

Jubal Early's Confederate army. This four-day 

operation and the later battle at Monocacy 

Junction delayed the Confederate army 

enough to allow the Union to reinforce 

Washington and stave off its capture. 

From August 1864 to December 1864, 

Harpers Ferry served as the main base of 

operations and chief supply depot for Major 

General Philip S. Sheridan's Union army 

during the final campaign in which Sheridan 

successfully destroyed Early's army as a 

fighting force and conquered the Shenandoah 

Valley in Virginia for the Union. 

By the end of the Civil War, Harpers Ferry 

was a ghost of the former town. Mills on 

Virginius Island and the U.S. arms manufacturing plants on Lower Hall’s Island and in the 

Musket Factory yard along the Potomac were 

largely destroyed. The United States Government decided not to rebuild the Armory at 

Harpers Ferry and to dispose of its lands and 

ruined buildings. In part because of these 

decisions, the town of Harpers Ferry never 

fully recovered its industrial importance. 

The final events of national significance to 

take place at Harpers Ferry occurred during 

the period 1865-1955 and relate to black 

history and education and the Niagara 

Movement. These were related to the 

founding and operation of Storer College. 

3 
CHAPTER 1: PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PLAN

Established through the efforts of the U.S. 

Freedman's Bureau, the Freewill Baptist 

denomination, and a New England philanthropist named John Storer, the school was 

one of the first to provide education for freed 

slaves. It was chartered as an integrated 

institution, a symbol of freedom through 

education, and a symbol of what John Brown 

had hoped to achieve. Among the first trustees 

was Frederick Douglass. It was the location of 

the second meeting of the Niagara Movement 

in 1906, an event of great importance in the 

later establishment of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People 

(NAACP). 

Today the national historical park consists of 

portions of the Lower Town, the former 

Storer College campus, landscapes associated 

with the national historical park's Civil War 

significance, and lands preserving the historic 

viewshed down the Potomac River. 

KEY AREAS IN THE NATIONAL 

HISTORICAL PARK 

The story of Harpers Ferry National 

Historical Park can be found in numerous 

locations throughout the national historical 

park (see Park map). For purposes of the 

General Management Plan, place names will be 

used for these areas for discussion of actions 

specific to each area. They are place names 

commonly used by NPS staff to identify 

locales in the national historical park and are 

based on the region's historic antecedents, 

natural resources, and visitor use. They have 

been designated for purposes of this plan and 

are not formal districts of the national 

historical park. 

These areas are static and will not change from 

alternative to alternative. They should not be 

confused with management zoning. Zones 

would be applied under each alternative but may 

change based on alternative concepts. 

Lower Town 

This area extends from the eastern end of 

Virginius Island on the Shenandoah side, 

beginning approximately at the Shenandoah 

Canal east to the confluence with the Potomac 

extending north to the CSX railroad line (the 

historic Winchester and Potomac). The heart of 

Lower Town is formed by the concentration of 

historic buildings and landscape features along 

Shenandoah Street from Potomac Street, west 

along Hog Alley, to High Street. At High Street 

the boundary roughly proceeds north to the 

intersection with Public Way then back south to 

the stone steps trail to St. Peters Catholic Church 

at Church Street then wrapping around the area 

of Harper Yard. The Lower Town area is closed 

at the "back” of the hillside as it drops down to 

Shenandoah Street at the Shenandoah Canal (see 

Lower Town map). 

The Hillside is a landscape of resources 

containing remnant walls, foundation ruins, 

including the structural ruins of the Episcopal 

Church, and the trail connecting Lower Town 

and Camp Hill through Harper Cemetery. The 

hill also functions as a buffer and boundary 

element defining the transition between Lower 

Town and Camp Hill. Jefferson Rock is on the 

hill within the Lower Town area along the trail 

passing St. Peters Catholic Church between 

Camp Hill and Lower Town. 

Federal Armory 

This area lies adjacent to the Potomac River 

reaching up from its banks to Potomac Street, 

and extends from the modern CSX railroad 

line near the Point, upriver to the Potomac 

Power Hydroelectric Plant. The Baltimore & 

Ohio train station is within the limits of the 

armory area. This is one of the most significant 

historic areas within the boundaries of the 

national historical park.

4 
HARPERS FERRY 

NATIONAL HISTORIC PARK 

MARTINSBURG 

CHARLESTOWN 

North 

United States Department of the Interior 

National Park Service

DSC / July 08 / 385 / 20031

Region Map 

Ap

p

alachia

n

Trail

Appalachia

n

Trail

Potomac Heritage National Scenic Trail

Potomac Heritage National Scenic Trail

671

67

27

340

340

Harpers Ferry

Road

Visitor

Center

WEST

VIRGINIA

MARYLAND

VIRGINIA

Wes

t Virginia

Virginia

Bakerton Road

Keep Tryst Rd

Bloomery

Road

H

arp

ers Ferry Road

Sandy Hook Road

BOLIVAR

HARPERS

FERRY

POTOMAC RIVER

POTOMAC RIVER

SHENANDOAH RIVER

0 0.5 1Mile

North

JACKSON’S

LEFT FLANK

JACKSON’S

RIGHT FLANK

NASH

FARM

UNION 

SKIRMISH 

LINE

FEDERAL 

ARMORY

LOWER TOWN

MURPHY 

FARM

BULL 

FALLS

MARYLAND HEIGHTS

SHORT HILL

POTOMA 

WAYSIDE

VIRGINIUS/HALL’S ISLANDS

LOUDOUN HEIGHTS

POTOMAC 

FRONTAGE

POTOMAC 

TERRACE

CAVALIER

HEIGHTS

BOLIVAR 

HEIGHTS

SCHOOLHOUSE 

RIDGE

SHENANDOAH

CITY

CAMP HILL

Legend

Park Boundary

Rail Road

Road

Trail

Bus Route

Draft General Management Plan

Harpers Ferry National Historical Park

United States Department of the Interior National Park Service

DSC / July 08 / 385 / 20032

Park Map

Draft General Management Plan

Harpers Ferry National Historical Park

United States Department of the Interior National Park Service

DSC / July 08 / 385 / 20033

Lower Town

North

Legend

Park Boundary

Rail Road

Road

Trail

Bus Route 

Potomac Heritage National Scenic Trail

Visitor

Center

HARPERS FERRY

340

BOLIVAR

LOUDOUN HEIGHTS

CAVALIER HEIGHTS

MARYLAND HEIGHTS

VIRGINIUS/HALL’S

ISLANDS

CAMP 

HILL

FEDERAL 

ARMORY

LOWER 

TOWN

NASH

FARM

Harpers

Ferry

Center

Appalachian Trail

Mather

Training 

Center

POTOMAC 

FRONTAGE

POTOMAC 

TERRACE

S H E N A N D O A H

R I V E R

P O T O M A C R I V E R

Introduction 

Potomac River Frontage 

The Potomac River frontage is adjacent to the 

Potomac River from its banks to the base of the 

bluff. This area continues up-river from the 

power plant at the end of the armory up to, 

and including, the dam and headgate at the 

west end. The Armory canal, within the limits 

of the frontage runs the length of the frontage. 

Virginius Island 

Virginius Island is the historically heavily 

developed industrial site adjacent to the 

Shenandoah River on the south side of 

Harpers Ferry. Although no longer an island, it 

was created when a canal system was 

developed to provide water power for the 

industry on the island. Mostly reclaimed by 

nature, today the outlines of the island can be 

traced by the remnants of the Shenandoah 

Canal on the north and east, where it angles 

out to the Shenandoah River. In modern times 

the island continues almost seamlessly as a 

"unit” to include the historic Hall’s Island 

upriver approximately to the modern-day 

bridge crossing of U.S. 340. 

Hall’s Island 

At one time Hall's Island (at the west end of 

Virginius Island) was several islands and 

primarily two islands — Upper and Lower 

Hall’s Island — separated from Virginius 

Island by man-made canals. These areas, along 

the banks of the Shenandoah River, contained 

the industrial workshops of John Hall and later 

the U.S. Rifle Factory. Today Hall’s Island is 

identified as beginning at the ruined locks (nos. 

4 & 5) in the remnant Shenandoah Canal and 

extending upriver to approximately the 

modern day U.S. 340 bridge crossing. 

 

Camp Hill 

Camp Hill is so-named because U.S. Army 

regiments camped on this hill above Lower 

Town in 1798-99. It is primarily a residential 

area bordered by Union Street to the west, 

Fillmore Street on the north, and the 4-acre 

Harper's Graveyard to the east. It maintains a 

historic quality with many historic structures 

dating from the antebellum period to after the 

turn of the century. It is in this area that Storer 

College, with several buildings used first by the 

military and later for various college functions, 

is located. It also consists of the wooded slope 

containing a stretch of the Appalachian Trail. 

In general the area today has a mixed 

residential ambiance with several buildings 

used for NPS administrative purposes. 

Loudoun Heights 

The mountainous and forested land lies along 

the south side of the Shenandoah River 

extending from its banks to the top of the 

ridge, across from the town, and stepping 

down to the river as it proceeds upstream. 

Loudoun Heights was logged by the Harpers 

Ferry Armory during the first half of the 19th 

century, virtually clearing away the forest. It 

was fortified and encamped on during the Civil 

War. 

Maryland Heights 

Maryland Heights is north of the Potomac 

River over looking Harpers Ferry and 

providing the most picturesque views of the 

town. At its base is the C & O Canal. The 

mountain includes numerous Union fortifications used during the Civil War and the ridge 

top is part of the 1862 Battle of Harpers Ferry. 

With its rock outcroppings and steep wooded 

slopes, it is the highest of the three ridges 

surrounding the town. 

11 
CHAPTER 1: PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PLAN

Short Hill 

Short Hill is the easternmost area of the 

national historical park. It is on the south side 

of the Potomac River and downstream from 

Harpers Ferry. It is primarily an area of 

wooded slopes, shoreline, trails, and historic 

ruins, including the Peachers Mill complex 

adjacent to the river. 

Cavalier Heights 

Cavalier Heights is an area of relatively 

undeveloped land southwest of the town of 

Bolivar, extending down the bluff to Shoreline 

Drive and the banks of the Shenandoah River. 

The area was considered suitable land for 

development of a visitor center and was 

acquired to possibly consolidate the scattered 

functions of the Harpers Ferry Center, as well 

as visitor parking and possible maintenance 

functions. 

Bolivar Heights (including 

Elk Run Natural Area) 

This linear ridge, 1 mile west of Harpers Ferry, 

witnessed more Civil War battlefield action 

than any other area within the national 

historical park. It constituted the principal 

Union battle line during the September 1862 

Battle of Harpers Ferry. It also hosted battle 

actions in October 1861, May 1862, June 1863, 

and July 1864. Bolivar Heights also was the site 

of Union and Confederate encampments. 

Artillery redoubts and infantry entrenchments 

still remain across the crest of the ridge. 

Union Skirmish Line 

The Skirmish Site, more recently known as 

the Hillside Fruit Farm, is along State 

Secondary Route 27 (also known as 

Bloomery/Bakerton Roads). Fronting on 

the west side of the road, the area sits on 

the west-facing slope of Bolivar Heights, 

facing the Schoolhouse Ridge to the west. 

Schoolhouse Ridge 

Schoolhouse Ridge was Stonewall Jackson's 

main battle line during the 1862 Battle of 

Harpers Ferry. It parallels Bolivar Heights, 

located approximately 1,000 yards west, 

and it fronts along State Secondary Route 

27 (Bloomery/Bakerton Roads). Its north 

and south sections are separated by U.S. 

340. 

Murphy Farm 

The Murphy Farm (Chambers Farm 1848-

1869) sits on a bluff overlooking Bull Falls 

on the Shenandoah River. The land was 

first developed as a farm in 1848 and later, 

during the Civil War, became an important 

position for the Confederates, whose success forced the Union to surrender on 

Bolivar Heights. Earthworks associated 

with the Civil War are preserved on the 

farm. The farm also marks one of the former locations of the John Brown Fort. The 

fort was relocated to the Murphy Farm in 

1895 after having been displayed at the 

1893 World's Columbian Exposition in 

Chicago. 

Nash Farm 

The Nash Farm consists of approximately 

five contiguous town lots in a relatively undeveloped section in the northwest corner 

of the town of Harpers Ferry. Surrounded 

by wooded lots, the Nash Farmstead was 

developed during the first quarter of the 

20th century. The property is on a grassy 

hill overlooking the Potomac River. 

12 
Introduction 

Potomac Terrace 

Potomac Terrace is a natural area of steep 

contours rising from the river frontage to the 

top of the bluff to the towns of Harpers Ferry 

and Bolivar. The area is one of dense understory vegetation with a relatively open 

timbered upper story of second- and thirdgrowth hardwood trees. 

Shenandoah City 

This area contains numerous but undetermined numbers of structural foundations, 

including the Strider Mill complex and 

undisturbed natural areas. It is primarily in the 

bottomland environment on the bank of the 

Shenandoah River at the base of a ravine 

formed between the bluff underlying Cavalier 

Heights and the Murphy Farm. 

Potoma Wayside 

This area is a moderately developed highway 

pull-off on U.S. 340 at the eastern base of 

Loudoun Heights. The area is mostly used as a 

takeout access for whitewater rafters and 

canoeists on the Potomac River. It is a heavily 

wooded natural wetland area subject to 

seasonal flooding. 

Bull Falls Area 

This area is situated below the Murphy Farm 

on the Shenandoah River Terrace but also 

extends into the river falls that gives the area 

its name. It is an area of densely overgrown 

vegetation occasionally used for canoe and 

fishing access. 

OTHER NPS SITES OR FACILTIES 

IN THE HARPERS FERRY AREA 

Appalachian National Scenic Trail 

The Appalachian National Scenic Trail is a 

trail that follows the Appalachian Mountains 

from Mount Katahdin, Maine, through New 

Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, 

Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, 

Pennsylvania, Maryland, West Virginia, 

Virginia, Tennessee, and North Carolina, to 

Springer Mountain, Georgia. Its length is 

roughly 2,150 miles. It is also a unit of the 

national park system with headquarters in 

Harpers Ferry, West Virginia. 

The national scenic trail travels down from 

South Mountain in Maryland, follows the 

Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National 

Historical Park west to Lock 32, then crosses 

the railroad bridge over the Potomac River, 

and enters the Harpers Ferry National 

Historical Park in Lower Town. From Lower 

Town, the trail follows a route up along the 

escarpment on Camp Hill above the Shenandoah River, then crosses the Shenandoah 

River on the U.S. 340 bridge, and climbs up 

Loudon Heights where it exits the national 

historical park. 

Harpers Ferry is a major destination along the 

Appalachian Trail. At approximately its halfway point, it is here hikers find the headquarters for the nonprofit Appalachian Trail 

Conservancy whose members built and 

maintained the trail. The Appalachian Trail 

Park Office (NPS headquarters for the trail), is 

also located here. While in the national 

historical park, trail hikers are able to take 

advantage of the Trail Store run by the conservancy where books and other items are sold 

and questions can be answered about the 

route and its amenities. 

 

While in Harpers Ferry, the Appalachian Trail 

traverses dedicated trail, city streets, and 

sidewalks. Hikers can avail themselves of a 

13 
CHAPTER 1: PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PLAN

shower, motel room, restaurants, or 

equipment sales should they so choose. 

Potomac Heritage 

National Scenic Trail 

The Potomac Heritage National Scenic Trail is 

a partnership to develop and maintain a network of locally managed trails for recreation, 

education, transportation, and health in a 425-

mile corridor between the Chesapeake Bay 

and the Allegheny Highlands. Legislation for 

the trail, a 1983 amendment to the National 

Trails System Act, assigns responsibilities for 

development and management of trail segments outside federally managed lands to 

local and state agencies and precludes the 

designation of trail segments in West Virginia. 

The National Park Service is responsible for 

administration of the trail corridor designation and assists various trail interests with 

coordination and with some technical and 

funding support. 

As of June 2006, 13 trails are currently 

recognized as segments of the Potomac 

Heritage National Scenic Trail: 

• the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal Towpath 

• the Mount Vernon Trail and the Potomac 

Heritage National Scenic Trail in George 

Washington Memorial Parkway 

• the Laurel Highlands Hiking Trail 

• the Great Allegheny Passage (connecting 

Cumberland, Maryland, and Pittsburgh, 

Pennsylvania) 

• the Potomac Heritage National Scenic 

Trail On-Road Bicycling Route in Prince 

Georges County, Maryland 

• a route in Nanjemoy Natural Resource 

Management Area, Charles County, 

Maryland 

• a 4.5-mile route in Prince William Forest 

Park 

• 7.7 miles of trails in Riverbend Park, Great 

Falls Park, and Scott’s Run Nature 

Preserve in northern Fairfax County, 

Virginia 

• a 15-mile linear park system in Loudoun 

County, Virginia 

• Alexandria Heritage Trail in Alexandria, 

Virginia 

Other trails — proposed segments of the 

national scenic trail — contribute to the 

“braided” trail concept. 

Harpers Ferry serves as a major trailhead for 

the Trail since many visitors access the C & O 

Canal Towpath (a segment of the Trail) via the 

pedestrian bridge across the Potomac River in 

the Lower Town. Based on legislation for the 

Trail, lands included within the boundary of 

Harpers Ferry National Historical Park in 

Loudoun County, Virginia, could include a 

segment of the Trail if such segment connected with a land or water trail downstream 

from Loudoun Heights. 

Lewis and Clark National Historic Trail 

On March 28, 2003, Harpers Ferry National 

Historical Park was designated by the 

National Park Service as an official site on the 

Lewis and Clark National Historic Trail. The 

honor recognized the role the U.S. Armory at 

Harpers Ferry played in outfitting the Lewis 

and Clark expedition when Meriwether Lewis 

visited the armory in 1803. The national 

historical park has a museum, state marker 

and history trail dedicated to Lewis’s visit. 

Harpers Ferry 

Interpretive Design Center 

The Harpers Ferry Interpretive Design Center 

is the NPS central office providing guidance 

and expertise in the fields of interpretive 

planning, conservation of objects, museum 

exhibits, audiovisual programs, graphics 

research, wayside exhibits, historic furnishings, and publications. The center is housed in 

a modern office building and several historic 

structures on Camp Hill under agreement 

with Harpers Ferry National Historical Park. 

14 
Introduction 

Mather Training Center 

The Mather Training Center is one of two 

training facilities the National Park Service 

uses to train its employees. It is housed on 

Camp Hill in the former Anthony Hall of 

Storer College. As with the Interpretive 

Design Center, the building housing the 

Mather Training Center is managed under an 

agreement with Harpers Ferry National 

Historical Park. 

National Capital Region Museum 

Collection Curatorial Facility 

On June 2, 2006 the Director of the National 

Capital Region approved a plan to develop a 

curatorial storage facility in the Harpers Ferry 

region to serve Antietam National Battlefield, 

Monocacy National Battlefield, Catoctin 

Mountain Park, the Chesapeake and Ohio 

Canal National Historical Park, and Harpers 

Ferry National Historical Park. The plan 

recommends a facility of unspecified size in an 

unspecified location, presumably outside the 

Harpers Ferry National Historical Park 

boundary. 

When completed, collections from each of the 

park areas would be curated and stored in the 

facility while remaining available to each park 

for research and exhibit purposes. 

PURPOSE OF THE PLAN 

The approved general management plan will 

be the basic document for managing Harpers 

Ferry National Historical Park for the next 15 

to 20 years. The plan will: 

• confirm the purpose, significance, and 

special mandates of the national historical 

park 

• clearly define resource conditions and 

visitor uses and experiences to be 

achieved in the national historical park 

• provide a framework for national 

historical park managers to use when 

making decisions about protecting park 

resources, providing quality visitor 

experiences, managing visitor use, and 

determining the types and kinds of 

facilities, if any, to develop in the national 

historical park 

• ensure that this foundation for decision 

making has been developed in 

consultation with interested stakeholders 

and adopted by the NPS leadership after 

an adequate analysis of the benefits, 

impacts, and economic costs of alternative 

courses of action 

Legislation establishing the National Park 

Service and governing its management 

provides the fundamental direction for the 

Administration of Harpers Ferry (and other 

units and programs of the national park 

system). This general management plan will 

build on these laws and the legislation that 

established Harpers Ferry National Historical 

Park (see appendix A) to provide a vision for 

its future. The "Servicewide Mandates and 

Policies” section calls the reader's attention to 

topics that are important to understanding the 

management direction at the national 

historical park. A table in that section (table 1) 

summarizes the topics and the conditions to 

which management is striving. Appendix B 

lists other laws and executive orders that, as 

appropriate, must be applied. The alternatives 

in this general management plan address the 

desired future conditions that are not 

mandated by law and policy and must be 

determined through a planning process. 

NEED FOR THE PLAN 

This new management plan for Harpers Ferry 

National Historical Park is needed because 

the last parkwide planning effort was a general 

management plan/development concept plan 

completed in 1980. Much has occurred since 

then — patterns and types of visitor use have 

changed, and the boundary has been 

15 
CHAPTER 1: PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PLAN

16 

expanded to include new resources. Each of 

these changes has major implications 

regarding how visitors access and use the 

national historical park as well as the facilities 

needed to support those uses, how resources 

are managed, and how the National Park 

Service manages its operations. 

A general management plan also is needed to 

meet the requirements of the National Parks 

and Recreation Act of 1978 and NPS policy, 

which mandate development of a general 

management plan for each unit in the national 

park system. 

THE NEXT STEPS 

After the distribution of the Draft General 

Management Plan / Environmental Impact 

Statement there will be a 60-day public review 

and comment period after which the NPS 

planning team will evaluate comments from 

other federal agencies, organizations, 

businesses, and individuals regarding the draft 

plan. Appropriate changes will be incorporated into a Final General Management Plan / 

Environmental Impact Statement. The final 

plan will include letters from governmental 

agencies, any substantive comments on the 

draft document, and NPS responses to those 

comments. Following distribution of the Final 

General Management Plan / Environmental 

Impact Statement and a 30-day no-action 

period, a record of decision approving a final 

plan will be signed by the NPS National 

Capital Regional Director. The record of 

decision documents the NPS selection of an 

alternative for implementation. With the signing of the record of decision, the plan can then 

be implemented. 

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PLAN 

Implementation of the approved plan also 

could be affected by other factors. Once the 

general management plan has been approved, 

additional feasibility studies and more 

detailed planning and environmental 

documentation would be completed, as 

required, before any proposed actions could 

be carried out. For example, 

• appropriate permits would be obtained 

before implementing actions that would 

impact wetlands,\ 

• appropriate federal and state agencies 

would be consulted concerning actions 

that could affect threatened and 

endangered species 

• appropriate state historic preservation 

offices (West Virginia, Virginia, Maryland) 

and certified local governments would be 

consulted concerning actions that could 

affect properties on or eligible for 

inclusion on the National Register of 

Historic Places 

The general management plan does not 

describe how particular programs or projects 

should be prioritized or implemented. Those 

decisions will be addressed during the more 

detailed planning associated with strategic 

plans and implementation plans. All of the 

future more detailed plans will tier from the 

approved general management plan and will 

be based on the goals, future conditions, and 

appropriate types of activities established in 

the approved general management plan. 

The implementation of the approved plan will 

depend on future funding. Approval of the 

plan does not guarantee that funding and 

staffing needed to implement the plan will be 

forthcoming. Full implementation of the 

approved plan could be many years in the 

future. 
GUIDANCE FOR THE PLANNING EFFORT 

PURPOSE AND SIGNIFICANCE 

Purpose 

Purpose statements are based on the national 

historical park's establishing legislation and 

legislative history and NPS policies. The statements reaffirm the reasons for which the 

national historical park was set aside as a unit 

of the national park system. Such statements 

help to guide management decisions. The 

purpose is as follows: 

To preserve Harpers Ferry National 

Historical Park for the benefit and 

enjoyment of the people of the United 

States as a public national memorial 

commemorating historical events that 

occurred at or near Harpers Ferry. 

Significance 

Significance statements capture the essence of 

the national historical park's importance to 

the country's natural and cultural heritage. 

Significance statements are not an inventory 

of national historical park resources; rather, 

they describe the national historical park's 

distinctiveness and help to place the national 

historical park within its regional, national, 

and international contexts. Significance 

statements answer questions such as why are 

Harpers Ferry National Historical Park's 

resources distinctive? What contribution do 

they make to the nation's natural/cultural 

heritage? 

Defining the national historical park's 

significance helps managers make decisions 

that preserve the resources and values 

necessary to accomplish the national 

historical park's purpose. 

The significance of Harpers Ferry National 

Historical Park was defined by NPS staff and 

planning team as follows: 

1. The geography of the Harpers Ferry area 

has made this a key travel, trade, and 

communications crossroads from the 

times of the earliest human habitation by 

American Indians to the present. 

2. George Washington designated Harpers 

Ferry as the second Federal Armory in 

1796 because of its geography and natural 

resources. It became a center for technological innovation, such as interchangeable parts and a model of the American 

System of Manufacturing. The Federal 

Armory provided arms and supplies for 

the Lewis and Clark expedition. 

3. Harpers Ferry preserves the site of John 

Brown's raid of 1859, an epic event 

occurring in opposition to slavery, which 

helped precipitate the Civil War. 

4. Harpers Ferry's location 61 miles northwest of Washington, D.C., made it a 

strategic target for both North and South 

during the American Civil War. The 

biggest battle in present-day West Virginia 

occurred here in September 1862, when 

Stonewall Jackson forced the largest surrender of U.S. troops during the Civil War. 

Union forces occupied the town during 

much of the war, establishing extensive 

fortifications and enforcing martial law on 

a civilian population. Due to the Baltimore 

and Ohio Railroad, Harpers Ferry served 

as the principal supply base for Union 

military operations in Shenandoah Valley 

during campaigns in 1862, 1863, and 1864. 

5. Harpers Ferry hosted a broad range of 

African Americans, including slaves, freed 

blacks, and Civil War refugees. Storer 

College, which was established in 1867, 

17 
CHAPTER 1: PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PLAN

was one of the first institutions of higher 

learning for former slaves. It was the site 

of the second Niagara Movement Convention in 1906, where W. E. B. DuBois 

devised the first modern philosophy and 

strategy for civil rights. This led to the 

formation of the National Association for 

the Advancement of Colored People 

(NAACP). 

6. The view of the confluence of the 

Shenandoah and Potomac, which inspired 

Thomas Jefferson to say it is “worth a 

voyage across the Atlantic,” continues to 

inspire visitors today. 

PRIMARY INTERPRETIVE THEMES 

Based on the national historical park's 

purpose, significance, and resources, the 

following interpretive themes have been 

developed. Interpretive themes are the key 

stories, concepts, and ideas of a park. They are 

the groundwork that NPS staff will use to 

educate visitors about the national historical 

park and to inspire visitors to care for and 

about its resources. With these themes, 

visitors can form intellectual and emotional 

connections with national historical park 

resources and experiences. Subsequent 

interpretive planning may elaborate on these 

primary themes. 

• The physical and historical geography of 

the Harpers Ferry area demonstrate how 

landscapes shape human history and how 

human endeavors profoundly affect 

natural landscapes — a powerful reminder 

that the actions of today determine the 

opportunities of tomorrow. 

• The invention of interchangeable parts in 

arms manufacturing at the Harpers Ferry 

Armory provided unprecedented 

momentum to the Industrial Revolution, 

forever changing the human experience 

and intensifying the ongoing dialogue 

concerning the costs and benefits of 

technological innovation. 

• The story of the cataclysmic impact of 

John Brown's raid, followed by the intense 

and pervasive effects of the Civil War on 

the community of Harpers Ferry and the 

nation, can provide myriad insights into 

the violent, transformative reality of war. 

• The history of Harpers Ferry chronicles 

critical milestones and issues in the continuing struggle to achieve the evolving 

American ideals of freedom, education, 

and equality for African Americans. 

• The history of Harpers Ferry weaves 

together common threads in the tapestry 

of 18th, 19th, and 20th century America, 

offering a deeper understanding into the 

great American experiment and providing 

important contexts for the challenges and 

opportunities facing us today. 

SERVICEWIDE LAWS AND POLICIES 

This section identifies what must be done at 

Harpers Ferry National Historical Park to 

comply with federal laws and policies of the 

National Park Service. Many park management directives are specified in laws and 

policies guiding the National Park Service and 

are therefore not subject to alternative 

approaches. A general management plan is not 

needed to decide, for instance, that it is appropriate to protect endangered species, control 

nonnative species, protect archeological sites, 

or provide access for the disabled. Laws and 

policies already direct such decisions. 

Although attaining some of the conditions set 

forth in these laws and policies may be 

dependent on available funding or staffing 

limitations, the National Park Service will 

continue to strive to implement these requirements with or without a new general 

management plan. 

Some of these laws and executive orders are 

applicable solely or primarily to units of the 

national park system. These include the 1916 

Organic Act that created the National Park 

Service, the General Authorities Act of 1970, 

the act of March 27, 1978 relating to the 

18 
Guidance for the Planning Effort 

management of the national park system, and 

the National Parks Omnibus Management Act 

(1998). Other laws and executive orders have 

much broader application, such as the 

Endangered Species Act, the National Historic 

Preservation Act of 1966 as amended, and 

Executive Order 11990 addressing the 

protection of wetlands. 

The NPS Organic Act (16 USC Section 1) 

provides the fundamental management 

direction for all units of the national park 

system: 

[P]romote and regulate the use of the 

Federal areas known as national parks, 

monuments, and reservations...by such 

means and measure as conform to the 

fundamental purpose of said parks, 

monuments and reservations, which 

purpose is to conserve the scenery and 

the natural and historic objects and the 

wildlife therein and to provide for the 

enjoyment of the same in such manner 

and by such means as will leave them 

unimpaired for the enjoyment of future 

generations. 

The National Park System General Authorities 

Act (16 USC section 1a-l et seq.) affirms that 

while all national park system units remain 

“distinct in character,” they are “united 

through their interrelated purposes and 

resources into one national park system as 

cumulative expressions of a single national 

heritage.” The act makes it clear that the NPS 

Organic Act and other protective mandates 

apply equally to all units of the system. 

Further, amendments state that NPS 

management of park units should not 

“derogat[e]...the purposes and values for 

which these various areas have been 

established.” 

The National Park Service also has established 

policies for all units under its stewardship. 

These are identified and explained in the NPS 

Management Policies 2006. The alternatives 

considered in this document incorporate and 

comply with the provisions of these mandates 

and policies. 

The alternatives considered in this document 

incorporate and comply with the provisions of 

the mandates and policies as funding and 

staffing allow. Conditions prescribed by 

service-wide mandates and policies that are 

particularly important to this document are 

summarized below. 

To truly understand the implications of an 

alternative, it is important to combine the 

service-wide mandates and policies with the 

management actions described in an 

alternative. 

Table 1 shows some of the most pertinent 

servicewide mandates and policy topics 

related to planning and managing Harpers 

Ferry National Historical Park; across from 

each topic are the desired conditions that the 

staff is striving to achieve for that topic and 

thus the table is written in the present tense. 

The alternatives in this general management 

plan address the desired future conditions 

that are not mandated by law and policy and 

must be determined through a planning 

process. 

It should be noted that although Harpers 

Ferry National Historical Park does not have 

overall responsibility for the two major trails 

that pass through the park, the National Park 

Service administers the Appalachian and 

Potomac Heritage national scenic trails and is 

subject to certain sections of the National 

Trails System Act of 1968 (as amended). 

BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENTS 

As part of the planning process, NPS management polices requires general management 

plans to look at boundary adjustments made 

to parks. 

Throughout its history, Harpers Ferry 

National Historical Park has expanded its 

19 
CHAPTER 1: PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PLAN

20 

boundaries to incorporate and protect areas 

of historic or natural importance. Congress 

passed the Harpers Ferry National Historical 

Park Revision Act of 2004 (PL 108-307) 

authorizing the addition of 1,240 acres of Civil 

War Battlefield and viewshed to the national 

historical park. With this expansion of park 

lands, the National Park Service will possess 

the majority of important historic resources in 

the Harpers Ferry area. However, there are 

sites in the tri-state area that are an integral 

part of the history of the town of Harpers 

Ferry. These sites are discussed in the 

“Relationship to Other Planning Efforts to 

This General Management Plan” section of 

the plan. None of these sites are proposed for 

acquisition in this plan.
Guidance for the Planning Effort 

TABLE 1. SERVICEWIDE MANDATES AND POLICIES PERTAINING TO HARPERS FERRY

NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK

Cultural Resources Management 

ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES

Archeological resources are the physical evidences of past human activity representing both historic and 

prehistoric time periods. They can be found above or below ground and submerged under water. Current 

laws and policies require that the following conditions be achieved in the parks:

Desired Condition Source 

Archeological sites are identified and inventoried 

and their eligibility determined and documented. 

Archeological sites are protected in an 

undisturbed condition unless it is determined 

through formal processes that disturbance or 

natural deterioration is unavoidable. When 

disturbance is unavoidable, the site is 

professionally excavated and documented in 

consultation with the appropriate state historic 

preservation office and/or American Indian tribes 

and the resulting artifacts, materials, and records 

are curated and conserved. Some archeological 

sites that can be adequately protected may be 

interpreted to the visitor. 

National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended

Advisory Council on Historic Preservation’s 

implementing regulations regarding the “Protection 

of Historic Properties” (36 CFR 800) 

American Indian Religious Freedom Act 

Archeological and Historic Preservation Act 

Archeological Resources Protection Act 

Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act 

NPS Management Policies 2006

DO 28 and accompanying “Cultural Resource 

Management Guideline” (2001) 

DO 28A “Archeology” (2004) 

Compliance Actions

• Parkwide archeological sites will be inventoried, documented and National Register of Historic Places 

eligibility evaluations made in order to provide the state historic preservation office recommendations 

for making a consensus determination of eligibility. 

• Initiate a program of nomination to the National Register of Historic Places those individual properties 

believed to be eligible for inclusion in and/or have had a consensus determination of eligibility already 

made. 

• Treat all archeological resources as eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places pending 

a formal determination of their eligibility. 

• Monitor and assess the condition of known archeological sites, develop and implement stabilization 

strategies or data recovery for sites being threatened or destroyed. 

• Protect all archeological resources eligible for inclusion in or are listed in the national register. 

• Design facilities to avoid known or suspected archeological resources. If disturbance to such resources is 

unavoidable, conduct formal consultation with the applicable state historic preservation office, the 

Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, as appropriate, and Indian tribes in accordance with the 

National Historic Preservation Act and the current NPS Programmatic Agreement among the National 

Park Service, Advisory Council on Historic Preservation and National Conference of State Historic 

Preservation Officers. 

• Conduct data recovery excavations at archeological sites only where protection or site avoidance during 

design and construction is not feasible. 

• Educate visitors on regulations governing archeological resources encouraging them through the 

interpretive programs to respect, and leave undisturbed, archeological resources. 

• Limit archeological research to those sites that are in imminent or identifiable danger of destruction 

through natural causes or as the result of development actions. 

• Allow archeological research activities when identified as a national historical park research need and in 

conformance with an approved research design. 

• Complete an archeological overview and assessment, including archeological identification/evaluation 

studies. 

• Enter cultural resource data into a secure GIS database.

21 
CHAPTER 1: PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PLAN

22 

HISTORIC STRUCTURES

A historic structure is "a constructed work consciously created to serve some human activity." Historic 

structures are usually immovable, although some have been relocated and others are mobile by design. 

They include buildings and monuments, dams, millraces and canals, bridges, tunnels and roads, fences, 

defensive works, ruins of all structural types, and outdoor sculpture. 

Current laws and policies require that the following conditions be achieved for historic structures:

Desired Condition Source

Historic structures are inventoried and 

their significance and integrity are 

evaluated under National Register of 

Historic Places criteria. The qualities that 

contribute to the listing or eligibility for 

listing of historic structures on the 

national register are protected in 

accordance with the Secretary of the 

Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for 

Archeology and Historic Preservation. 

National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended

Advisory Council on Historic Preservation’s implementing 

regulations regarding the “Protection of Historic 

Properties” (36 CFR 800) 

Archeological and Historic Preservation Act 

Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of 

Historic Properties, with Guidelines for the Treatment of 

Cultural Landscapes 

Programmatic memorandum of agreement among the 

National Park Service, the Advisory Council on Historic 

Preservation, and the National Council of State Historic 

Preservation Officers (1995) 

NPS Management Policies 2006

DO 28 “and accompanying “Cultural Resource Management 

Guideline” 

Compliance Actions

• Update/certify the list of classified structures as needed. 

• Update the National Register of Historic Places nomination for Harpers Ferry National Historical Park as 

necessary. 

• Develop and initiate a program of identification and evaluation and begin the process of reaching a 

consensus determination of eligibility with the state historic preservation officer for buildings and 

structures believed to be eligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places. 

• Treat all structures as eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places pending a formal 

determination of eligibility. 

• Subject to the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, programmatically monitor and assess the 

condition of historic structures and develop and implement a program for the appropriate level of 

preservation for each historic structure determined or considered eligible for inclusion in the National 

Register of Historic Places. 

• Before modifying any historic structure on the National Register of Historic Places, the National Park 

Service will consult with the West Virginia, Virginia, or Maryland state historic preservation office(s) as 

appropriate, and as required. 

• Complete historic resource study for all areas of the national historical park. 

• Import cultural resource data into a secure GIS database 
Guidance for the Planning Effort 

CULTURAL LANDSCAPES

A cultural landscape is a reflection of human adaptation and use of natural resources and is often 

expressed in the way land is organized and divided, patterns of settlement, land use, systems of 

circulation, and the types of structures that are built. The character of a cultural landscape is defined both 

by physical materials, such as roads, buildings, walls, and vegetation, and by use reflecting cultural values 

and traditions. 

Current laws and policies require that the following conditions be achieved in the parks for historic 

properties including historic cultural landscapes. 

Desired Condition Source 

Conduct cultural landscape inventories to identify 

landscapes potentially eligible for listing in the 

National Register of Historic Places and to assist in 

future management decisions for landscapes and 

associated resources, both cultural and natural. 

The management of cultural landscapes focuses on 

preserving the landscape’s physical attributes, 

biotic systems, and use, when that use contributes 

to its historical significance. 

The preservation, rehabilitation, restoration, or 

reconstruction of cultural landscapes is undertaken 

in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior's 

Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties 

with Guideline’s for the Treatment of Cultural 

Landscapes. 

National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as 

amended 

Advisory Council on Historic Preservation’s 

implementing regulations regarding the 

“Protection of Historic Properties” (36 CFR 800) 

Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the 

Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines 

for the Treatment of Cultural Landscapes (1996) 

NPS Management Policies 2006 

DO 28 and accompanying “Cultural Resource 

Management Guideline” 

Compliance Actions

• Complete a survey, inventory, and evaluation of cultural landscapes for areas of the national historical 

park not already surveyed. 

• Submit the inventory and evaluation results to the appropriate state historic preservation office for 

review and comment 

• Prepare nominations for those areas believed to be eligible for inclusion in the National Register of 

Historic Places for review by the state historic preservation officer or a formal determination by the 

keeper of the national register as to their eligibility. 

• Treat potential cultural landscapes as eligible for inclusion in the national register pending agreement 

of eligibility with the appropriate state historic preservation office or a formal determination by the 

keeper of the national register. 

• Determine, implement, and maintain the appropriate level of preservation for each landscape formally 

listed on the national register or determined to be eligible for listing subject to the Secretary of the 

Interior’s Standards. 

23 
CHAPTER 1: PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PLAN

MUSEUM COLLECTIONS

Museum collections (objects, specimens, and archival and manuscript collections) provide information 

about processes, events, and interactions among people and the environment. All resource management 

records are managed as museum property. 

Current laws and policies require that the following conditions be achieved in the parks for museum 

collections:

Desired Condition Source

All museum collections (objects, specimens, and 

archival collections) are identified and 

inventoried, catalogued, documented, 

preserved, and protected, and provision is 

made for access to and use of these items for 

exhibits, research, and interpretation. 

Archeological and Historic Preservation Act 

Archeological Resources Protection Act 

Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation 

Act 

NPS Management Policies 2006 

DO 24 “Museum Collections Management” 

DO 28 and accompanying “Cultural Resource 

Management Guideline” 

36 CFR Part 79 

Actions

Current laws and policies require that the National Park Service take the following actions to meet its legal 

and policy requirements: 

• Inventory and catalog all national historical park museum collections in accordance with standards 

outlined in the NPS Museum Handbook. Develop and implement a collection management program 

according to NPS standards to guide the protection, conservation, documentation, and use of 

museum collections. 

• Planning for storage and exhibit area facilities sufficient to meet current curation standards consistent 

with DO 24 and 36 CFR 79 will be implemented by the national historical park staff. 

• Use NPS standards and guidelines on the display and care of artifacts including artifacts used in 

exhibits. 

• Do not display or store irreplaceable items at Harpers Ferry National Historical Park within the 500-

year floodplain. 

• Update the Scope of Collection Statement when warranted. 

24 
Guidance for the Planning Effort 

Natural Resources Management 

SOILS

Desired Condition Source

The National Park Service actively seeks to understand 

and preserve the soil resources, and to prevent, to the 

extent possible, the unnatural erosion, physical removal, 

or contamination of the soil, or its contamination of 

other resources. 

Natural soil resources and processes function in as natural 

a condition as possible, except where special 

considerations are allowable under policy. 

NPS Management Policies 2006

When soil excavation is an unavoidable part of an 

approved facility development project, the National Park 

Service will minimize soil excavation, erosion, and offsite 

soil migration during and after the development activity. 

NPS Management Policies 2006

Compliance Actions

The National Park Service will take the following kinds of actions to meet legal and policy requirements 

related to soils: 

• Update soil GIS data 

• NPS staff would apply soil conservation measures to any surface-disturbing project 

WATER RESOURCES

Desired Condition Source

Surface water and groundwater are protected, and water 

quality meets or exceeds all applicable water quality 

standards. 

Clean Water Act,

Executive Order 11514 

NPS Management Policies 2006

NPS and NPS-permitted programs and facilities are 

maintained and operated to avoid pollution of surface 

water and groundwater. 

Clean Water Act

Executive Order 12088 

Rivers and Harbors Act 

NPS Management Policies 2006

Compliance Actions

The National Park Service will take the following kinds of actions to meet legal and policy requirements 

related to this resource: 

• Investigate and monitor water flows and quality including trace elements. When poor readings 

occur, attempt to locate and mitigate source. 

• When appropriate, NPS staff would educate visitors about the water resources 

25 
CHAPTER 1: PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PLAN

NATIVE VEGETATION AND ANIMALS

Desired Condition Source

The National Park Service will maintain, as part of the natural 

ecosystem, all native plants and animals in the parks. 

Populations of native plant and animal species function in as 

natural condition as possible except where special considerations 

are warranted. 

Native species populations that have been severely reduced in or 

extirpated from the parks are restored where feasible and 

sustainable. 

NPS Management Policies 2006

The management of nonnative plant and animal species, up to 

and including eradication, will be conducted wherever such 

species threaten parks’ resources or public health and when 

control is prudent and feasible. 

NPS Management Policies 2006

Executive Order 13112 “Invasive 

Species” 

Maintain healthy native ecosystems that are free from nonnative 

pests and diseases that alter the composition of health of the 

native communities. 

NPS Management Policies 2006

Compliance Actions

The National Park Service will take the following kinds of actions to meet legal and policy requirements 

related to this resource: 

• Locate and inventory areas of native vegetative communities 

• Continue upgrading wildlife inventory study of all national historical park sections 

• Implement an exotic species management plan 

• Develop a resource stewardship strategy, including management of the gypsy moth, white-tailed 

deer surveys, monitoring of the impacts caused by white-tailed deer on vegetation, and other 

resource management strategies. 

THREATENED, ENDANGERED, AND SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES 

Desired Condition Source

Federal and state-listed threatened and endangered species and 

their habitats are protected and sustained. 

Endangered Species Act 

NPS Management Policies 2006

Native threatened and endangered species populations that have 

been severely reduced in or extirpated from the parks are restored 

where feasible and sustainable. 

NPS Management Policies 2006

Compliance Actions

The National Park Service will take the following kinds of actions to meet legal and policy requirements 

related to this resource: 

• Conduct periodic inventories for special status species 

• Prepare and implement a resources management plan that includes a monitoring and protection 

program for listed species 

26 
Guidance for the Planning Effort 

NATURAL SOUNDS

Desired Condition Source

The National Park Service preserves the natural ambient 

soundscapes, restores degraded soundscapes to the natural 

ambient condition wherever possible, and protects natural 

soundscapes from degradation due to human-caused noise. 

Disruptions from recreational uses are managed to provide a 

high-quality visitor experience in an effort to preserve or restore 

the natural quiet and natural sounds. 

NPS Management Policies 2006

Director’s Order 47 “Sound 

Preservation and Noise 

Management” 

Compliance Actions

The National Park Service will take the following kinds of actions to meet legal and policy requirements 

related to this resource: 

• In undeveloped areas of the parks, identify and take actions to prevent or minimize unnatural 

sounds that adversely affect natural soundscapes or visitors’ enjoyment of them. 

• Regulate the use of motorized equipment during visitor hours to minimize noise generated by NPS 

management activities 

Lightscape Management/Night Sky

Desired Condition Source

Excellent opportunities to see the night sky are available. 

Artificial light sources both within and outside the parks do 

not unacceptably adversely affect opportunities to see the 

night sky. 

NPS Management Policies 2006

Compliance Actions

The National Park Service will take the following kinds of actions to meet legal and policy requirements 

related to this resource: 

• Identify and take actions to prevent or minimize outdoor lighting in the national historical park 

and surrounding communities of Harpers Ferry, Bolivar, Neersville, and Sandy Hook that adversely 

affects natural lightscapes or visitors’ enjoyment. 

27 
CHAPTER 1: PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PLAN

VISITOR USE AND EXPERIENCE

Desired Condition Source

Natural and cultural resources are conserved “unimpaired” 

for the enjoyment of future generations. Visitors have 

opportunities for forms of enjoyment that are uniquely 

suited and appropriate to the superlative natural and 

cultural resources found in the parks. No activities occur 

that would cause derogation of the values and purposes 

for which the parks have been established. 

For all zones, districts, or other logical management 

divisions within a park system unit, the types and levels of 

visitor use are consistent with the desired resource and 

visitor experience conditions prescribed for those areas. 

Visitors will have opportunities to understand and 

appreciate the significance of the parks and their 

resources, and to develop a personal stewardship ethic. 

NPS Organic Act

NPS Management Policies 2006

To the extent feasible, programs, services, and facilities are 

accessible to and usable by all people, including those with 

disabilities. 

Architectural Barriers Act Accessibility 

Standards 

Director’s Order 42 “Accessibility for Visitors 

with Disabilities in NPS Programs, 

Facilities, and Services” 

NPS staff will identify implementation commitments for 

visitor carrying capacities for all areas of the parks. 

National Parks and Recreation Act (PL 95-

625) 

NPS Management Policies 2006

Compliance Actions

The National Park Service will take the following kinds of actions to meet legal and policy requirements 

related to this value: 

• Give visitors the opportunity to understand, appreciate, and enjoy all areas of the parks. 

• Continue to monitor visitor comments on issues such as crowding, parking, access, and other 

experience-related topics. 

28 
Guidance for the Planning Effort 

SUSTAINABLE DESIGN

Desired Condition Source

NPS visitor management facilities are harmonious with 

parks’ resources, compatible with natural processes, 

aesthetically pleasing, functional, as accessible as possible 

to all segments of the population, energy-efficient, and 

cost-effective. 

All decisions regarding NPS operations, facilities 

management, and development in the parks — from the 

initial concept through design and construction — reflect 

principles of resource conservation. Thus, all NPS 

developments and operations are sustainable to the 

maximum degree possible and practical. New 

developments and existing facilities are located, built, and 

modified according to the Guiding Principles of Sustainable 

Design (NPS 1993) or other similar guidelines. 

Management decision-making and activities throughout 

the national park system should use value analysis, which 

is mandatory for all Department of the Interior bureaus, to 

help achieve this goal. 

NPS Management Policies 2006

Executive Order 13123 “Greening the 

Government through Efficient Energy 

Management” 

NPS Guiding Principles of Sustainable Design

Director’s Order 13 “Environmental 

Leadership” 

Compliance Actions

The National Park Service will take the following kinds of actions to meet legal and policy requirements 

related to this value: 

• NPS staff will work with experts to make national historical park facilities and programs 

sustainable. 

29 
RELATIONSHIP OF OTHER PLANNING EFFORTS TO THIS GENERAL 

MANAGEMENT PLAN 

Numerous nationally significant historic sites 

are near the national historical park, which 

relate directly to the history of Harpers Ferry. 

Many of these areas are on the National 

Register of Historic Places, such as the 

Kennedy Farm and the Charles Town Court 

House. Others such as the Shepherdstown 

Battlefield are not. The National Park Service 

would work with local, state, and national 

interests lending expertise in support of 

continued preservation and interpretation of 

these areas integral to the telling of the story 

of John Brown's raid and General Robert E. 

Lee's Maryland Campaign. No boundary 

adjustments are proposed in this document. 

The local transportation district is planning an 

expansion of the public transportation system. 

This would include an expanded public bus 

system, additional commuter rail stations, and 

new bicycle paths. This could affect how the 

public accesses the national historical park 

and the traffic patterns in and around Harpers 

Ferry. 

The national historical park will partner or 

closely coordinate with ongoing and future 

planning efforts related to the West Virginia 

Welcome Center, Potomac Heritage National 

Scenic Trail, and Appalachian National Scenic 

Trail. 

The National Park Service has worked closely 

with the Hagerstown/Eastern Panhandle 

Metropolitan Planning Organization on its 

“Long Range Multimodal Transportation Plan 

to 2030.” 

The National Park Service is currently 

evaluating the feasibility/need for a new 

curatorial and museum storage facility for the 

NPS National Capital Region. Should such a 

facility be located in the Harpers Ferry 

vicinity, it would obviate the need for the 

development of additional museum storage in 

the national historical park. 

30 
PLANNING ISSUES AND CONCERNS 

The general public, NPS staff; representatives 

from other county, state, and federal agencies; 

and representatives from various organizations identified issues and concerns during 

scoping (early information gathering) for this 

general management plan. [An issue, for the 

purposes of this plan, is defined as an 

opportunity, conflict, or problem regarding 

the use or management of public lands]. 

Comments were solicited at public meetings 

and through planning newsletters (see the 

"Consultation and Coordination” chapter). 

The general management plan alternatives 

provide strategies for addressing the issues 

within the context of the national historical 

park's purpose, significance, and special 

mandates. 

Not all issues identified during scoping will be 

dealt with within the general management 

plan. These are things that are already 

governed by law or policy, may be beyond the 

scope of the plan, may be better dealt with in 

another type of document, may be corrected 

as a part of another action, or are not feasible. 

The planning team analyzed all the comments 

received from national historical park neighbors, interest groups, community members, 

and the public during the scoping period to 

identify important issues that NPS 

management should address. Comments 

received indicated that the most important 

issue that should be addressed is the threat 

from outside development encroaching on the 

national historical park. Related to that was 

the need to expand the boundary to protect 

additional Civil War sites. Other priorities 

mentioned included cooperation with local 

communities, more or better access to 

national historical park sites, protection of 

resources, and more interpretation of Civil 

War sites. 

TRESPASS 

Trespass refers to the unauthorized entry onto 

NPS lands of people or animals often resulting 

in damage to national historical park property 

and resources. Although a serious concern, it 

is more a matter of staffing and law 

enforcement than an issue that can be dealt 

with in the general management plan. 

BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT 

This issue came up frequently during the 

scoping process. Harpers Ferry National 

Historical Park is currently involved in a 

process of land acquisition resulting in the 

addition of several properties containing 

significant resources relating to the history of 

Harpers Ferry. Legislation in 2004 did not 

address lands in the viewshed of Jefferson 

Rock in Virginia and Maryland. This remains 

a serious concern of the public and may need 

to be addressed through legislation allowing 

NPS purchase in fee or scenic easement from 

willing sellers. 

COOPERATION WITH 

LOCAL COMMUNITIES 

Cooperation with neighbors and with the 

communities of Harpers Ferry and Bolivar is 

an important concern of Harpers Ferry 

National Historical Park. National historical 

park staff and the planning team have sought 

the comments of all affected neighbors and 

the local communities during scoping and will 

continue to consult with them during the 

course of this plan. Continued cooperation 

and coordination needs to be ongoing 

following the planning process, during 

implementation, and into the future. 

31 
CHAPTER 1: PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PLAN

BETTER ACCESS TO NPS SITES 

Some areas of the national historical park are 

not open to the public. Other areas are 

difficult to get to, do not have designated 

parking, or lack appropriate directional/ 

interpretive signs. In an effort to provide 

better way-finding, two studies dealing with 

signs and access have been undertaken by the 

National Park Service. The plan will 

incorporate the information from these 

studies and look at other improvements that 

can be made to improve access around the 

national historical park. 

PROTECTION OF NATIONAL 

HISTORICAL PARK RESOURCES 

Protection of national historical park 

resources is an ongoing issue that is dealt with 

generally in the plan. It encompasses law 

enforcement, visitor education, and 

preservation/maintenance rather than a set of 

actions that can be fully described in the plan. 

MORE INTERPRETATION 

OF CIVIL WAR SITES 

During scoping, the public expressed frustration that there was little or no interpretation 

by rangers at many sites. Most of the sites have 

interpretive panels but much of the interpretation occurs without benefit of NPS staff. With 

increasing budgetary concerns systemwide, 

the likelihood of additional staff is small. The 

plan notes this concern and identifies some of 

the ways to provide more efficient interpretation. A later interpretive plan will be necessary 

to specifically identify ways to address the 

need for additional interpretation, perhaps 

through increased or updated signs, sitespecific brochures, and self-guided audio 

tours. However, as noted elsewhere in this 

plan, there is no guarantee that funding will be 

provided to make this happen. 

 

STAFF HOUSING 

Staff housing for seasonal employees and 

volunteers is very difficult to find in the 

Harpers Ferry area. Seasonal employees and 

volunteers often cannot afford to pay the 

rental rates, even if the housing is available 

locally. 

LACK OF STAFF 

The national historical park’s “Business Plan” 

(2003) has identified a need for additional 

personnel to maintain facilities, provide 

interpretation, protect resources and visitors, 

and to otherwise administer the needs of the 

national historical park. The plan notes this 

need. However, as noted elsewhere in this 

plan, there is no guarantee that funding for 

additional staff will be provided. 

NONNATIVE SPECIES 

Nonnative species of plants and animals have 

become established within Harpers Ferry 

National Historical Park. Some are so 

established that they likely cannot feasibly be 

removed, such as the dandelion. Others outcompete the native species and cause widespread disruption of the environment. The 

gypsy moth has been a major issue on Loudon 

and Maryland Heights as well as Short Hill. 

The plan notes this is a concern. However, 

such species are covered by NPS policy and 

won't be discussed in detail. 

MAINTENANCE YARD LOCATION 

The location of the maintenance yard requires 

that NPS and commercial delivery trucks 

drive on narrow side streets not ideal for such 

use. Additionally, noise from these vehicles 

can disturb neighbors. The plan does look at 

alternative locations for the maintenance 

facility. 

 

32 
Planning Issues and Concerns 

33 

STATIC VISITATION 

This issue was mentioned by NPS staff as a 

concern. Many parks have experienced static 

or a decline in visitation as post 9/11 travel 

fears, gasoline prices, and visitor interests 

have diversified. This is also related to the 

staffing concern identified above. Implementation of any of the action alternatives 

could help to improve visitation. 
IMPACT TOPICS — RESOURCES AND VALUES AT STAKE IN THE 

PLANNING PROCESS 

The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) 

guidelines for implementing the National 

Environmental Policy Act require that the 

description of the affected environment must 

focus on describing the resources and people 

that might be affected by implementation of 

the alternatives. Impact topics were developed 

to focus the environmental analysis and to 

ensure that alternatives were evaluated against 

relevant topics. These impact topics were 

identified based on federal laws and other 

legal requirements, the CEQ guidelines, NPS 

management policies, NPS subject-matter 

expertise and knowledge of limited or easily 

impacted resources, and issues/ concerns 

expressed by other agencies or the public 

during initial project scoping. A brief rationale 

for the selection of each impact topic is given 

below, as well as for dismissing specific topics 

from further consideration. 

IMPACT TOPICS TO BE CONSIDERED 

Cultural Resources 

The National Historic Preservation Act and 

the National Environmental Policy Act 

require that the effects of any federal undertaking on cultural resources be examined. 

Also, NPS Management Policies, and Cultural 

Resource Management Guideline (Director's 

Order 28), call for the consideration of 

cultural resources in planning proposals. 

Actions proposed in this plan could affect 

historic structures, archeological resources, 

and cultural landscapes. 

Historic Structures. Although not all historic 

buildings or structures have been included in 

the current list of classified structures as a 

result of recent land acquisitions by the 

National Park Service, this plan proposes both 

uses and treatments to historic structures 

throughout the national historical park. 

Archeological Resources. Archeological 

deposits are found throughout the national 

historical park. While specific legal management requirements are provided for in law 

and policy, the plan proposes specific actions 

in areas of high concentrations of such 

deposits. 

Cultural Landscapes. The national historical 

park preserves considerable historic topography as they may have appeared in 1862, the 

time of Civil War occupation. These period 

landscapes are at Bolivar Heights, Murphy 

Farm, and Schoolhouse Ridge. Each of these 

landscapes is more heavily wooded today than 

in 1862. 

Current cultural landscape studies cover 

Lower Town, Virginius Island, and Schoolhouse Ridge South. However, this topic is of 

importance to the overall protection and 

preservation of the national historical park's 

historical appearance and interpretive needs. 

Thomas Jefferson described the view of the 

rivers' confluence as "worth a trip across the 

Atlantic." The National Park Service has 

acquired much of the surrounding heights in 

Virginia and Maryland in order to preserve 

this natural viewshed as seen from the 

national historical park and to protect historic 

sites. Scenery and natural beauty were listed as 

national historical park values by many of the 

public who commented during the scoping 

period. 

Encroaching residential and commercial 

development outside the national historical 

park and the presence of utility lines and other 

intrusions in the park are affecting the historic 

landscapes. 

34 
Impact Topics — Resources and Values at Stake in the Planning Process 

Natural Resources 

Water Resources (including wetlands). 

Rivers, lakes, and wetlands are highly important ecological components in the region. 

They provide nutrient transport, water 

purification, and habitat for a wide diversity of 

life. Water quality is a concern for wildlife, 

fisheries, recreation, and aesthetics. Subtopics 

include ground water and storm water 

management. Analysis of potential impacts to 

wetlands is required by Executive Order 

11990, the Clean Water Act, and NPS 

Management Policies 2006. The National 

Wetlands Inventory (www.nwi.fws.gov) 

indicates that there are several areas classified 

as wetlands in the national historical park. 

One or more of the alternatives could affect 

water resources such as water quality and 

wetlands. 

Floodplains. Analysis of potential impacts to 

floodplains is required by Executive Orders 

11988, the Clean Water Act, and NPS Management Policies. Some of Lower Town is within 

100-year and 500-year floodplains, which 

poses an ongoing risk to historic structures 

and national historical park developments. 

Soils. The Organic Act and NPS Management 

Policies 2006 require the protection and 

conservation of soil resources that could be 

affected by management actions. Soils at 

Harpers Ferry can be affected by construction, restoration, and visitor use. Alternatives 

presented in this plan could have adverse or 

beneficial impacts on soils. 

Cave Resources. Consideration of caves and 

cave-related features or resources is required 

by NPS Management Policies 2006 (4.8.2.2) 

and the Federal Cave Resource Protection Act 

of 1988 (43 CFR 37). Caves and numerous 

rock shelters have formed within or near the 

boundaries of Harpers Ferry. At least one 

limestone cave is known to contain caveadapted life. It is possible that caves may 

contain important biological, paleontological 

or cultural resources that could be damaged 

without proper management. 

Vegetative Communities. Harpers Ferry 

National Historical Park is home to a great 

variety of vegetation — from riverside riparian 

communities to upland forests. There are concerns over the effects of white-tailed deer 

overpopulation, acid precipitation, and the 

spread of nonnative plants in the national 

historical park. Alternatives presented in this 

plan could affect native and invasive 

nonnative vegetation. 

Fish. Historically 43 species of fish have been 

encountered in the waters here, including the 

Potomac and Shenandoah rivers and their 

tributaries. Freshwater game fish include 

largemouth and smallmouth bass, channel 

catfish, and bluegill sunfish. Other fish 

indigenous to the river waters include dace, 

chub, shiner, darter, minnows, bullhead, and 

carp. 

The Shenandoah and Potomac rivers flow 

through the national historical park but are 

outside the boundary. The National Park 

Service assists the states with enforcement of 

fishing regulations. There are several small 

streams, ponds, and wetlands in the national 

historical park that are inhabited by fish. 

Wildlife. Harpers Ferry National Historical 

Park is home to a great variety of insects, 

birds, and other wildlife. Fish and wildlife 

concerns at the national historical park 

include preserving natural habitats in the 

outlying areas and maintaining healthy 

populations. The Organic Act and NPS 

Management Policies require the protection 

and conservation of wildlife resources that 

could be affected by actions that change 

human use or development patterns in the 

national historical park. 

Alternatives presented in this plan could affect 

wildlife in the national historical park. 

35 
CHAPTER 1: PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PLAN

Special Status Species. Analysis of the 

potential impacts on special status species 

(federal or state endangered, threatened, 

candidate, or species of concern) and their 

habitat is required by the Endangered Species 

Act, NPS management policies, the National 

Environmental Policy Act, and other regulations. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and 

state natural resources departments indicate 

that there are special status plant and animal 

species in or near the national historical park. 

The alternatives presented in this document 

have the potential to affect one or more of 

these species. 

Soundscapes. NPS Management Policies (4.9) 

require park managers to strive to preserve the 

natural soundscape of a park, which is the lack 

of human-related sound and prevalence of 

natural sounds. At Harpers Ferry, these 

sounds may be associated with the physical 

and biological resources such as the sounds of 

flowing water, insects, or birds. Natural quiet 

in undeveloped areas of the national historical 

park is an important value as is maintaining 

the ambiance of the 19th century town; both 

identified by the public require protection. 

Implementing the action alternatives could 

alter the soundscape in one or more areas of 

the national historical park. 

Lightscape Management. NPS policy 

requires the National Park Service to preserve, 

to the extent possible, the natural lightscapes 

of parks and seek to minimize the intrusion of 

artificial light (light pollution) into the night 

scene (NPS Management Policies, 4.10). The 

clarity of night skies is important to visitor 

experience as well as being ecologically 

important. Artificial light sources both within 

and outside the national historical park have 

the potential to diminish the clarity of night 

skies. New development is occurring near 

park boundaries so the potential for nighttime lightscapes to be further degraded is 

increasing. 

Visitor Use and Experience 

The planning team identified visitor experience as an important issue that could be 

appreciably affected under the alternatives. 

The Organic Act and NPS Management 

Policies 2006 direct the National Park Service 

to provide enjoyment opportunities for 

visitors that are uniquely suited and appropriate to the resources found in the national 

historical park. Several different aspects of 

visitation and enjoyment are evaluated and 

analyzed: visitor uses; recreational opportunities; access to orientation, information, and 

interpretation; visitor facilities; and access to 

features in the national historical park. 

Socioeconomic Environment 

The National Environmental Policy Act 

requires an examination of social and economic impacts caused by federal actions. 

Harpers Ferry National Historical Park affects 

the socioeconomics and opportunities of 

nearby communities. Residents and 

businesses (e.g., restaurants and hotels) in the 

region are concerned about changes in the 

management of the national historical park 

that might affect their livelihood and socioeconomic environment and opportunities. 

NPS Operations 

The alternatives proposed in this plan could 

affect NPS operations and facilities. Subtopics 

could include staffing, maintenance, commercial services, facilities, emergency response, 

energy use, ability to enforce NPS regulations 

and protect national historical park values, 

employee and visitor health and safety, 

distance to work, and administrative access. 

36 
Impact Topics — Resources and Values at Stake in the Planning Process 

IMPACT TOPICS DISMISSED 

FROM FURTHER CONSIDERATION 

Ethnographic Resources 

For purposes of this document, an ethnographic resource is associated with a specific 

contemporary human group or family using a 

particular place in a unit of the national park 

system over time in a way relevant to that 

group’s traditional cultural heritage and social 

identity. More specifically, the National Park 

Service defines an ethnographic resource as 

any “site, structure, object, landscape, or 

natural resource feature assigned traditional 

legendary, religious, subsistence, or other 

significance in the cultural system of a group 

traditionally associated with it” (National Park 

Service 1998:181). 

Because the National Park Service has not 

undertaken an ethnographic overview and 

assessment for the national historical park, a 

site-specific ethnographic study would be 

needed before implementation of the plan’s 

selected alternative. This effort would ensure 

that cultural and natural character-defining 

features of a group’s traditional use of an area 

would not be affected or that the effects 

would be minimal. Facts would need to be 

gathered about what groups might exist and 

the way(s) they might be tied to specific 

aspects of the national historical park. For 

example, alumni or family groups associated 

with Storer College, which operated from 

1867 to 1955, would be researched as would 

any such groups that could be said to be 

traditionally associated with what is now the 

national historical park. 

Although Storer College closed its doors in 

1955, alumni have gathered there regularly 

since then for reunions to commemorate their 

time at the college, to acknowledge Storer’s 

legacy through the Storer College Alumni 

Association, and to renew ties with their 

former classmates. Fewer alumni of course 

survive, but the national historical park 

remains open to them and to those of their 

families who wish to continue the custom. 

The level of connection of these Storer alumni 

and their families with the national historical 

park is high. The Park Service wants to sustain 

these ties and to continue to acknowledge 

Storer’s African American legacy by allowing 

and cooperating with alumni access. 

In all of the alternatives, such access to Storer 

College would continue and not change by 

implementing this general management plan. 

That expectation is consistent with dismissing 

ethnographic resources as an impact topic in 

this document. Before implementation of the 

alternative selected, the ethnographic study 

called for above would necessarily include 

Storer College as a specific national historical 

park site and would analyze access to the 

college for alumni and family groups. 

Given European contact and European 

American westward expansion, many of the 

once specific connections of Native 

Americans with their traditional lands have 

been lost. This is the case with Harpers Ferry. 

In the vicinity of what is now Harpers Ferry 

National Historical Park in West Virginia, 

Maryland, and Virginia, there are no federally 

recognized American Indian tribes. There are 

no such American Indian tribes with whom to 

request Native American government-togovernment consultations (Tiller 1996). There 

are no known ethnographic resources or 

traditional cultural properties (ethnographic 

resources that are considered eligible for 

inclusion or have been listed in the National 

Register of Historic Places) traditionally 

associated with contemporary Native 

American peoples in what is now the national 

historical park. The suggested ethnographic 

study previously discussed would be expected 

to confirm this condition. Consistent with 

dismissing ethnographic resources in this 

document, ethnographic research performed 

before the implementation of the selected 

alternative would occur along with the 

possible analysis of impacts. 

 

37 
CHAPTER 1: PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PLAN

Museum Collections 

Consolidating the collections and archives in a

new regional facility would greatly enhance 

the ability to curate and maintain the 

collections, perform research, design 

interpretive exhibits, and more easily retrieve 

objects and archives for other park purposes. 

Storage conditions would be more uniform. 

However, because the museum collections 

and archives are already maintained according 

to NPS standards and will continue to be in all 

alternatives, there would be minimal to no 

impact on items in the collection. This topic 

has therefore been dismissed from further 

analysis. 

Indian Trust Resources 

Secretarial Order 3175 requires that any anticipated impacts on Indian trust resources 

from a proposed projects or actions by 

agencies of the Department of the Interior be 

explicitly addressed in environmental 

documents. The federal Indian trust 

responsibility is a legally enforceable fiduciary 

obligation on the part of the United States to 

protect tribal lands, assets, resources, and 

treaty rights, and it represents a duty to carry 

out the mandates of federal law with respect 

to American Indian and Alaska Native tribes. 

There are no Indian trust resources in 

Harpers Ferry National Historical Park. The 

lands comprising the national historical park 

are not held in trust by the secretary of the 

interior for the benefit of Indians due solely to 

their status as Indians. Therefore, the topic of 

Indian trust resources was dismissed from 

further analysis. 

Air Quality 

The Clean Air Act and NPS Management 

Policies state that managers have a responsibility to protect national historical park airquality-related values from adverse air 

pollution impacts. 

Sources of pollution that affect air quality in 

Harpers Ferry are primarily outside the 

national historical park's boundaries. 

Stationary and mobile emissions in the region 

are the major source of air pollution. Sources 

of emissions in the region around Harpers 

Ferry include the following: 

• motorized vehicles and trains 

• residential woodstoves and fireplaces 

• lumber and paper mills 

• sand and gravel or limestone quarries 

• other industries 

Air pollution is somewhat mitigated locally by 

the filtering effect of trees and other 

vegetation in the undeveloped areas of the 

national historical park during leaf-on season. 

Conversely, natural resource specialists are 

concerned that atmospheric pollutants are 

adversely affecting the health of trees and 

plants. 

Comprehensive air quality data have been 

collected by the NPS Air Resources Division 

(ARD). According to the division's data, 

Loudoun County, VA, had nonattainment of 

the National Ambient Air Quality Standard for 

ozone, which is 0.8 ppm for an 8-hour period 

(NPS 2003f). ARD also identifies Jefferson 

County, WV, and Washington County, 

Maryland, as Early Action counties. Early 

Action means that an agreement has been 

entered into with EPA for more time to allow 

the county to achieve compliance with air 

quality standards. 

Air quality protection measures (mitigation) 

and operating procedures would be implemented by the National Park Service to 

protect air quality and prevent its degradation 

from NPS operations. Such measures 

described in the alternatives include mass 

transit with environmentally clean vehicles. 

38 
Impact Topics — Resources and Values at Stake in the Planning Process 

Construction actions occurring as a result of 

any of the action alternatives would require 

site-specific environmental analysis and 

include air quality protection measures such 

as dust abatement and vehicle restrictions. 

Construction activities would temporarily 

raise the levels of particulates, hydrocarbons, 

and nitrogen oxides in highly localized areas 

of effect from earth disturbance and 

combustion engine emissions. These shortterm adverse impacts would be minor on air 

quality in the park and negligible on air quality 

in the region. 

Implementing any of the alternatives would 

have a negligible effect on regional air quality 

and would not interfere with protection 

mandates. Therefore, the topic of air quality 

was dismissed from further analysis. 

Geological Resources 

The national historical park is in the Blue 

Ridge Mountain section of the extensive 

Appalachian Mountain Range that rose 360 

million years ago when collisions between 

continental plates caused massive folding of 

the earth's crust. Once taller than the Rocky 

Mountains are today, these mountains have 

been worn down by eons of wind, rain, and 

ice until only the roots remain. 

Weverton quartzite, phylite (Harpers shale), 

and limestone are the predominant rock types 

in the national historical park, each playing a 

role in the formation of the current landscape. 

Harpers shale, or phylite, is a metamorphic 

rock that contains mica crystals and often has 

a wavy appearance. It is about 2,000 feet thick 

and comprises the cliffs and hillsides seen in 

Lower Town. Limestone (calcium carbonate) 

is a sedimentary rock formed when the region 

was under a shallow inland sea and is an 

accumulation of lime from living organisms. 

None of the alternatives described in this 

document would affect the geological 

resources of the region more than negligibly, 

nor are there any unusual geologic hazards. 

Therefore, the topic of geological resources 

was dismissed from further analysis. 

Wilderness and Wild and Scenic 

Rivers and American Heritage Rivers 

The Potomac River is listed on the “Nationwide Rivers Inventory” for the segments 

relative to Harpers Ferry National Historical 

Park in the counties of Frederick and 

Washington in Maryland, Loudon in Virginia, 

and Jefferson in West Virginia. The Potomac 

River is an American Heritage River, and the 

national historical park plays a role in its 

preservation. 

Wilderness areas and wild and scenic rivers 

are congressionally designated areas. There 

are no such designations in the national 

historical park, and no river segments in the 

national historical park are eligible for 

designation; therefore this topic is dismissed 

from further analysis. 

Prime or Unique Farmlands 

In August 1980 the Council on Environmental 

Quality (CEQ) directed that federal agencies 

must assess the effects of their actions on 

farmland soils classified by the United States 

Department of Agriculture's Natural Resource 

Conservation Service as prime or unique. 

Prime or unique farmland is defined as soil 

which particularly produces general crops 

such as common foods, forage, fiber, and oil 

seed; unique farmland produces specialty 

crops such as fruits, vegetables, and nuts. 

Soils of the Frankstown series are categorized 

by the U.S. Department of Agriculture as 

unique farmlands and may exist in the 

national historical park (soil inventories are 

complete). However, implementing any of the 

action alternatives would not change park 

39 
CHAPTER 1: PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PLAN

operation activities, visitation patterns, or uses 

of the land more than negligibly. Historic 

agricultural use would continue on portions of 

Bolivar Heights, Schoolhouse Ridge, and the 

Murphy Farm. Maryland Heights, Loudon 

Heights, and Short Hill would remain 

primarily undisturbed. Because there would 

be no moderate or major impacts to the use of 

these soils, the topic of prime or unique farmlands was dismissed from further analysis. 

Natural or Depletable Resources 

Requirements and Conservation Potential 

Consideration of these topics is required by 40 

CFR 1502.16. The National Park Service has 

adopted the concept of sustainable design as a 

guiding principle of facility planning and 

development (NPS Management Policies 

9.1.1.7). The objectives of sustainability are to 

design facilities to minimize adverse effects on 

natural and cultural values, to reflect their 

environmental setting and to maintain and 

encourage biodiversity; to operate and maintain facilities to promote their sustainability; 

and to illustrate and promote conservation 

principles and practices through sustainable 

design and ecologically sensitive use. 

Essentially, sustainability is the concept of 

living within the environment with the least 

impact on the environment. 

Through sustainable design concepts and 

other resource management principles, all of 

the alternatives analyzed in this document 

would conserve natural resources and would 

not result in a substantial loss of natural or 

depletable resources. Therefore, this topic 

was dismissed from further analysis. 

Energy Requirements and 

Conservation Potential 

One or more of the action alternatives could 

result in new facilities with inherent energy 

needs. In all alternatives, new facilities would 

be designed with long-term sustainability in 

mind. 

The National Park Service has adopted the 

concept of sustainable design as a guiding 

principle of facility planning and development 

(NPS Management Policies 9.1.1.7). The 

objectives of sustainability are to design 

facilities to minimize adverse effects on 

natural and cultural values, to reflect their 

environmental setting, and require the least 

amount of nonrenewable fuels/energy. 

Action alternatives could result in an 

increased energy need, but this need is 

expected to be minor when energy needs in 

the park are considered and negligible when 

seen in a regional context. Thus, this topic was 

dismissed from further analysis. 

Urban Quality and Design 

of the Built Environment 

Consideration of this topic is required by 40 

CFR 1502.16. The quality of urban areas is a 

consideration in this planning project because 

of the need to reflect the historic character of 

the town. According to park policy, vernacular architecture would be considered for any 

building rehabilitation or new structures built 

throughout the national historical park. Emphasis would be placed on designs, materials, 

and colors that reflect the historic period and 

do not detract from the built environment. 

Sustainable construction concepts would also 

be applied where feasible. Given that these 

considerations would be applied under any 

alternative, no further analysis of this topic is 

necessary. Therefore, the topic was dismissed 

from further analysis. 

Environmental Justice 

Presidential Executive Order 12898, “General 

Actions to Address Environmental Justice in 

Minority Populations and Low-Income 

Populations,” requires all federal agencies to 

incorporate environmental justice into their 

missions by identifying and addressing the 

disproportionately high and/or adverse 

human health or environmental effects of 

40 
Impact Topics — Resources and Values at Stake in the Planning Process 

41 

their programs and policies on minorities and 

low-income populations and communities. 

According to the Environmental Protection 

Agency, environmental justice is the 

...fair treatment and meaningful 

involvement of all people, regardless of 

race, color, national origin, or income, 

with respect to the development, 

implementation, and enforcement of 

environmental laws, regulations and 

policies. Fair treatment means that no 

group of people, including a racial, 

ethnic, or socioeconomic group, should 

bear a disproportionate share of the 

negative environmental consequences 

resulting from industrial, municipal, and 

commercial operations or the execution 

of federal, state, local, and tribal 

programs and policies. 

The goal of fair treatment is not to shift risks 

among populations, but to identify potentially 

disproportionately high and adverse effects 

and identify alternatives that may mitigate 

these impacts. 

The communities surrounding Harpers Ferry 

National Historical Park contain both 

minority and low-income populations; 

however, environmental justice is dismissed as 

an impact topic for the following reasons: 

• The park staff and planning team actively 

solicited public participation as part of the 

planning process and gave equal consideration to all input from persons 

regardless of age, race, income status, or 

other socioeconomic or demographic 

factors. 

• Implementation of the proposed alternative would not result in any identifiable 

adverse human health effects. Therefore, 

there would be no direct or indirect 

adverse effects on any minority or lowincome population. 

• The impacts associated with implementation of the preferred alternative would not 

disproportionately affect any minority or 

low-income population or community. 

• Implementation of the preferred alternative would not result in any identified 

effects that would be specific to any 

minority or low-income community. 

• The impacts to the socioeconomic 

environment resulting from 

implementation of any of the action 

alternatives would be beneficial. In 

addition, the park staff and planning team 

do not anticipate the impacts on the 

socioeconomic environment to 

appreciably alter the physical and social 

structure of the nearby communities. 

Therefore, this topic was dismissed from 

further analysis.

Chapter 2

Alternatives, Including the Preferred Alternative

INTRODUCTION 

Many aspects of the desired future condition 

of Harpers Ferry National Historical Park are 

defined in the establishing legislation, the 

national historical park's purpose and significance statements, and the servicewide mandates and policies that were described earlier. 

The National Park Service solicited input 

from the public, NPS staff, government 

agencies, and other organizations regarding 

issues and desired conditions for the national 

historical park. Planning team members 

gathered information about existing visitor 

use and the condition of the national historical park's facilities and resources. They considered which areas of the national historical 

park attract visitors and which areas have 

sensitive resources. 

Using the above information the planning 

team developed a set of seven management 

prescriptions and three alternatives to reflect 

the range of ideas proposed by the NPS staff 

and the public. 

In addition to developing the management 

prescriptions and alternatives, the team 

determined a user carrying capacity for the 

national historical park, which sets parameters 

for maintaining desired resource conditions 

and visitor experience. Three preservation 

treatments for the historic properties 

proposed in this plan were also defined. 

This chapter describes the user capacities, 

preservation treatments of historic properties, 

management prescriptions, and the alternatives for managing the national historical park 

for the next 15 to 20 years. Tables in this 

chapter summarize the management 

prescriptions, key differences between the 

alternatives, and key differences in the 

impacts that are expected from implementing 

each alternative. (The summary of impacts 

table is based on the analysis in Chapter 4, 

“Environmental Consequences”). This 

chapter also describes mitigation measures 

that would be used to lessen or avoid impacts, 

additional studies that would be needed, and 

the environmentally preferred alternative. 

USER CAPACITIES 

The General Authorities Act for the National 

Park Service, section 604, amended section 

12(b), requires that general management plans 

establish a user carrying capacity for a unit of 

the national park system, saying, among other 

things, that there must be "identification of an 

implementation commitment for visitor 

carrying capacity for all areas of the [national 

park system] unit..." In addition, there also is 

a requirement in the NPS Management Policies 

2006 that general management plans address 

the issue of visitor carrying capacity. The use 

of the concept of carrying capacity in planning 

infrastructure and visitor management 

programs would be expected to result in 

effective and efficient management. 

User capacity is defined as the type and level 

of visitor use that can be accommodated while 

sustaining the quality of national historical 

park resources and visitor opportunities 

consistent with the purposes of the national 

historical park. Research has shown that user 

capacity cannot be measured simply as a 

number of people because impacts to desired 

resource conditions and visitor experience are 

often related to a variety of factors, including 

the number of people, the types of activities 

people engage in, where they go, what type of 

resources are in the area, and the level of 

management presence. At the GMP level of 

decision making, management zones address 

user capacity because they include qualitative 

descriptions of desired resource conditions 

and visitor opportunities (see table 3 for a 

description of zones used in this plan). The 

strategy of addressing user capacity at Harpers 

Ferry National Historical Park is a tiered 

approach that would keep a general eye on 

45 
CHAPTER 2: ALTERNATIVES,INCLUDING THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

broad trends while focusing more specific 

monitoring and management on areas where 

action is most likely needed to achieve desired 

conditions. 

Implementation-level park planning may 

address specific indicators, standards, and 

actions to implement the general strategy 

prescribed in this document. An identification 

of the types of indicators that may be monitored and a range of actions that may be taken 

when indicators are not showing progress 

towards meeting the desired condition 

follows. 

Facility Management Zone 

This zone is not for use by visitors, so user 

capacities are not applicable. 

Historic Structure Zone 

Levels of use within the high-use Historic 

Structure Zone would be primarily controlled 

by the physical capacity of facilities, such as 

structures, parking areas, and visitor centers 

(see table 2). For example, the Provost 

Marshal's living history exhibit can handle 

about one dozen people at one time. On the 

other hand, the John Brown Museum (which 

is the first floors of three different buildings, 

all connected) can handle 60 people at one 

time. Visitor numbers shown in table 2 cause 

no damaging consequences to the historic 

structures. In almost every case, floor boards 

are not original. In most every other instance, 

floors have been reinforced during building 

rehabilitations. 

High-use levels may become more typical 

throughout the years as regional population 

growth continues. General use information 

will be collected, such as visitation trends, 

visitor complaints, parking problems, 

crowding in the visitor centers, vandalism, 

increase in law enforcement incidents, waste 

quantity, and requests for special uses. This 

TABLE 2. LIST OF EXHIBITS AND USER CAPACITY

Exhibit or Structure Visitor/Staff 

Capacity 

John Brown Museum 60 

Dry Goods Store living 

history exhibit 35 

Machine Shop living history 

exhibit 20 

Blacksmith Shop living 

history exhibit 20 

Tavern living history exhibit 10 

Confectionary living history 

exhibit 10 

Provost Marshal's House 

living history exhibit 12 

Master Armorer's House 

exhibits (Information 

Center) 

40 

Reading an Old Building 

exhibit 15 

John Brown Fort 25 

Cavalier Heights visitor 

contact station 15 

Harpers Ferry place in 

history exhibit 20 

Black Voices exhibit 15 

Storer College exhibit 15 

Civil War exhibit (Bldg. 3) 12 

Civil War exhibit (Bldg. 15) 15 

Lewis & Clark exhibit 12 

Natural history exhibit 10 

Burton Jewelry store 

furnished exhibit 4 

James Taylor furnished 

exhibit 4 

Officers' Quarters furnished 

exhibit 4 

Harper House 1st floor 

furnished exhibit 4 

Harper House 2nd floor 

furnished exhibit 4 

Harper House basement 

furnished exhibit 4 

information would be systematically analyzed 

to watch for trends. If trends indicate substantial change, the range of management 

actions that might be undertaken could 

include the following: 

46 
Introduction 

• providing additional seasonal transit 

access to popular destinations to reduce 

traffic and crowding and to help disperse 

use at peak times 

• encouraging visitors to walk between 

transit stops to disperse use and improve 

visitor experiences 

• using various orientation and information 

approaches to encourage visitors to come 

during less crowded times (daily and 

seasonally) or to visit less popular areas in 

the national historical park 

More specific indicators and standards would 

be established by NPS staff to monitor wear 

and tear in historic structures. 

Visitor Portal Zone 

All visitors are encouraged to enter the 

national historical park through the relatively 

small Visitor Portal Zone; therefore, it has the 

highest density of visitors. Levels of use would 

be primarily controlled by the physical 

capacity of facilities, such as the restrooms, 

parking lot, and visitor contact station. 

The parking lot on Cavalier Heights has 

spaces for 900 vehicles and is rarely filled 

except for special events. General information 

would continue to be collected, such as 

visitation trends, visitor complaints, parking 

problems, crowding in the contact station, 

vandalism, increase in law enforcement 

incidents, accidents, waste quantity, and 

requests for special uses. If trends indicate 

substantial change, the range of management 

actions that might be undertaken could 

include additional transportation studies and 

possible modifications of facilities. 

Adaptive Use Zone 

At destinations and features within the 

moderate-use Adaptive Use Zone, levels of 

use are expected to rise because of changes 

proposed in the alternatives that would attract 

more visitors. General information would 

continue to be collected, such as visitation 

trends, visitor complaints, crowding in the 

exhibit rooms, and vandalism. This information would be systematically analyzed to 

watch for trends. If trends indicate substantial 

change, the range of management actions that 

might be undertaken could include increasing 

transportation studies and possible modifications of facilities or structure interiors. More 

specific indicators and standards would be 

established to monitor wear and tear in 

historic structures. 

Cultural Landscape Zone 

Areas in the Cultural Landscape Zone 

generally have the physical capacity to absorb 

visitor use and still maintain less crowded 

experiences for visitors while meeting desired 

conditions. Some trailheads would be provided and trails could connect this zone with 

other zones. Parking would not be allowed in 

undesignated areas. 

Indicators in this zone may include the 

condition of natural soundscapes and visible 

impacts, such as the presence of visitorcreated trails, trash, and noxious plants. 

Indicators would be monitored to ensure that 

desired resource prescription standards are 

met. Resource management plans will contain 

details for monitoring. Types of management 

actions that may be undertaken in this zone to 

address changes in resource conditions, and 

possibly affecting visitor distribution and 

behavior, include 

• defining road and parking area edges so 

that parking is limited to designated 

locations 

• improving trail delineation or hardening 

trails 

• providing restrooms 

• removing invasive plants 

47 
CHAPTER 2: ALTERNATIVES,INCLUDING THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

Archeological Preservation Zone 

The Archeological Preservation Zone would 

be applied to mostly low-use areas where 

some self-sustaining natural processes are 

allowed to exist. Indicators monitored in this 

zone may include the number of visitors at 

one time at popular destinations, the condition of resources, visible impacts such as the 

presence of visitor-created trails, unplanned 

widening of trails, presence of invasive plants, 

and visitor experiences. A combination of 

indicators would be monitored in specific 

popular or resource sensitive areas to ensure 

that desired resource conditions are 

maintained. 

The range of management actions that might 

be undertaken to address changes in resource 

conditions include 

• defining trails 

• removing trails and closing areas to use to 

allow rehabilitation of damaged areas 

• removing invasive plants 

• expanding educational programs 

(especially those emphasizing leave-notrace practices). 

Scenic/Natural Preservation Zone 

Management of this low-use zone would 

emphasize preservation of resources while 

allowing visitor use and enjoyment. NPS staff 

would monitor resource conditions, visitor 

use, and trends in this zone. Specific resource 

and visitor experience monitoring would be 

conducted. 

Indicators in this zone might include the 

condition of important resources (meadow 

condition, riparian communities, indicator 

species, soil erosion, vegetation cover, historic 

sites, water quality, natural soundscape), 

visible impacts (presence of social trails, trash, 

invasive or illegal plants), and visitor experience values (such as encounter rates, human 

or stock excrement and aesthetics). A combination of indicators would be monitored in 

specific popular or resource sensitive areas to 

ensure that desired resource conditions are 

maintained and desired visitor experiences 

achieved. 

The range of management actions that might 

be undertaken to address changes in resource 

conditions or visitor experiences include 

• redesigning trails 

• restoration of areas of soil and vegetation 

damage 

• removing invasive plants 

• expanding educational programs 

(especially those emphasizing leave-notrace practices) 

• instituting a permit system to reduce or 

shift use 

PRESERVATION TREATMENTS IN 

RELATION TO THE ALTERNATIVES 

Many of the buildings and structures, 

archeological resources, and landscapes 

identified require specific preservation 

treatments. The terms used to describe these 

actions have specific definitions and are 

described in The Secretary of the Interior's 

Standards and Guidelines for Archeology and 

Historic Preservation. That document defines 

the principles that federal agencies must 

follow when they stabilize or alter historic 

buildings, landscapes or sites. The secretary’s 

Treatment Standards with Guidelines for 

Historic Properties and Guidelines for Cultural 

Landscapes are also useful for determining 

preservation treatments. Of the four levels of 

treatment, preservation, rehabilitation, and 

restoration are proposed in this GMP/EIS. 

Preservation is the process of applying 

measures necessary to sustain existing form, 

integrity and materials of a historic property. 

Work includes stabilizing the property and 

focuses on ongoing maintenance and repair of 

historic materials and features. Preservation 

maintains the character of the resource. Most 

48 
Introduction 

49 

of the activity that takes place on the 

battlefields today is preservation; buildings, 

monuments, and landscapes are stabilized and 

repaired to maintain their existing character. 

Preservation is the only treatment appropriate 

for archeological resources. 

Rehabilitation makes possible compatible 

uses for properties through repair, alteration 

and addition while preserving significant 

historic features that convey historical values. 

Rehabilitation identifies, protects, retains, and 

preserves historic features. Changes that have 

acquired significance in their own right are 

generally retained and preserved. Historic 

features that have been changed or have 

deteriorated may be repaired. Rehabilitation 

could also allow for the replacement of 

missing historic features like fences. Finally, 

rehabilitation permits alterations and 

additions for new use as long as the historic 

appearance and character are retained. 

Restoration is the act or process of accurately 

depicting the form, features, and character of 

a property as it appeared at a particular period 

of time by means of the removal of features 

from other periods in its history and reconstruction of missing features from the 

restoration period. The limited and sensitive 

upgrading of mechanical, electrical, and 

plumbing systems and other code required 

work to make properties functional is 

appropriate within a restoration project. 

MANAGEMENT PRESCRIPTIONS 

The building blocks for reaching an approved 

plan for managing a national park system unit 

are the management prescriptions and the 

alternatives. All are developed within the 

scope of the national historical park's 

purpose, significance, mandates, and 

legislation. 

Management prescriptions are descriptions of 

desired future conditions for national historical park resources and visitor experiences in 

different areas of the park. The management 

prescriptions identify the widest range of 

potential appropriate resource conditions, 

visitor experiences, and facilities that fall 

within the scope of the national historical 

park's purpose, significance, and special 

mandates. Seven sets of management 

prescriptions have been identified for the 

national historical park. 

The management prescriptions are presented 

in table 3. Visitor experiences, resource conditions, and appropriate activities and facilities are described for each. These prescriptions were presented in Newsletter #2. They 

were developed as a result of this planning 

effort and therefore are not applied to the noaction alternative. In formulating the alternatives, the management prescriptions were 

placed in different locations or configurations 

on a map of the national historical park 

according to the overall intent (concept) of 

each alternative. 
CHAPTER 2: ALTERNATIVES,INCLUDING THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

TABLE 3. MANAGEMENT PRESCRIPTIONS

Desired Resource 

Conditions 

Desired Visitor 

Conditions/ Experiences Appropriate Facilities 

SCENIC/NATURAL PRESERVATION ZONE 

Existing natural conditions 

maintained and disturbed 

areas restored. 

Scenic viewsheds maintained. 

Eliminate existing modern 

roads where appropriate. 

Cultural resources receive 

appropriate preservation 

treatment. 

Nonnative species removed. 

Views to and from Harpers 

Ferry maintained. 

Guided and self-guided 

opportunities (e.g., hiking, 

fishing, nature viewing). 

Natural soundscape with 

relatively low ambient 

noise. 

Encounters with other visitors 

low to moderate, and low 

with NPS staff. 

Hiking is moderate to difficult. 

Primitive trails and historic 

road traces remain 

(convert traces to trails or 

allow administrative use 

only). 

New trails allowed where 

there is a demonstrated 

need and where scenic 

values are not affected. 

Limited parking at trailheads. 

Minimal interpretive media 

(unobtrusive waysides, 

exhibits). 

Restrooms. 

No utility towers unless 

adequately mitigated 

(utilities rerouted 

underground or out of 

national historical park 

where feasible). 

CULTURAL LANDSCAPE ZONE 

Wooded and open character 

such as woodlots, farms, 

battlefields. 

Reminiscent of the Civil War 

era or 19th century as a 

whole. 

Natural resources may be 

modified to emphasize 

historic landscapes and 

views or to prevent 

damage to cultural 

resources. 

Viewsheds offer appropriate 

historical context. 

Self-guided exploration aided 

by interpretive signs. 

Ranger-led tours and options. 

Natural appearing setting with 

opportunity for visitors to 

explore the open space of 

the battlefields. 

Quiet/contemplative 

atmosphere. 

Natural soundscape prevails 

the majority of the time. 

Encounters with other visitors 

low to moderate. 

Occasional special events 

must not detract from the 

landscape. 

Trails appropriate to the 

setting (hardened to 

prevent resource impacts, 

if necessary, but with an 

unobtrusive appearance). 

Wayside exhibits. 

Farm roads. 

Parking at trailheads. 

Self-contained/low impact 

toilets. 

Leasing of historic structures 

and lands. 

Adaptively used historic 

structures. 

50 
Introduction 

Desired Resource Desired Visitor 

Conditions Conditions/ Experiences Appropriate Facilities 

HISTORIC STRUCTURE ZONE 

Appearance of a 19th century 

community. 

Modern intrusions removed to 

the extent possible. 

Re-create the activity of an 

“alive” town. 

Natural resources may be 

modified to reflect the 

19th century. 

Yards and landscaping 

appropriate to the period 

of the structures and/or 

the neighboring town. 

Vehicle access minimized. 

Adaptive use of interiors 

appropriate. 

Visitor able to immerse self in 

19th century town. 

High level of activity and life. 

High level of encounters with 

other visitors and NPS 

staff. 

Guided and self-guided 

activities. 

Interpretation/orientation/ 

exhibits occur inside 

buildings as well as 

outside. 

Occasional special events and 

living history 

demonstrations. 

Human-related sounds prevail.

New structures developed 

only where there is a 

demonstrated need (built 

with sympathetic 

architecture). 

Utilities hidden or placed 

underground. 

Leasing and adaptive reuse of 

historic structures is 

appropriate. 

Contemporary and period 

exhibits. 

Alternative transportation 

sites. 

Regulated parking. 

ARCHEOLOGICAL 

PRESERVATION ZONE 

Archeological resources 

stabilized and preserved. 

Landscape managed to limit 

disturbance of 

archeological features. 

Place of reflection/quiet/ 

contemplation. 

Guided and self-guided tours. 

High level of interpretation to 

promote understanding. 

Low to medium encounters 

among visitor groups. 

Human-related sounds may 

detract from natural 

soundscape in some 

portions of zone. 

Waysides. 

Low-impact, naturalappearing trails. 

No new roads. 

Trailhead (with restrooms, 

parking, fee box, 

brochures). 

VISITOR PORTAL ZONE 

Natural resources modified for 

visitor use and services. 

Potential reuse of historic 

structures/properties. 

Visitor feels welcomed/invited 

to partake in the national 

historical park. 

Managed entry experience 

that says visitor has 

entered the national 

historical park. 

High level of NPS presence. 

High level of encounters with 

other visitors and NPS 

staff. 

Readily accessible personal 

and nonpersonal services 

(orientation/information). 

Occasional moderate to high 

level of noise. 

Easy access to site and 

transportation. 

Human-related sound prevails.

Fee collection. 

Compatible new construction 

allowed. 

Facilities (e.g., parking). 

Restrooms, picnic tables / 

shelters, information / 

regulatory signs / bulletin 

boards, roads, sidewalks, 

amphitheater, visitor 

contact / visitor center). 

Transportation hub facilities. 

51 
CHAPTER 2: ALTERNATIVES,INCLUDING THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

52 

Desired Resource 

Conditions 

Desired Visitor 

Conditions/ Experiences Appropriate Facilities 

ADAPTIVE USE ZONE 

Historic structures would be 

preserved and interpreted. 

Reuse of existing historic 

structures and empty 

buildings preferred. 

Located away from sensitive 

sites. 

Low impact on community 

Natural resources may be 

modified. 

New construction is 

appropriately scaled to 

surroundings. 

Visitors would be able to stroll 

through an area of 

preserved historic and 

modern structures, 

pleasant landscaped 

lawns. 

Structures not used for 

administration purposes 

could be open for 

interpretive purposes or 

placed in the historic 

leasing program. 

Quiet, low paced visitor 

experience. 

Occasional guided tours but 

mostly self-guided 

exploration of building 

exteriors. 

Soundscape is typical of an 

urban setting. 

New structures allowed must 

be compatible with the 

existing setting. 

Parking, pathways, and access 

roads compatible with the 

existing setting. 

Appropriate landscaping for 

location. 

Interpretive signs provide 

most interpretation. 

Staff housing in historic 

structures. 

NPS offices and leased space 

is appropriate. 

FACILITY MANAGEMENT ZONE 

Landscape highly modified to 

support zone activities —

vegetation used for 

screening. 

Few natural resources 

remaining. 

Occasional high noise levels. 

No cultural or sensitive natural 

resources. 

Allows some facility 

expansion. 

Sensitive to surroundings, 

especially to residential 

areas. 

Not for visitor use. Appropriate facilities to the 

operation of the national 

historical park (e.g., access 

roads, fences, shops, 

lighting, materials storage, 

“boneyard,” parking, 

offices, emergency services 

cache, vehicle storage, 

recycling facility, fuel 

storage). 

Must have easy delivery 

access. 

Must have adequate utility 

access. 
Introduction 

FORMULATION OF 

THE ALTERNATIVES 

The alternatives in this general management 

plan are different scenarios that could be 

fashioned with the management prescriptions 

available. Each of the alternatives has an 

overall management concept and a 

description of how different areas, or zones, 

of the national historical park would be 

managed (management prescriptions and 

related actions). The concept for each 

alternative gives planners an idea of what the 

alternative is going to look like. Management 

zones might be larger or smaller and in 

different locations in different alternatives, 

depending on the overall concept for each 

alternative. This Draft General Management 

Plan/ Environmental Impact Statement 

presents three alternatives, including the 

National Park Service's preferred alternative, 

for future management of Harpers Ferry 

National Historical Park. Alternative 1, the 

"no-action" alternative that presents a continuation of existing management direction, is 

included as a baseline for comparing the 

consequences of implementing each alternative. The "action" alternatives are 

alternative 2 (the preferred alternative) and 

alternative 3. These action alternatives present 

different ways to manage resources and visitor 

use and improve facilities and the 

infrastructure at the national historical park. 

These alternatives embody the range of what 

the public and the National Park Service want 

to see accomplished with regard to cultural 

resource conditions, natural resource conditions, and visitor use and experience at 

Harpers Ferry National Historical Park. The 

actual configurations for each action alternative were developed by overlaying the 

management prescriptions (described later) 

on a map of the national historical park. 

As noted previously in the "Guidance for the 

Planning Effort" section, the National Park 

Service would continue to follow existing 

agreements and servicewide mandates, laws, 

and policies regardless of the alternatives 

considered in this plan. These mandates and 

policies are not repeated in this chapter. 

The alternatives focus on what resource 

conditions and visitor uses and opportunities 

should be at the national historical park rather 

than on details of how these conditions and 

uses/experiences should be achieved. Thus, 

the alternatives do not include many details 

on resource or visitor use management. The 

no-action alternative is included to form a 

baseline for comparison in the General 

Management Plan / Environmental Impact 

Statement. 

More detailed plans or studies will be required before most conditions proposed in 

the alternatives are achieved. The implementation of any alternative also depends on 

future funding and environmental compliance. This plan does not guarantee that money 

will be forthcoming. The plan establishes a 

vision of the future that will guide day-to-day 

and year-to-year management of the national 

historical park, but full implementation could 

take many years. 

All alternatives to be considered in this 

general management plan must be consistent 

with and contribute to sideboards within 

which all management actions must fall. These 

sideboards are the purpose and significance 

statements along with the mission goal. All 

alternatives must also be within NPS legal 

mandates and park policies. 

The alternatives in this general management 

plan would provide for resource protection 

and visitor use. Resource conditions, visitor 

experience, and appropriate activities and 

facilities are discussed in each alternative. The 

actions common to all alternatives, by area, 

are described in table 4.

53 
CHAPTER 2: ALTERNATIVES,INCLUDING THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

TABLE 4. ACTIONS COMMON TO ALL ALTERNATIVES

TOPIC ACTIONS 

LOWER TOWN 

Cultural Resources Assess all buildings for NRHP eligibility and nominate if eligible 

Conduct section 106 review for all activities potentially affecting historic pro

Natural Resources Allow use of nonnative vegetation only where necessary and appropriate to Visitor Experience Encourage use of visitor surveys to assess visitor satisfaction 

Improve Appalachian National Scenic Trail marking within the national histor

Provide pedestrian access to all national historical park areas Retain transit facility (turnaround, shelter) Maintain NPS control and oversight of all interpretive activities Provide interpretive panels throughout national historical park(“Books on WThe Potomac Heritage National Scenic Trail along the river could become a l

Potoma Wayside, and Harpers Ferry. 

NPS Operations Continue to make public facilities compliant with ADA Accessibility guideline

Maintain control and oversight of how buildings are used and changed Continue to upgrade facilities and structures to meet ADA needs 

FEDERAL 

ARMORY 

Cultural Resources Restore train station to 1931appearance and adaptively used as train/commu

visitor information and collection point for entrance fees 

Natural Resources Remove hazardous and nonnative trees Visitor Experience Provide quiet contemplative experience 

Provide primarily self-guided tours with occasional ranger-led activities Include activities such as hiking, observing nature, contemplation, etc. 

VIRGINIUS & 

HALL’S ISLAND 

Cultural Resources Manage national historical park for preservation of archeological resources 

Natural Resources Protect wetlands and state species of concern 

Remove hazard and nonnative trees 

Visitor Experience Include activities such as hiking, observing nature, etc. 

Provide quiet contemplative experience Provide primarily self-guided tours Provide nearby bus access 

54 
Table 4. Actions C

TOPIC ACTIONS 

LOUDOUN 

HEIGHTS 

Cultural Resources Stabilize and preserve earthworks Natural Resources Identify and eradicate invasive species: implement IPM (integrated pest mana

vegetation to maintain trails and remove hazard trees a on Appalachian TraiActively manage to maintain natural resources 

Visitor Experience Recreational activities (hiking, fishing, observing nature, etc.) 

Maintain existing trails Opportunities for solitude No toilets/drinking water Provide only private vehicle access 

NPS Operations Continue cooperation with Appalachian Trail entities 

Maintain existing trails 

MARYLAND 

HEIGHTS 

Cultural Resources Stabilize and preserve cultural features 

Natural Resources Identify and eradicate invasive species; implement IPM Visitor Experience Provide pedestrian access only; maintain trails and historic roads 

Maintain directional and interpretive signs 

Primitive recreational activities (hiking, observing natural scenery, wildlife, etOpportunities for solitude No private vehicle access allowed No toilets/drinking water 

SHORT HILL 

Cultural Resources Stabilize and preserve cultural features Natural Resources Identify and eradicate invasive species, implement IPM Visitor Experience No vehicles allowed, pedestrian-only access 

Maintain directional and interpretive signs No on-site interpretation Opportunities for solitude Primitive recreational activities (cross-country hiking, observing nature etc.) No toilets/drinking water The Potomac Heritage National Scenic Trail along the river could become a l

Potoma Wayside, and Harpers Ferry. 

NPS Operations Visitation discouraged 

Manage as natural area 

55 
CHAPTER 2: ALTERNATIVES,INCLUDING THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

TOPIC ACTIONS 

BOLIVAR 

HEIGHTS 

Cultural Resources Maintain as a battlefield landscape 

Natural Resources Maintain battlefield landscape through agricultural lease and vista clearing Visitor Experience Maintain parking and trails 

Provide wayside interpretive signs 

CAMP HILL 

Cultural Resources Assess all buildings for National Register of Historic Places eligibility and nom

Conduct section 106 review for all activities potentially affecting historic pro

Natural Resources Allow use of nonnative vegetation only where necessary and appropriate to Visitor Experience Encourage use of visitor surveys to assess visitor satisfaction 

Improve Appalachian Trail marking through town Provide pedestrian access to all national historical park areas Possible connections to regional bike path Maintain NPS control and oversight of all interpretive activities, regardless of Move Appalachian Trail and Potomac Heritage National Scenic Trail offices to 

NPS Operations Continue to make public facilities compliant with ADA Accessibility guideline

Maintain NPS control and oversight of how buildings are used and changed Maintain campus environment 

CAVALIER 

HEIGHTS Visitor Experience Pave stabilized turf overflow parking 

POTOMAC 

FRONTAGE 

Natural Resources Remove hazard and nonnative trees Visitor Experience Fishing, observing nature, hiking 

Access by personal vehicle or hiking Occasional ranger-led tours 

NASH FARM 

POTOMAC 

TERRACE 

Natural Resources Maintain natural area conditions 

SCHOOLHOUSE 

RIDGE 

Cultural Resources Maintain as a battlefield landscape Natural Resources Maintain battlefield landscape through agricultural lease and vista clearingVisitor Experience Maintain parking, trails, and restrooms, and provide wayside interpretive exhNPS Operations Encourage visitation; leave some areas natural 

56 
Table 4. Actions C

57 

TOPIC ACTIONS 

BULL FALLS/ 

SHENANDOAH 

CITY 

Cultural Resources Identify and evaluate cultural resources 

Natural Resources Preserve viewshed from river and maintain natural conditions Visitor Experience No on-site interpretation 

MURPHY FARM Cultural Resources Protect Civil War earthworks 

Natural Resources Manage nonagricultural lands for natural processes Visitor Experience Access by hiking trail 

Interpret Civil War earthworks Offer occasional interpretive tours 

POTOMA 

WAYSIDE 

Natural Resources Modify to allow recreational experience 

Manage nonrecreational areas for natural resource preservation 

Visitor Experience The Potomac Heritage National Scenic Trail along the river could become a l

Potoma Wayside, and Harpers Ferry 
CHAPTER 2: ALTERNATIVES,INCLUDING THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

IDENTIFICATION OF THE 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE 

The development of a preferred alternative 

involves evaluating the alternatives with the 

use of an objective analysis process called 

"Choosing by Advantages" or CBA. Through 

this process, the planning team identifies and 

compares the relative advantages of each 

alternative according to a set of factors. The 

benefits or advantages of each alternative are 

compared for each of the following CBA 

factors: 

• provision of opportunities for quality 

visitor experiences 

• availability of visitor programs and 

services(information, orientation, exhibits 

and programs 

• ease of access to all park areas for all 

visitors 

• availability of resources to public 

• protection of cultural and natural 

resources 

• protection of historic structures 

• protection of historic 

landscapes/viewsheds 

• protection of museum collections 

• preservation of natural resources 

• improvement of NPS operations 

(maintenance operations, administrative 

efficiency, security/law enforcement) 

The relationships between the advantages and 

costs of each alternative are established. This 

information is used to combine the best 

attributes of the preliminary alternatives into 

the preferred alternative. This alternative gives 

the National Park Service the greatest overall 

benefits for each point listed above for the 

most reasonable cost. 

DEVELOPMENT OF COST ESTIMATES 

To make wise planning and management 

decisions for the national historical park, NPS 

decision-makers and the public must consider 

an overall picture of the advantages, 

disadvantages, and general costs of the 

alternatives, including the no-action 

alternative (alternative 1). By including the noaction alternative, a comparison can be made 

between the action alternatives and current 

national historical park management 

practices. 

It is important that the cost estimates contain 

the same elements and that they be developed 

with the same general assumptions so that 

there can be consistency and comparability 

among alternatives. The following caveats 

apply to the costs presented throughout this 

general management plan. 

• The costs are presented as estimates 

and allow for flexibility in application 

of components. 

• These costs are not appropriate for 

budgeting purposes. 

• The costs presented have been 

developed using industry standards to 

the extent available. 

• Actual costs will be determined at a 

later date, considering the design of 

facilities, identification of detailed 

resource protection needs, and 

changing visitor expectations. 

• Approval of the general management 

plan does not guarantee that funding 

or staffing for proposed actions will be 

available. 

• Full implementation of the general 

management plan may be many years 

in the future. 

COST ESTIMATE COMPONENTS 

Annual Operating Costs 

• Annual national historical park 

operating costs include staff salary 

and benefits, equipment, 

maintenance, utilities, monitoring, 

contract services, and space rental. 

58 
Introduction 

59 

One-Time Costs 

One-time costs for the alternatives include 

• major rehabilitation or replacement of 

existing facilities and infrastructure 

• new development (including NPS 

transportation infrastructure costs) 

• interpretive media (audiovisual 

programs, exhibits, wayside exhibits, 

publications) 

• resource management and visitor 

services (inventories of resources and 

visitors, implementation planning, 

compliance) 

• other significant one-time costs, such 

as removing buildings, buying 

transportation equipment, restoring 

resources, or acting on specific 

implementation plans 

• reports, studies, archeological 

excavations, and other research with 

substantial costs 

NPS Facilities Model 

The National Park Service has developed 

facility models for several types of facilities, 

such as visitor centers and maintenance 

facilities, based on a number of factors unique 

to each park system unit. This model was used 

in the development of cost estimates for 

Harpers Ferry National Historical Park. 

LAND ACQUISITION 

This plan does not propose acquisition of any 

lands outside the already authorized 

boundary. Thus no land acquisition costs are 

provided in this plan 
ALTERNATIVE 1: NO ACTION 

GENERAL 

Under the no-action alternative, Harpers 

Ferry National Historical Park would 

continue the current management strategies 

and practices now in place. Management 

would continue to follow the intent and spirit 

of the 1980 Development Concept Plan, the last 

parkwide plan. Visitors would not notice any 

changes in appearance or operations because 

management would continue to offer the same 

visitor experiences and preserve the national 

historical park's existing cultural, natural, and 

scenic values. No action does not imply or 

direct the discontinuation of any existing 

programs or services. 

No boundary adjustments are proposed in 

this alternative. 

Because Harpers Ferry National Historical 

Park does not have a general management 

plan, zoning (as described under the action 

alternatives) is not discussed. 

SITE-SPECIFIC ACTIONS 

Lower Town 

Restored historic structure exteriors would 

continue to present a 19th century town. The 

interiors would continue to be used for static 

interpretive displays and NPS administration. 

The main bookstore operated by Harpers 

Ferry Historical Association would remain in 

Lower Town. The national historical park’s 

second information center would remain in 

the Master Armorer's house. Occasional 

special events would be held on the Green. 

Visitors would use the national historical park 

transportation system to access Lower Town 

from the visitor contact station on Cavalier 

Heights. Private vehicles would drive through 

Lower Town, but parking space would 

continue to be limited. 

All cultural and natural resource management 

actions including building preservation and 

maintenance would continue according to 

existing laws and policies. 

Public access to backyards behind historic 

buildings would continue in this alternative. 

The NPS administrative space would remain 

on upper floors. Access to the space by the 

general visiting public would be limited. 

Museum exhibits and interpretive panels 

would remain in their current locations and 

would be periodically updated but not 

expanded into new areas of historic buildings. 

Static displays such as the General Store 

would remain. The bookstore and information center would remain in their current 

locations on Shenandoah Street. 

Some museum objects would continue to be 

used in exhibits and displays for interpretive 

purposes in areas such as the Master 

Armorer's house and the Frederick A. Roeder 

confectionary as identified in the Collections 

Management Plan. Specific structures such as 

the John Brown Museum, the Gerard Bond 

Wager Building, the John C. Unseld Building, 

and the William Anderson building would 

continue to house exhibits and offices. Curatorial and storage functions would remain in 

multiple buildings around Lower Town and 

throughout the national historical park until a 

new regional collection curatorial facility has 

been constructed. At that time curatorial and 

storage functions would be removed to the 

new facility. 

The national historical park would continue 

its commitment to upgrade facilities and 

structures to accommodate visitors with 

disabilities in conformance with the 

Americans with Disabilities Act.

60 
Ap

p

alachia

n

Trail

Appalachian

Trail

P. otomac Heritage National Scenic Trail

.

Potomac Heritage National Scenic Trail

671 

67 

27 

340 

340 

Harpers Ferry

Road

Visitor 

Center 

WEST 

VIRGINIA 

MARYLAND 

VIRGINIA 

Wes

t Virginia 

Virginia

Bakerton Road 

Keep Tryst Rd 

Bloomery

Road

H

arp

ers Ferry Road

Sandy Hook Road

BOLIVAR 

HARPERS 

FERRY 

POTOMAC RIVER

POTOMAC RIVER

SHENANDOAH RIVER

0 0.5 1Mile 

North 

c'HRSNQHBRSQTBSTQDRVNTKCBNMSHMTDSNAD

 L@HMS@HMDCOQDRDQUDC


c-DVKX@BPTHQDCOQNODQSHDR-@RG%@QL,TQOGX

 %@QL2BGNNKGNTRD1HCFD	VNTKCADHMSDFQ@SDC

 HMSNSGDO@QJRSQTBSTQDRQDRSNQDCNQQDG@AHKHS@SDC

 K@MCRB@ODRQDRSNQDCMNMBNMSQHATSHMFED@STQDR

 QDLNUDC


c"@LO'HKKK@MCRB@ODVNTKCADLNCHEHDCSN

 QDOQDRDMS@B@LOTR@SLNROGDQD


c&Q@MCUHDV2BGNNKVNTKCADQDG@AHKHS@SDC


c QBGDNKNFHB@KQDRNTQBDRVNTKCBNMSHMTDSN

 ADRS@AHKHYDC


c#HQDBSHNM@KHMSDQOQDSHUDRHFMR@KNMFSQ@HKRVNTKC

 ADTOFQ@CDC


JACKSON’S 

LEFT FLANK 

JACKSON’S 

RIGHT FLANK 

NASH 

FARM 

UNION 

SKIRMISH 

LINE 

FEDERAL 

ARMORY 

LOWER TOWN 

MURPHY 

FARM 

MARYLAND HEIGHTS 

SHORT HILL 

POTOMA 

WAYSIDE 

VIRGINIUS/HALL’S ISLANDS 

LOUDOUN HEIGHTS 

POTOMAC 

FRONTAGE 

POTOMAC 

TERRACE 

CAVALIER 

HEIGHTS 

BOLIVAR 

HEIGHTS 

SCHOOLHOUSE 

RIDGE 

CAMP HILL

Draft General Management Plan 

Harpers Ferry National Historical Park 

5NITED3TATES$EPARTMENTOFTHE)NTERIORs.ATIONAL0ARK3ERVICE

DSC / July 08 / 385 / 20034

Alternative 1 

No Action Legend 

Park Boundary 

Rail Road 

Road 

Trail 

Bus Route 

Alternative 1: No Action 

Current management strategy to provide a 

semblance of the historic landscape would 

continue. Uniformed rangers would be 

present to answer visitor questions and 

provide information. NPS-led activities would 

occur infrequently. 

The Lower Town bus pavilion would remain 

in its current location. Visitors would continue to use the facility as the main drop-off 

for visiting Lower Town. NPS staff would 

continue to work with the city to regulate 

vehicular traffic as needed. Private, NPS, and 

commercial vehicles would continue to intrude on the historic setting. Pedestrians 

would continue to walk in the streets as if 

under the impression that streets are closed to 

traffic. 

Access from the John Brown Monument to 

the armory grounds would remain unchanged, 

using a wooden staircase from the monument 

on top of the 1890s railroad embankment to 

the armory grounds below. The primitive trail 

around the armory grounds between the river 

and the embankment would remain. Some 

trees and brush would continue to be 

removed to open views of the grounds. 

Archeological research would be limited to 

that necessary to assess the condition of the 

subsurface remains and to identify foundation 

walls and corners. Limited excavation would 

occur for interpretive or demonstration 

purposes. 

The historic train station would remain a 

MARC commuter station, Amtrak stop, and 

an NPS entrance fee collection point. The 

station parking lot would continue to serve 

mostly Amtrak/MARC commuters during the 

week. 

Potomac Frontage 

The Potomac Frontage area would continue 

to be managed for its cultural resource values. 

Conditions of the Armory canal, dam, power 

station, and associated structures would 

continue to be monitored and actions to 

prevent the loss or failure of historic fabric 

would be addressed. 

The Armory canal would be maintained as an 

archeological preserve and natural area. 

Natural processes would continue in and 

along the Armory canal as long as the cultural 

resources were not impaired by such 

processes. 

Virginius and Hall’s Islands 

These islands would be managed for archeological preservation and natural values. 

In addition to identification and evaluation 

efforts, monitoring directed toward 

preserving in-situ deposits, some selective 

stabilization of foundations, mill races, and 

canal locks would continue. Vegetation 

management would continue to protect 

archeological features and sites. 

Existing trails would continue to be used by 

visitors for accessing the cultural and natural 

resources of the islands. Existing interpretive 

signs would also remain and could be supplemented by additional signs as archeological 

research dictated. 

Camp Hill 

The National Park Service (Harpers Ferry 

NHP, Harpers Ferry Center, and Mather 

Training Center) would continue to preserve 

and use the historic structures on Camp Hill 

that reflect the history of Storer College, the 

military presence of the first half of the 19th 

century, and more recent town history. A 

proposed dormitory for the Mather Training 

Center would be constructed if funding 

became available. 

The Storer College campus on Camp Hill 

would continue to be managed to reflect the 

atmosphere of the historic college. Adaptive 

reuse of historic buildings would continue. 

63 
CHAPTER 2: ALTERNATIVES,INCLUDING THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

Building exteriors would be preserved or 

restored to the earliest period of documentable appearance within their period of 

significance. 

The Shipley School would be rehabilitated in 

keeping with NPS preservation policy while a 

study of possible uses was undertaken. Should 

it be determined that this building, already 

condemned by federal authorities, was too 

costly to maintain, the National Park Service 

would follow the procedures necessary to 

remove it, in consultation with the West 

Virginia state historic preservation officer. 

Most visitor information on the history of 

Camp Hill and Storer College would continue 

to be in Lower Town. A limited number of 

additional interpretive panels on-site would 

explain the history of the area or structures. 

NPS headquarters would be in the Brackett, 

Morrell, and possibly Lockwood houses. The 

NPS maintenance facility would remain in its 

current location. 

Visitors would access Camp Hill on their own 

initiative. Public access to the interior of 

historic structures, such as the Lockwood 

House, Brackett House, and others, would 

occur only for official business. 

Bolivar Heights 

Bolivar Heights would be maintained in its 

current condition as a battlefield site. The 

historic events that took place would continue 

to be interpreted with wayside exhibits. 

The viewshed would be maintained in a 

semblance of its historic condition. Some 

trimming of vegetation could be done to open 

Civil War line-of-fire clearings. 

Civil war earthworks, camps, and remnant 

structures would continue to be preserved 

and protected from damage or destruction. 

Schoolhouse Ridge 

The battlefield landscape and its viewshed 

within the national historical park would be 

maintained through the use of agricultural 

leasing and natural resource preservation 

policy. 

Schoolhouse Ridge would be accessible to the 

public with visitor amenities such as trails, 

parking areas, and wayside exhibits provided. 

Cultural resources such as Civil War earthworks, camps, and remnant structures would 

continue to be protected from damage or 

destruction. Nonhistoric structures would 

continue to molder or be removed if 

determined to be a safety hazard. 

Nash Farm 

Buildings at the Nash Farm would be maintained for NPS use and closed to the public. 

Visitors would be allowed to walk the 

grounds, but no visitor amenities such as 

restrooms would be provided. 

Potomac Terrace 

Grandview School under the no-action 

alternative would be used by the Resource 

Protection and Public Management Division. 

The exterior of the building would be 

preserved. The natural areas behind the 

school would be maintained. 

Cavalier Heights 

Cavalier Heights would continue to be the 

main entry point for the national historical 

park. The entrance station, visitor information 

facility, and small bookstore outlet would 

remain and serve their current functions. The 

NPS transportation system would shuttle 

visitors between Cavalier Heights and the 

Lower Town. The bus maintenance facility 

would remain in its current location. 

64 
Alternative 1: No Action 

Murphy Farm 

Visitors would continue to access the Murphy 

Farm from Cavalier Heights by foot trail. No 

visitor amenities would be provided. 

Civil War earthworks would not be stabilized. 

The (1895-1910) foundation of John Brown's 

Fort would undergo stabilization and 

continue to be interpreted. 

Continued management under the no-action 

alternative would result in the stabilization 

and preservation of the Chambers/Murphy 

farmhouse. The interior would be adaptively 

reused for NPS purposes such as staff or 

volunteers living quarters. Through the 

continued use of agricultural leasing, a 

semblance of the historic farm would be 

maintained. 

Maryland Heights, Loudoun 

Heights, and Short Hill 

Natural areas of Maryland Heights, Loudoun 

Heights, and Short Hill would be managed to 

maintain or enhance natural resource values. 

Preservation of cultural resources such as 

Civil War earthworks, camps, and remnant 

structures would continue. Nonhistoric 

structures would be allowed to molder unless 

they posed a safety hazard. At that point they 

would be removed. NPS staff would continue 

to use and maintain historic roads for maintenance and resource protection activities. 

Existing historic and scenic viewsheds on 

Maryland Heights would be maintained. 

Visitors would use existing trails, visit historic 

sites, view wayside exhibits and take in 

panoramic vistas. 

Development of the Potomac Heritage 

National Scenic Trail along the river could 

provide a link between Short Hill, Potoma 

Wayside and Harpers Ferry. 

Potoma Wayside 

Potoma Wayside would continue to be 

maintained by NPS staff as the primary 

takeout point on the Potomac River at 

Harpers Ferry. Limited public access for 

enjoyment of Piney Creek falls and river use 

would be provided. The access trail to the falls 

and river would be maintained for safety and 

resource protection. 

COST ESTIMATES 

The following applies to costs presented 

throughout this general management plan: 

• The costs are presented as estimates 

and allow for flexibility in application 

of components. 

• These costs are not appropriate for 

budgeting purposes. 

• The costs presented have been 

developed using industry standards to 

the extent available. 

• Actual costs will be determined at a 

later date, considering the design of 

facilities, identification of detailed 

resource protection needs, and 

changing visitor expectations. 

• Approval of the general management 

plan does not guarantee that funding 

or staffing for proposed actions will be 

available. 

• Full implementation of the general 

management plan may be many years 

in the future. 

Costs have been broken down into annual 

operating costs and one-time costs. All 

estimates are in 2007 dollars. 

Annual costs include the costs associated with 

ongoing maintenance, utilities, staffing, 

supplies and materials, and any leasing costs. 

This alternative would continue the staffing 

level of 92 full-time-equivalent positions or 

FTEs. 

65 
CHAPTER 2: ALTERNATIVES,INCLUDING THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

66 

One-time costs reflect the current absence of 

projects in the no-action alternative that have 

been approved at the NPS program level and 

assigned to a funding source. 

Annual operating costs: $ 6,400,000 

Includes 92 FTE positions 

Total one-time costs: $ 0 

Facility and non-facility cost: $ 0 

Other: $ 0 

Removal of buildings: $ 0 
ALTERNATIVE 2: PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE 

GENERAL 

Harpers Ferry National Historical Park would 

present 250 years of history at the site through 

exhibits at a new visitor center that provides 

an orientation to the site and encourages 

visitors to explore areas of the park that 

illustrate themes in park history. The park 

would be more easily accessible by round-thepark trail and an expanded transportation 

system that reaches most park locales in West 

Virginia. Park staff would bring life to the park 

by scheduling more festivals, events, and 

tours, and increasing the visibility of national 

historical park staff. Park offices would 

remain on Camp Hill in rehabilitated historic 

structures and a satellite maintenance facility 

would be constructed somewhere near the 

Murphy Farm or Schoolhouse Ridge to 

obviate the need for enlarging the existing 

facility. A public/private consortium would be 

sought to rehabilitate and manage the historic 

Shipley School. 

Under this alternative, each location in the 

national historical park would be managed 

and interpreted to reflect the most significant 

period associated with it. For example, 

Schoolhouse Ridge would be managed to 

appear much as it did at the time of the Civil 

War while the Storer College area would be 

managed to appear as it did during its days as 

an educational institution, and Nash Farm 

would reflect a 1940s dairy farm appearance. 

Management activities would focus on the 

preservation of the resources as well as the 

presentation of the interpretive themes 

appropriate to each location. Visitors would 

receive a better understanding of certain 

events such as the Civil War at Harpers Ferry 

through a comprehensive Civil War auto tour 

and/or a trail system developed to connect 

outlying portions of the national historical 

park. Likewise, African American history in 

the national historical park would be elevated 

to its proper place by prominently exhibiting 

this history in buildings on Camp Hill. The 

Storer College and Niagara exhibits in Lower 

Town would be moved to Camp Hill. The 

NPS staff would work with partners 

throughout the tri-state area to promote 

protection of and visitation to the rich 

diversity of local history sites associated with 

Harpers Ferry in West Virginia, Maryland, 

and Virginia. 

The route of the NPS transportation system 

(the Park Explorer) would be expanded and 

shuttle visitors from the visitor center directly 

to the NPS site(s) they wish to visit, including 

parts of the Civil War battlefield and Camp 

Hill. NPS staff would work with the community to promote solutions to difficult 

parking and traffic circulation issues in Lower 

Town that would enhance the visitor 

experience while respecting the needs of 

downtown businesses. A round-the-park trail 

would be developed to connect all outlying 

portions of the national historical park. 

No boundary adjustments are proposed in 

this alternative. 

MANAGEMENT ZONING 

Historic Structure Zone 

As described under alternatives 2 and 3 this 

zone would be applied to Lower Town, 

including the pier remains of a historic bridge 

across the Potomac River and the retired 

Potomac Edison Hydroelectric Plant. 

Lower Town. Presenting the historic 

atmosphere and vitality of a living 19th 

century community in Lower Town would be 

accomplished through restored structures, 

authentic landscaping, restored interiors, 

period shops, and costumed interpreters. 

Additional venues, such as backyards, would 

be used for interpretation, living history 

67 
CHAPTER 2: ALTERNATIVES,INCLUDING THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

demonstrations, and display of animals such 

as a horse and carriage or mules. The section 

of the Appalachian National Scenic Trail that 

passes through the national historical park 

would be maintained to Appalachian Trail 

Conservancy standards. Improved trailside 

interpretive signs would be added north and 

south of the trail intersection to the 

Appalachian Trail Conservancy headquarters 

on Washington Street. The Appalachian 

National Scenic Trail, Potomac Heritage 

National Scenic Trail and The Lewis and 

Clark National Historical Trail would be 

interpreted in wayside exhibits in the Lower 

Town, to promote greater public awareness of 

these resources. 

The information center and bookstore would 

move to Cavalier Heights to better serve visitors and evoke a more accurate presentation 

of the 19th century historic town. A smaller 

bookstore outlet would be developed 

elsewhere in Lower Town. 

Historic building exteriors would remain 

unchanged from their current restored 

appearance. Unused first-floor interior spaces 

would be used for displays, exhibits, or the 

presentation of historic conditions such as 

former business establishments and offices. 

Changes to existing uses would also be 

expected. Second- and third-floor spaces 

would be used for exhibits or for seasonal staff 

housing. 

Increased accessibility and use of historic 

structures for interpretive purposes would 

provide additional opportunities for the 

display of museum collections. 

In The Green and Arsenal Square, the location 

of former prominent building foundations, 

could be capped with stone or use other 

interpretive methods to show the arrangement 

of former buildings. 

An enhanced interpretation and education 

program would be delivered by park staff and 

volunteers. Visitors would access Lower 

Town using the NPS transportation system. 

During large special events conducted by the 

National Park Service, town of Harpers Ferry, 

and Main Street Harpers Ferry, vehicles in the 

event area would be regulated by a traffic 

control plan. Emergency vehicle uses would 

have access at all times. 

The retired Potomac Edison Hydroelectric 

plant would be maintained and used for 

interpretation and other NPS purposes such 

as maintenance and preservation training. 

Additional work in the area of the Upper and 

Lower armory yards could include burying 

utility lines, stabilizing walls and foundations 

and providing for visitor safety. 

Adaptive Use Zone 

This zone would be applied to Grandview 

School and Camp Hill, except for the NPS 

maintenance facility. 

The interior of the Grandview school building 

would be adaptively reused by the NPS 

Resources Protection and Public Use 

Management Division. Vehicle bays and a 

small storage area would be added at this site 

complementing the building's appearance. 

Camp Hill. Management focus on Camp Hill 

would be to preserve and use the structures 

while increasing visitation and promoting, 

understanding of African American history 

that occurred on Camp Hill. 

The Lockwood House and immediate 

environs would be developed as a portal to 

attract pedestrian traffic from the Lower 

Town and Jefferson Rock. Trails would be 

improved, and interpretive waysides and a 

68 
Ap

p

alachia

n

Trail

Appalachia

n

Trail

P. otomac Heritage National Scenic Trail

.

Potomac Heritage National Scenic Trail

671 

67 

27 

340 

340 

Harpers Ferry

Road

Visitor 

Center 

WEST 

VIRGINIA 

MARYLAND 

VIRGINIA 

Wes

t Virginia 

Virginia

Bakerton Road 

Keep Tryst Rd 

Bloomery

Road

Harpers Ferry R

oad

Sandy Hook Road

BOLIVAR 

HARPERS 

FERRY 

POTOMAC RIVER

POTOMAC RIVER

SHENANDOAH RIVER

0 0.5 1Mile 

North 

JACKSON’S 

LEFT FLANK 

JACKSON’S 

RIGHT FLANK 

NASH 

FARM 

UNION 

SKIRMISH 

LINE 

FEDERAL 

ARMORY 

LOWER TOWN 

MURPHY 

FARM 

MARYLAND HEIGHTS 

SHORT HILL 

POTOMA 

WAYSIDE 

VIRGINIUS/HALL’S ISLANDS 

LOUDOUN HEIGHTS 

POTOMAC 

FRONTAGE 

POTOMAC 

TERRACE 

CAVALIER 

HEIGHTS 

BOLIVAR 

HEIGHTS 

SCHOOLHOUSE 

RIDGE 

CAMP HILL

Draft General Management Plan 

Harpers Ferry National Historical Park 

5NITED3TATES$EPARTMENTOFTHE)NTERIORs.ATIONAL0ARK3ERVICE

DSC / July 08 / 385 / 20035

Legend !LTERNATIVEs0REFERRED!LTERNATIVE

Rail Road 

Road 

Trail 

Bus Route 

2 1 

3 

4 

5 

8 

6 

7 

1. LOWER TOWN

c,TRDTLBNKKDBSHNMRVNTKCADLNUDCSN@MDV

 E@BHKHSXKNB@SHNMSNADCDSDQLHMDC	


 c'HRSNQHBENTMC@SHNMRVNTKCADNTSKHMDC


 c2D@RNM@K@MCC@HKXUDGHBKDQDRSQHBSHNMRVNTKCAD

 HLOKDLDMSDC


2. VIRGINIUS & HALL’S ISLAND

 c CCHSHNM@KATR@BBDRRVNTKCADBQD@SDCMD@QAX


3. CAMP HILL

 c3GD!Q@BJDSS@MC,NQQDKKGNTRDRVNTKCAD

 QDG@AHKHS@SDCENQO@QJGD@CPT@QSDQR


 c3GDL@HMSDM@MBDE@BHKHSXVNTKCADDWO@MCDC

 @MC@CCHSHNM@KR@SDKKHSDE@BHKHSHDRCDUDKNODC


 c3GDEHQRSEKNNQNESGD+NBJVNNC'NTRDVNTKC

 ADTRDCENQHMSDQOQDS@SHNM@MCSGDTOODQEKNNQ

 VNTKCADQDG@AHKHS@SDCENQNEEHBDRO@BD


ÿ
NASH FARM/POTOMAC TERRACE

 c(MSDQHNQRVNTKCADQDG@AHKHS@SDCENQ@M

 DMUHQNMLDMS@KDCTB@SHNMBDMSDQ


Ā
CAVALIER HEIGHTS

 c LTKSHOTQONRDUHRHSNQBDMSDQDMSQ@MBDBNLOKDW

 VNTKCADCDUDKNODC


 c MNTSCNNQ@LOGHSGD@SDQVNTKCADBNMRSQTBSDC


6
POTOMAC FRONTAGE

 c3GDB@M@KV@KKR@MCGD@CF@SDVNTKCADQDO@HQDC

 @MCSGDB@M@KQDV@SDQDC


 c3GDONVDQOK@MSVNTKCADQDG@AHKHS@SDCENQ

 HMSDQOQDSHUDTRD


Ă
POTOMA WAYSIDE

 c1HUDQ@BBDRRVNTKCADoG@QCDMDCpSNE@BHKHS@SD

 S@JDNTS


ă
LOUDOUN HEIGHTS

Management Zones  c "HUHK6@QNUDQKNNJVNTKCADCDUDKNODC


Adaptive Use 

Archeological Preservation 

Cultural Landscape 

Facility Management 

Historic Structure 

Scenic/Natural Preservation 

Visitor Portal 

Alternative 2: Preferred Alternative 

picnic area would be added. Public restrooms 

and first-floor interpretive exhibits would be 

built in the Lockwood House. These 

improvements to Camp Hill would make this 

part of the national historical park a 

destination area and support the presentation 

of African America history. 

Pedestrian circulation between the Lockwood 

House and Anthony Hall would be promoted. 

Buildings on the Storer campus, where 

possible, would be opened to expanded public 

interpretation in addition to ongoing NPS 

administrative functions. 

A study would be undertaken to determine 

the future office space needs of the Harpers 

Ferry National Historical Park, Harpers Ferry 

Center, Mather Training Center, Appalachian 

Trail Park Office, and the Potomac Heritage 

National Scenic Trail Office. 

The Shipley School would be rehabilitated 

and managed through a public/private 

partnership. Although the structure would no 

longer serve a park function, it would 

continue to be a historically significant local 

structure on the landscape. 

The National Park Service would restore 

Storer College buildings where sufficient 

information determined the extent and 

configuration of the structure. 

The Morrell and Bracket houses would be 

rehabilitated for administrative space. 

Additional office space would be available in 

the Lockwood House. 

Building exteriors would be stabilized or 

restored to the earliest period of 

documentable appearance within the national 

historical park’s period of significance. 

Visitors could access Camp Hill by an 

expanded route of the NPS transportation 

system (Park Explorer) or on hiking trails 

from the Lower Town. 

National Historical Park museum collections 

would be moved into a new planned regional 

museum collection curatorial facility to be 

located somewhere in the Harpers Ferry 

vicinity. 

A period lighting plan would be developed 

and implemented. The plan would be 

integrated into and be compatible with the 

historic campus and preserving the night sky. 

 

Cultural Landscape Zone 

This zone would be applied to sites of Civil 

War importance and African American and 

local settlement history. 

Bolivar Heights. This Civil War battlefield 

site would be maintained as part of the 

Harpers Ferry battlefield. Visitors would 

access the entrance to Bolivar Heights by an 

expanded route of the NPS transportation 

system (Park Explorer), or by a self-guided 

auto tour. Seasonal ranger-led interpretive 

walks or demonstrations would be held here. 

Wayside interpretive exhibits would provide 

understanding of the historic significance of 

the area from 1861 to 1865 and to reflect 

battle actions at this site. 

Line-of-fire clearings to Schoolhouse Ridge 

(avoiding development in the viewshed to the 

west) would be maintained to convey 

understanding of historic events. 

Civil War earthworks, camps, and remnant 

structures would be stabilized and protected. 

The current program of preservation and 

protection would continue. 

Schoolhouse Ridge. Civil War sites here 

would be managed as part of the Harpers 

Ferry battlefield. Through the continued use 

of NPS-managed agricultural leases and 

removal of nonnative vegetation, a semblance 

of the historic landscape would be restored. 

71 
CHAPTER 2: ALTERNATIVES,INCLUDING THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

After a program of evaluation of need and 

National Register of Historic Places eligibility, 

some buildings could be removed to enhance 

the historic setting and improve safety 

conditions. Impacts on any such buildings 

meeting national register criteria would be 

mitigated through consultation with the state 

historic preservation office and the Advisory 

Council on Historic Preservation. 

Foot trails would be established to important 

points of interest, and a pedestrian bridge or 

tunnel would be constructed to connect the 

north and south sections of Schoolhouse 

Ridge battlefield, ensuring safe passage of 

visitors wishing to cross U.S. 340. Wayside 

exhibits would be installed to interpret the 

Civil War history of the Schoolhouse Ridge 

battlefield sites. Seasonal ranger-led interpretive walks and living history programs would 

be held on site. Visitors would access Schoolhouse Ridge battlefield by an expanded route 

of the NPS transportation system (Park 

Explorer) or from trailhead parking areas. A 

line of field artillery pieces could be 

strategically placed on the battlefield. 

Facilities at the dilapidated former Jellystone 

campground would be removed and the land 

restored to a natural contour and managed 

under an agricultural lease. A small part of this 

area would be available as a primitive campsite 

for group camping. 

Harpers Ferry Caverns would be restored to 

natural conditions by removing man-made 

intrusions and restoring natural airflow. After 

a risk management assessment is completed, 

access to the cave for recreation and research 

may be allowed through the NPS permit 

system. 

Murphy Farm. The historic landscape of the 

Murphy Farm would be maintained through 

an NPS-managed agricultural lease. Visitors 

would access the Murphy Farm via an 

expanded route of the NPS transportation 

system (Park Explorer), a self-guided auto 

tour, or a walking trail. The trail on the farm 

would lead visitors to Civil War earthworks, 

an overlook of the Shenandoah River, and the 

former location of John Brown's Fort, a prominent site during the 1906 Niagara Movement 

Convention. Native American history would 

be interpreted on the farm. A paved parking 

area and restrooms would be provided at the 

farm. A small grouping of field artillery pieces 

could be strategically placed on the farm. 

The Chambers/Murphy farmhouse would be 

stabilized and preserved in its present 

condition and evaluated for adaptive reuse. 

The entire property would be inventoried for 

archeological and historic resources to 

identify all possible cultural resources. 

A preservation and protection program for the 

Civil War earthworks would be developed 

and implemented. The remnant foundation of 

John Brown's Fort would be stabilized and 

preserved. 

The Nash Farm. The Nash Farm would be 

restored as a mid-20th century farmscape and 

function as a small-scale resource education 

center with an outdoor laboratory used for 

day use and evening programs. 

The center would be operated by the National 

Park Service or a private nonprofit education 

partner. Group access to the farm would be by 

small bus with limited vehicle parking 

provided. The farm would primarily serve 

school children; however, the public would 

have opportunities to participate in formal 

and informal program offerings. 

Trails would be developed to connect the 

Nash Farm with Bolivar Heights and Lower 

Town. 

Archeological Preservation Zone 

This zone would preserve archeological 

resources in place. Under this alternative, it is 

applied to Virginius Island, Hall’s Island, the 

72 
Alternative 2: Preferred Alternative 

Armory grounds, and the Potomac Frontage 

(Armory canal). 

Virginius and Hall's Islands. An active program of stabilization and preservation of 

remnant structures would be conducted on 

the islands. Some structure foundations would 

be located and exposed through archeological 

testing. Excavation on Hall’s Island would be 

limited to exposing building foundations or 

other ruins providing interpretive and educational opportunities at this important historic 

site. 

NPS staff could mark foundations of buildings 

where sufficient information existed to 

determine the extent and configuration of the 

structure. 

Visitors would access the site from the Lower 

Town bus pavilion. Trails with wayside 

interpretation would guide visitors through 

the islands. 

The wetland along Shenandoah Street and 

Shoreline Drive would be protected and 

interpreted. Natural vegetation would be 

preserved, except where it was causing 

damage to cultural resources and needed to be 

removed. 

A pedestrian bridge to finish the Cavalier 

Heights to Lower Town trail would be 

constructed adjacent to the Shoreline Drive 

Bridge. 

Federal Armory. The Federal Armory 

grounds would be maintained as an archeological preserve. Vegetative growth would be 

removed and the expanse of open space 

linking the town to the river would be once 

again established. The lower armory grounds 

would be linked to the upper armory grounds 

by means of a crossing beneath the railroad 

tracks to ensure safe visitor access. 

Where possible, building foundations would 

be located through archeological testing. 

Stabilization and preservation activities would 

occur on exposed ruins. If original foundations are exposed for interpretation, appropriate measures would be implemented to 

protect archeological resources. NPS staff 

would mark foundations of buildings with 

stones or other means of interpretation where 

sufficient information existed to determine 

the configuration of prominent structures. 

A variety of studies would be undertaken to 

investigate the suitability/feasibility of moving 

the John Brown's Fort to its original location 

by breaching or removing a portion of the 

railroad embankment. If feasible, this could 

also provide for pedestrian access to the 

armory grounds. 

Potomac Frontage. An archeological survey 

and assessment of the Armory Canal would be 

conducted. A program of evaluation and longterm stabilization of the Armory canal walls 

and headgate structure would be initiated. 

The purpose of this program would be to rewater the canal to appear as it did during the 

historic industrial period. This could include 

actions such as removing vegetation from the 

canal prism, repointing, and replacing stone 

work and/or iron parts. 

Visitor Portal Zone 

In alternative 2, this zone would be applied to 

the area around the visitor center on Cavalier 

Heights, the train station, and Potoma 

Wayside. 

Cavalier Heights. The undersized information center and associated facilities would be 

remodeled and expanded. The new facility 

would serve as the hub for future visitor 

orientation, information, and transportation. 

An enlarged visitor center, additional parking, 

prominent bookstore, theater, and restrooms 

would be provided. National historical park 

visitors would plan and begin their visit here. 

Picnicking space would be provided. 

73 
CHAPTER 2: ALTERNATIVES,INCLUDING THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

The transportation system (Park Explorer) 

would originate at the hub, the geographic 

center of the national historical park, and 

provide service to popular places or attractions. A pedestrian bridge would be built over 

Shoreline Drive to directly link Cavalier 

Heights with a trail to the Murphy Farm. 

Train Station. The train station would be 

restored to its 1931 appearance and be used as 

a MARC commuter station, Amtrak stop, for 

visitor information and interpretation. The 

station parking lot would continue to serve 

multiple purposes — as parking for Amtrak/ 

MARC commuters, NPS visitors, and business 

district patrons. The national historical park 

would expand its interpretation of the 

transportation history in the vicinity of the 

train station, possibly acquiring and displaying 

a Civil War period locomotive. NPS staff 

would work with the town and Main Street 

Harpers Ferry to underground utilities and to 

provide adequate parking to improve the 

ambiance of Potomac Street and coordination 

of special events. The National Park Service 

would continue to encourage employees and 

local businesses to park at Cavalier Heights 

and use the NPS shuttle system to Lower 

Town to maximize parking spaces for visitors, 

patrons, and local residents at the train station 

and on Potomac Street. 

Potoma Wayside. The river takeout would 

continue to be maintained and provide for 

public access. The access trail would be 

improved for safety and resource protection. 

A hardened take-out point would be built 

along the Potomac. Restrooms would be 

provided. 

Facility Management Zone 

In alternative 2, this zone would be applied to 

the maintenance facility in its current location 

on Camp Hill and to an area on Cavalier 

Heights around the bus maintenance garage. 

Scenic/Natural Preservation Zone 

The purpose of this zone would be to 

maintain existing natural conditions and 

restore disturbed areas. Scenic viewsheds 

throughout the national historical park would 

be preserved. The gypsy moth would continue 

to be managed to protect the scenic vistas of 

Loudon and Maryland Heights and Short Hill. 

This zone would be applied to the outlying 

heights, parts of riverfronts, and other areas 

comprising about 63% of the national 

historical park. 

Potomac Terrace. Existing natural areas on 

the terrace would be preserved. The Old 

Furnace Road bed would be incorporated into 

the national historical park’s trail system. John 

Brown's Cave would be restored to its natural 

condition by removing the steel plate at the 

entrance to the cave and installing a batfriendly gate. 

Maryland Heights. Historic roads would be 

maintained for hikers and NPS vehicles 

required for maintenance, resource 

protection, and rescue activities. 

Historic military line-of-fire clearings around 

the batteries and fortification on Maryland 

Heights would be maintained. The deer herd 

would be studied to determine its part in a 

healthy ecosystem and whether population 

control is an issue. 

Visitors would have access to trails, historic 

sites, and on-site interpretation. Wayside 

exhibits will convey the Civil War and ironindustry stories that occurred here. 

Historic properties would be evaluated. 

Properties such as Civil War earthworks, 

camps, and remnant structures, would be 

stabilized and protected from human and 

natural impacts. A preservation and 

protection program for the Civil War 

earthworks would be developed and 

implemented. 

74 
Alternative 2: Preferred Alternative 

Loudoun Heights. NPS staff would work 

with the utility companies to mitigate the 

impacts of overhead utility lines in natural 

areas. The National Park Service would 

continue to work with the states of Virginia, 

Maryland, and West Virginia on the 

consideration of a highway bypass around 

Harpers Ferry. The nonhistoric Sherwood 

house would be removed. A Civil War 

overlook with wayside interpretation would 

be constructed in its place. This site would 

include a vista opened on the Loudoun 

plateau overlooking the Shenandoah River 

and battlefield positions on Bolivar Heights, 

Camp Hill, and the Murphy Farm. Visitors 

would access the vista by vehicle from 

Chestnut Hill Road or a side trail from the 

Appalachian National Scenic Trail. A small 

parking area would be installed for visitors 

following a self-guided Civil War auto tour. 

Historic properties would be further 

identified and evaluated. A preservation and 

protection program for Civil War earthworks, 

camps, and remnant structures would be 

developed and implemented. 

Short Hill. Like all outlying natural areas, 

Short Hill would be actively managed to 

maintain or enhance natural processes for 

nonnative species control and protection of 

rare native species. Historic roads would 

continue to be used and maintained at a 

minimal level by park staff for maintenance 

and resource protection activities. 

An archeological survey and inventory of the 

Short Hill property would be conducted. This 

study would assist in the protection and 

preservation of cultural resources on Short 

Hill. 

COST ESTIMATES 

The following applies to costs presented 

throughout this general management plan: 

• The costs are presented as estimates 

and allow for flexibility in application 

of components. 

• These costs are not appropriate for 

budgeting purposes. 

• The costs presented have been 

developed using industry standards to 

the extent available. 

• Actual costs will be determined at a 

later date, considering the design of 

facilities, identification of detailed 

resource protection needs, and 

changing visitor expectations. 

• Approval of the general management 

plan does not guarantee that funding 

or staffing for proposed actions will be 

available. 

• Full implementation of the general 

management plan may be many years 

in the future. 

Costs have been broken down into annual 

operating costs and one-time costs. All 

estimates are in 2007 dollars. 

Annual costs include the costs associated with 

ongoing maintenance, utilities, staffing, 

supplies, and materials. 

Staffing levels needed to fully implement the 

alternative are proposed at 95 full-time 

equivalent positions (FTEs). The number of 

positions is higher than alternative 1, 

reflecting the additional seasonal positions 

needed to staff facilities in Lower Town 

proposed for expanded NPS interpretation. 

Among the projects included in the one-time 

costs are the rehabilitation of building 

interiors in Lower Town, rehabilitation/ 

restoration of the Morell, Brackett, and 

Lockwood houses, removal of the 

campground and restoration of the caverns, a 

new visitor center complex, rehabilitation of 

the power plant for exhibits, and restoration 

75 
CHAPTER 2: ALTERNATIVES,INCLUDING THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

76 

and rewatering of the Armory Canal. These 

projects constitute the majority of capital 

investments proposed in alternative 2. The 

“Other category includes research projects, 

studies, and documentation. 

Annual operating costs: $ 6,600,000 

Includes 95 FTE positions 

Total one-time costs: $17,900,000 

Facility and non-facility cost: $17,700,000 

Other $ 200,000 

Removal of buildings: $0 
ALTERNATIVE 3 

GENERAL 

Harpers Ferry National Historical Park would 

become a gateway to the West Virginia, 

Maryland, Virginia region as well as the park 

through a cooperative visitor center complex 

at Cavalier Heights. Through the use of 

partners and concessioners the park would 

increase its ability to bring life and activity to 

all areas of the park. This partnership would 

allow additional interpretation, preservation 

of additional historic resources, and maintenance of facilities as well as a seamless 

transportation system that serves both the 

park and the local community. A round-thepark trail would also connect the park to the 

regional trail system. A new headquarters 

building and maintenance facility would be 

constructed outside Camp Hill to allow 

restoration of the historic structures for interpretive purposes and the landscape to the 

Storer College period. The Shipley School 

would either be removed and the site landscaped or rehabilitated under a public/private 

partnership. 

Alternative three is similar to alternative two 

in that each location in the national historical 

park would be managed and interpreted to 

reflect the most significant period associated 

with it. Some structures, facilities, and agricultural lands would be leased to non-NPS 

entities to ensure their continued used and 

upkeep and to lessen the financial burden on 

the federal government. The African 

American history in the national historical 

park would be interpreted prominently in 

Storer college buildings on Camp Hill. Visitors 

would be offered a greater diversity of 

experience and program opportunities, some 

of which could be provided through fee-based 

commercial enterprises. NPS staff would 

partner with the regional tourism industry to 

promote visitation to a variety of historic sites. 

 

In this alternative, the transportation system 

would be operated in partnership with Main 

Street Harpers Ferry and expanded to 

incorporate stops in Harpers Ferry and 

possibly Bolivar. Partnerships would be 

sought with Amtrak and MARC to schedule 

excursion trains from Washington, D.C., to 

the national historical park. A round-thenational-historical-park trail would be 

developed with connections to regional trails. 

No boundary adjustments are proposed in 

this plan. 

MANAGEMENT ZONING 

Historic Structure Zone 

This zone would be applied to Lower Town, 

including the remains of a historic bridge 

across the Potomac River and the Potomac 

Power Hydroelectric Plant. 

Lower Town. To enhance the visitor experience in Lower Town, partnerships would be 

developed with private businesses to establish 

and maintain commercial operations within 

the national historical park's historic structures appropriate to the time period. 

Examples of such commercial operations 

could be a clothing store that carries clothing 

of the period and caters to Civil War reenactors, a bakery that would sell baked goods, 

or a period photography gallery. All historic 

buildings in Lower Town would be evaluated 

for such conversion. Care would be taken to 

ensure that such businesses would not 

compete with existing private businesses in 

Lower Town. The goal of this alternative 

would be to bring more activity and a greater 

diversity of experiences to draw more visitors 

to Lower Town. 

NPS staff would work with the community to 

seek innovative parking and traffic solutions 

77 
CHAPTER 2: ALTERNATIVES,INCLUDING THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

within all of Lower Town in addition to an 

expanded shuttle bus route. A small satellite 

bookstore would continue to operate in 

Lower Town, but the main bookstore would 

be combined with a new visitor information 

center at Cavalier Heights to provide a larger 

sales area and convenient shopping location 

for park visitors. 

Building exteriors would maintain their 

current restored appearance. Interior spaces 

would be gradually converted to commercial 

use. Selected areas behind buildings could be 

used by the lessee to support interpretive 

stories or to accommodate period displays or 

events. 

Museum collections would continue to be 

used in interpretive exhibits and displayed in 

locations such as the Master Armorer's 

House. As buildings are leased museum 

collections would be moved to exhibits at the 

new visitor center on Cavalier Heights or 

placed into storage. Curatorial and storage 

functions would be moved from Lower Town 

buildings. 

National historical park concessioners could 

provide some of the interpretive programming 

or demonstrations. For example, a shop 

selling needlework or weaving supplies could 

provide demonstrations on period quilt 

making or how to weave. 

NPS and private vehicles could be strictly 

regulated in the Lower Town during special 

events or possibly seasonally to provide a 

more accurate historical setting. Emergency 

vehicles would have access at all times. 

The Potomac Hydroelectric power plant 

building would be made available for use by 

the NPS Historic Preservation Training 

Center or a similar historic preservation 

group. 

Demonstration of historic preservation 

techniques by artisans/crafters could help 

visitors to understand the effort that goes into 

preserving a site like Harpers Ferry National 

Historical Park. 

Adaptive Use Zone 

Under this alternative, Grandview School and 

all NPS land on Camp Hill would be placed in 

this zone. 

Camp Hill. The Shipley School would be 

managed and rehabilitated by a public-private 

partnership dedicated to its preservation and 

adaptive reuse. If such a partnership proves 

infeasible the structure will be removed 

following appropriate consultation with the 

State Historic Preservation Officer. 

The Storer College portion of Camp Hill 

would be managed to reflect the historic 

college campus from 1867 to1955. Building 

exteriors would be studied and restored. 

The Brackett and Morrell houses would be 

rehabilitated to house interpretive exhibits, 

many of which will come from Lower Town 

buildings. 

The museum storage now in the Lockwood 

house and in Lower Town would be removed 

and combined in a new state-of-the-art facility 

on Camp Hill. The first floor would continue 

to provide interpretive display space, and 

other floors would be used for other park 

purposes. 

Development and implementation of a period 

lighting plan would complement the historic 

college setting. 

Visitors to Camp Hill would find increased 

access to, and information on, Camp Hill's 

military history and Storer College. 

Interpretation would be expanded through 

signs and wayside exhibits on the grounds, 

and interpretive exhibits. 

78 
Ap

p

alachia

n

Trail

Appalachia

n

Trail

P. otomac Heritage National Scenic Trail

.

Potomac Heritage National Scenic Trail

671 

67 

27 

340 

340 

Harpers Ferry

Road

Visitor 

Center 

WEST 

VIRGINIA 

MARYLAND 

VIRGINIA 

Wes

t Virginia 

Virginia

Bakerton Road 

Keep Tryst Rd 

Bloomery

Road

Harpers Ferry Road

Sandy Hook Road

BOLIVAR 

HARPERS 

FERRY 

POTOMAC RIVER

POTOMAC RIVER

SHENANDOAH RIVER

0 0.5 1Mile 

North 

JACKSON’S 

LEFT FLANK 

JACKSON’S 

RIGHT FLANK 

NASH 

FARM 

UNION 

SKIRMISH 

LINE 

FEDERAL 

ARMORY 

LOWER TOWN 

MURPHY 

FARM 

MARYLAND HEIGHTS 

SHORT HILL 

POTOMA 

WAYSIDE 

VIRGINIUS/HALL’S ISLANDS 

LOUDOUN HEIGHTS 

POTOMAC 

FRONTAGE 

POTOMAC 

TERRACE 

CAVALIER 

HEIGHTS 

BOLIVAR 

HEIGHTS 

SCHOOLHOUSE 

RIDGE 

CAMP HILL

Draft General Management Plan 

Harpers Ferry National Historical Park 

5NITED3TATES$EPARTMENTOFTHE)NTERIORs.ATIONAL0ARK3ERVICE

DSC / July 08 / 385 / 20036

Alternative 3 Legend 

Rail Road 

Road 

Trail 

Bus Route 

2 1 

3 

4 

5 

6 7 

8 

1. LOWER TOWN

c,TRDTLBNKKDBSHNMRVNTKCADLNUDCNTSNE

 +NVDQ3NVM


 c5DGHBKDQDRSQHBSHNMRVNTKCADHLOKDLDMSDC

 CTQHMFODQHNCRNEGHFGUHRHS@SHNM


2. VIRGINIUS & HALL’S ISLAND

 c CCHSHNM@KATR@BBDRRVNTKCADBQD@SDCMD@QAX


3. CAMP HILL

 c'D@CPT@QSDQRVNTKCADBNMRNKHC@SDCHM@

 MDVRSQTBSTQDKNB@SHNMSNADCDSDQLHMDC	


 c,@HMSDM@MBDE@BHKHSXVNTKCADLNUDCNTSRHCD

 SGDO@QJRNSG@SSGDBTQQDMSKNB@SHNMBNTKCAD

 QDK@MCRB@ODCHMSN@OTAKHBO@QJ


 c3GDEHQRSEKNNQNESGD+NBJVNNC'NTRDVNTKC

 ADTRDCENQHMSDQOQDS@SHNM@MCSGDTOODQEKNNQ

 VNTKCADQDG@AHKHS@SDCENQNEEHBDRO@BD


 c2GHOKDX2BGNNKVNTKCADOQDRDQUDC@MCL@M@FDC

 AX@OTAKHBOQHU@SDO@QSMDQRGHO


ÿ
NASH FARM/POTOMAC TERRACE

 c2SQTBSTQDRVNTKCADQDG@AHKHS@SDCSNETMBSHNM@R

 @OQHU@SDKXNODQ@SDCDMUHQNMLDMS@KDCTB@SHNM

 HMRSHSTSD


Ā
CAVALIER HEIGHTS

 c INHMS-/2RS@SDSNTQHRLDMSQ@MBDBNLOKDW

 VNTKCADCDUDKNODC


 c MNTSCNNQ@LOGHSGD@SDQVNTKCADBNMRSQTBSDC


6
POTOMAC FRONTAGE

 c"@M@KV@KKR@MCGD@CF@SDVNTKCADRS@AHKHYDC


 c3GDONVDQOK@MSVNTKCADQDG@AHKHS@SDC@R@

 SQ@HMHMFE@BHKHSX


Ă
MARYLAND HEIGHTS

 c/@QJHMF@KNMF'@QODQR%DQQX1N@CVNTKCAD

 HMBQD@RDC


ă
POTOMA WAYSIDE

 c1HUDQ@BBDRRVNTKCADoG@QCDMDCpSNE@BHKHS@SD

Management Zones  S@JDNTS


Adaptive Use 

Archeological Preservation 

Cultural Landscape 

Facility Management 

Historic Structure 

Scenic/Natural Preservation 

Visitor Portal 

Alternative 3 

The expanded route of the bus system serving 

the national historical park would have one or 

more stops on Camp Hill. 

The park maintenance facility would be 

moved outside the national historical park, 

and the former site would be turned into 

green open space. 

The interior of the Grandview school building 

would be adaptively rehabilitated for use by 

the national historical park’s Resources 

Protection and Public Management Division. 

Vehicle bays and a small storage area would be 

added complementing the building's 

appearance. 

Existing natural areas behind the school and 

on the slopes down to the river would be 

preserved. Interpretive panels near the 

building could provide the history of the 

school and explain its relationship to the 

national historical park's African-American 

interpretive theme. 

Cultural Landscape Zone 

Cultural Landscape zoning would be applied 

to sites of Civil War activity including the 

Murphy Farm and the Nash Farm. 

Bolivar Heights. This Civil War battlefield 

site would be maintained as part of the 

Harpers Ferry battlefield. Visitors would 

access the entrance to Bolivar Heights via the 

expanded route of the NPS transportation 

system (Park Explorer), or via a self-guided 

auto tour. Occasional ranger-led interpretive 

walks or demonstrations would be held here. 

Wayside interpretive exhibits would provide 

understanding of the historic significance of 

the area from 1861 to 1865 and to reflect 

battle actions at this site. Line-of-fire clearings 

to Schoolhouse Ridge would be maintained. 

The Civil war earthworks would be stabilized 

and protected from human and natural 

impacts. 

Schoolhouse Ridge. The Civil War 

battlefield sites referred to as Schoolhouse 

Ridge would be maintained in agricultural 

leases to represent the historic character of 

the battlefield in 1862. 

After a program of evaluation of need and 

National Register of Historic Places eligibility, 

some buildings could be removed to enhance the 

historic setting. Any such buildings meeting 

national register criteria would be mitigated 

through consultation with the state historic 

preservation office and the Advisory Council on 

Historic Preservation. Additional research could 

identify other historic or archeological properties on Schoolhouse Ridge that should be 

evaluated and preserved. A preservation and 

protection program for the existing Civil War 

earthworks would be developed and 

implemented. 

Additional foot trails around the battlefield 

sites and connecting with trails to other areas 

of the national historical park would be 

constructed. Interpretive walks or demonstrations would be held, some of which would be 

conducted by national historical park partners 

or a park concessioner. Visitors would access 

these sites on their own. There would be no 

bus access. 

NPS staff would work with the West Virginia 

Department of Highways to determine the 

feasibility of a pedestrian tunnel or overpass 

crossing U.S. 340 at Bakerton and Bloomery 

Roads. This tunnel or overpass would provide 

a safe means of access for visitors hiking 

between the north and south battlefield sites. 

Harpers Ferry Caverns would be restored to 

as natural a condition as possible. The caverns 

would be accessed only by groups with an 

NPS permit. 

The former campground would be downgraded to a primitive camping area for group 

activities related to the national historical 

park's interpretive and educational mission. 

All aboveground structures would be 

81 
CHAPTER 2: ALTERNATIVES,INCLUDING THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

removed, and the landscape would be 

managed under an agricultural lease. 

Murphy Farm. The historic landscape of the 

Murphy Farm would be maintained through 

an NPS-managed agricultural lease. Primitive 

trails would provide for visitors to see Civil 

War earthworks, a scenic overlook of the 

Shenandoah River, and the former site of John 

Brown's Fort. The Murphy/ Chambers 

farmhouse would be used for interpretation 

or available for historic leasing. A parking area 

and restrooms could be provided. 

An identification and evaluation of all 

archeological and historic resources would be 

undertaken. A preservation and protection 

program for the Civil War earthworks would 

also be developed and implemented. 

The remnant foundation of John Brown's Fort 

would be stabilized and preserved. 

The Nash Farm. The farm would be maintained as a mid-20th century farmscape 

reflecting its history as a dairy farm. The 

National Park Service would partner with an 

educational group to maintain the property 

and operate it as a small-scale environmental 

education center. Building interiors would be 

adaptively used to accommodate classroom 

uses. 

The proposed use could take several forms. It 

could be a small-scale environmental education center, teaching children and adults 

about the environment, or a research facility 

working to identify solutions to local, state, or 

regional planning and environmental issues. 

As an NPS facility, any tenant would be 

expected to also provide opportunities for 

visitors and staff to participate and learn from 

their activities. 

There would be no access from the expanded 

bus route of the NPS shuttle system. Children 

would arrive by school bus and visitors by car. 

Parking would also be provided for staff. 

Trails would be developed to connect the 

Nash Farm with Bolivar Heights and Lower 

Town. 

Archeological Preservation Zone 

This zone would be used to preserve 

archeological resources in place. Under this 

alternative, this zone would be applied to 

Virginius Island, Hall's Island, the Armory 

grounds, and the Potomac Frontage (Armory 

canal). This zone would be smaller in this 

alternative than other alternatives. 

Virginius and Hall’s Islands. Management 

of these islands would showcase and interpret 

stabilized structural ruins and outlined or 

“ghosted” foundations associated with the 

manufacturing history of the islands. A large 

part of this story would be the struggle 

between man and the forces of nature trying 

to reclaim the islands. 

An ongoing program of stabilization and 

preservation of remnant archeological 

structures would be conducted. Some 

structural foundations would be located and 

exposed through archeological testing. 

Excavation would be limited to exposing 

building foundations or other ruins that 

would provide interpretive opportunities. 

Existing wetlands and other areas of natural 

significance would be protected. Trails would 

be routed to avoid such sites or designed to 

mitigate adverse effects, and wayside interpretation would explain their importance. A 

new stop on the bus route near the old pulp 

mill would allow visitors to exit at Hall's 

Island. New trails and waysides would allow 

visitors a better appreciation of the resources 

and importance of this area. 

Federal Armory. The Federal Armory 

grounds would be maintained as an archeological preserve. A universally accessible trail 

would be developed to access the grounds. A 

viewing platform along the river wall could be 

provided for visitors to overlook the armory 

82 
Alternative 3 

and the views of the Potomac River and 

Maryland Heights. 

Where possible, building foundations would 

be located through archeological testing. 

Capping the foundations with stone would 

allow the historic structures to be better 

interpreted. Stabilization and preservation 

activities would occur on any exposed ruins. 

Wayside exhibits would help to explain the 

former uses of the structures within the 

armory grounds but most visitors' understanding of the site would come from exhibits 

and an audiovisual program in the visitor 

center or ranger-led programs. 

The Armory Fire Engine House (John 

Brown's Fort) would be maintained in its 

current location. 

Potomac Frontage. The Armory canal walls, 

headgate structure, and channels associated 

with the #3 diversion dam would be stabilized 

(but not rewatered) and preserved. This 

would maintain the integrity of the historic 

canal well into the future. Some re-growth of 

vegetation would be allowed to continue in 

the Armory canal as long as it did not 

jeopardize the integrity of the canal walls. 

A trail along the canal would be developed to 

provide for visitors and local users to access 

the area. Waysides could be developed and 

installed to explain the workings and purposes 

of the canal. Birders and fishermen would 

have more convenient access. The entrance to 

John Brown's Cave would be secured to 

discourage unauthorized access. 

Visitor Portal Zone 

Under alternative 3, this zone would be 

applied around the visitor center on Cavalier 

Heights, the train station, and Potoma 

Wayside. 

Cavalier Heights. New visitor facilities at 

Cavalier Heights would become a primary 

source for national historical park and 

regional information and the NPS shuttle 

system, and a venue for special events. The 

national historical park would partner with 

city, county, and state visitors bureaus to 

provide national historical park, local, and 

regional information about sites, events, and 

activities available to visitors. 

Facilities would include an expanded, jointly 

managed regional visitor center with a theater, 

exhibits, main NPS bookstore, and offices. A 

formal picnic area would be constructed on 

the grounds. Fees would be collected within 

the new NPS visitor facility. 

Train Station. No additional changes or 

alterations to the train station or its use as a 

commuter station, visitor information and 

NPS fee collection point would occur. The 

station parking lot would continue to serve 

multiple purposes for Amtrak/MARC 

commuters, park visitors, and shop patrons. 

Potoma Wayside. The river take-out point 

would continue to be used for public access to 

and from the Potomac River. Maintenance 

would be the responsibility of the national 

historical park augmented by the whitewater 

river-running companies that use the site. The 

trail would be improved for safety and 

resource protection. Restrooms could be 

provided. 

Facility Management Zone 

This zone would be the smallest in size under 

this alternative because the NPS maintenance 

facility and yard would be moved out of the 

national historical park. The zone would be 

applied only to the bus maintenance garage on 

Cavalier Heights, which would be jointly 

operated between the National Park Service 

and a regional transportation company. 

83 
CHAPTER 2: ALTERNATIVES,INCLUDING THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

Scenic/Natural Preservation Zone 

This zone would be used to protect scenic 

viewsheds and areas that are primarily in a 

natural condition. It would be applied to the 

outlying heights, portions of riverfronts, and 

other areas comprising about 67% of the 

national historical park. The gypsy moth 

would continue to be managed to protect the 

scenic vistas of Loudon and Maryland Heights 

and Short Hill. 

Maryland Heights. This area would be 

actively managed to maintain or enhance 

natural resource values. The deer herd on 

Maryland Heights would be studied to 

determine if population control was needed to 

maintain a healthy, functioning ecosystem. 

In some areas historic viewsheds would be 

opened and maintained. Visitors would have 

access to existing trails, historic sites, and onsite interpretation. 

An evaluation of all archeological and historic 

resources would be undertaken. Properties 

such as Civil War earthworks, camps, and 

remnant structures would be stabilized and 

protected from human and natural impacts. 

Loudoun Heights. An evaluation of all 

archeological and historic properties would 

be undertaken. Properties such as Civil War 

earthworks, camps, and remnant structures 

would be stabilized and protected from 

human and natural impacts. Nonhistoric 

structures such as the Sherwood house would 

be allowed to deteriorate. If they were 

determined to be a safety hazard they would 

be removed. 

The Appalachian Trail would be maintained 

through the national historical park by the 

Appalachian Trail Conservancy volunteers 

and support offices. NPS staff would work 

with utility companies to lessen the impacts of 

overhead utility lines in natural areas. 

The national historical park would also work 

with the state of Virginia on the possibility of 

moving U.S. Highway 340 to lessen the impact 

of traffic on the national historical park or 

creating a bypass around the park. 

Short Hill. Like all outlying areas, natural 

resource management would focus on 

nonnative species control and the protection 

of rare native species. Archeological and 

historic resources would be identified and 

preserved. Related scientific research by 

outside agencies or institutions would be 

encouraged. 

COST ESTIMATES 

The following applies to costs presented 

throughout this general management plan: 

• The costs are presented as estimates 

and allow for flexibility in application 

of components. 

• These costs are not appropriate for 

budgeting purposes. 

• The costs presented have been 

developed using industry standards to 

the extent available. 

• Actual costs will be determined at a 

later date, considering the design of 

facilities, identification of detailed 

resource protection needs, and 

changing visitor expectations. 

• Approval of the general management 

plan does not guarantee that funding 

or staffing for proposed actions will be 

available. 

• Full implementation of the general 

management plan may be many years 

in the future. 

Costs have been broken down into annual 

operating costs and one-time costs. All 

estimates are in 2007 dollars. 

Annual costs include the costs associated with 

ongoing maintenance, utilities, staffing, 

supplies and materials, and any leasing costs. 

Staffing levels needed to carry out the 

84 
Alternative 3 

85 

alternative are proposed at 92 full-time 

equivalent positions (FTEs), the same as the 

no-action alternative. This reflects the impact 

of concessioners providing some of the 

interpretation in Lower Town. 

Among the major one-time cost items in 

alternative 3 are the removal of the maintenance facility, restoration/rehabilitation work 

on the Morrell, Brackett, and Lockwood 

houses, a new headquarters building, 

rehabilitation work at the Nash farm, 

rehabilitation of the Murphy farmhouse, 

stabilization of the Armory canal walls, 

rehabilitation of the power plant, construction 

of a new visitor center facility, and 

rehabilitation of the Grandview School. 

Annual operating costs: $ 6,300,000 

Includes 92 FTE positions 

Total one-time costs: $ 24,200,000 

Facility and non-facility cost: $ 23,600,000 

Other: $ 200,000 

Removal of buildings: $ 400,000 
MITIGATIVE MEASURES COMMON TO ALL ACTION ALTERNATIVES 

Congress charged the National Park Service 

with managing the lands under its stewardship 

“in such manner and by such means as will 

leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of 

future generations” (NPS Organic Act, 16 USC 

1). As a result, the National Park Service 

routinely evaluates its actions and implements 

mitigation whenever conditions occur that 

could adversely affect the sustainability of 

national park system resources. 

To ensure that implementation of the action 

alternatives protects unimpaired natural and 

cultural resources and the quality of the visitor 

experience, a consistent set of mitigation 

measures would be applied to actions 

proposed in this plan. The National Park 

Service would prepare appropriate environmental review (i.e., those required by the 

National Environmental Policy Act, National 

Historic Preservation Act, and other relevant 

legislation) for these future actions. As part of 

the environmental review, the National Park 

Service would avoid, minimize, and mitigate 

adverse impacts when practicable. The 

implementation of a compliance-monitoring 

program could be considered to stay within 

the parameters of National Environmental 

Policy Act and National Historic Preservation 

Act compliance documents, U.S. Army Corps 

of Engineers Section 404 permits, etc. The 

compliance-monitoring program would 

oversee these mitigation measures and would 

include reporting protocols. 

The following mitigating measures and best 

management practices would be applied to 

avoid or minimize potential impacts from 

implementation of the alternatives. These 

measures would apply to all alternatives. 

CULTURAL RESOURCES MITIGATION 

Actions outlined in the alternatives identified 

in this General Management Plan, are subject 

to the requirements identified in the NPS 

Management Policies and DO-28 and its 

accompanying “Cultural Resources Management Guideline.” In addition, compliance 

with Section 106 of the National Historic 

Preservation Act of 1966 (as amended), and its 

implementing regulations (36 CFR 800) the 

National Park Service must take into consideration the effects of the undertaking on 

resources either listed in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic 

Places. 

In addition, in order to comply with these 

requirements development of acceptable and 

appropriate strategies to mitigate any adverse 

effects resulting from implementation of the 

selected alternative will be developed in consultation with the appropriate state historic 

preservation office, under the current 

Programmatic Agreement among the National 

Park Service, the Advisory Council on 

Historic Preservation, and National 

Conference of State Historic Preservation 

Officers. 

The National Park Service would preserve and 

protect, to the greatest extent possible, 

resources that reflect human occupation of 

Harpers Ferry National Historical Park. 

Mitigation measures could include, but are 

not necessarily limited to the following types 

of actions: 

• Whenever possible, project design 

features would be modified to avoid 

impacts to cultural resources. New 

developments would be relatively limited 

and would be located on sites that blend 

with cultural landscapes. If appropriate, 

historic vegetative screening would be 

used to minimize impacts on cultural 

landscapes. 

• Wherever possible, projects and facilities 

would be located in previously disturbed 

or existing developed areas. Facilities 

86 
Mitigative Measures Common to All Action Alternatives 

would be located to avoid known or 

suspected archeological resources. 

• Archeological data recovery excavations 

would be primarily limited to sites 

threatened with destruction where 

protection or site avoidance during design 

and construction is infeasible. Should 

archeological resources be discovered, 

during construction or other NPS 

activities, work would be stopped in that 

location until the resources were properly 

recorded by the National Park Service and 

evaluated under the eligibility criteria of 

the National Register of Historic Places. If 

in the subsequent consultation with the 

appropriate West Virginia, Maryland, or 

Virginia State Historic Preservation office 

the resource is determined eligible, appropriate measures to either avoid or ameliorate further resource impacts necessary 

to mitigate the loss or disturbance of the 

resource would be implemented. 

• If previously unidentified archeological 

resources or human remains are 

unearthed during construction activities, 

work in the discovery area would be 

stopped immediately, and the NPS 

superintendent and the contracting officer 

would be notified. Measures would be 

instituted to protect the remains and the 

superintendent would notify the state 

historic preservation officer. Any artifacts 

found in association with the remains, 

funerary objects, sacred objects, and 

objects of cultural patrimony, would be 

left in place. If the remains were 

determined to be of American Indian 

origin, the superintendent would notify 

associated tribes according to the Native 

American Graves Protection and 

Repatriation Act and its implementing 

regulations. 

• Mitigation measures for buildings, 

structures, and landscapes include 

documentation according to standards of 

the Historic American Buildings 

Survey/Historic American Engineering 

Record/Historic American Landscapes 

Survey (HABS/HAER/HALS). The level of 

this documentation would depend on the 

level of significance (national, state, or 

local) and individual attributes and be 

determined in consultation with the state 

historic preservation officer. When 

demolition of a historic structure is 

proposed, architectural elements and 

objects may be salvaged for reuse in 

rehabilitating similar structures, or they 

may be added to the NPS museum 

collection. In addition, the historical 

alteration of the human environment and 

reasons for that alteration would be 

interpreted to national historical park 

visitors. 

• No national register-listed or -eligible 

building or structure would be removed 

without prior review by park and region 

cultural resource specialists, including 

approval by the regional director, and 

consultation with the appropriate state 

historic preservation office. Before a 

national register-listed or -eligible 

structure is removed, appropriate documentation recording the structure would 

be prepared in accordance with Section 

110 (b) of the National Historic Preservation Act and the documentation submitted 

to the HABS/HAER/HALS program. 

• Prior to demolition of any national 

register-listed or -eligible building or 

structure, a survey for archeological 

resources in the general vicinity of the 

affected structure would be designed and 

conducted in consultation with the 

appropriate state historic preservation 

office. The excavation, recordation, and 

mapping of any significant cultural 

remains would be completed prior to 

demolition to ensure that important 

archeological data that otherwise would 

be lost is recovered and documented. 

• Avoid adverse impacts through following 

the guidelines presented in the Secretary 

of the Interior’s Standards for Archeology 

and Historic Preservation, and the 

Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for 

the Treatment of Historic Properties, with 

87 
CHAPTER 2: ALTERNATIVES,INCLUDING THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

Guidelines for the Treatment of Cultural 

Landscapes; 

• Encourage visitors through the NPS 

interpretive programs to respect and leave 

cultural resources undisturbed. 

NATURAL RESOURCES MITIGATION 

The following measures, when applied to a 

construction project or other surfacedisturbing action, are intended to reduce the 

severity or scope of adverse impacts to natural 

resources from such a project. A construction 

project would also have site-specific environmental analysis completed before work 

begins. This analysis would also recommend 

additional mitigation specific to the type of 

project and its location. 

Nonnative Species 

• Implement a noxious weed abatement 

program. Standard measures could 

include the following elements: ensure 

construction-related equipment arrives 

on-site free of mud or feed-bearing 

material, certify all seeds and straw 

material as weed-free, identify areas of 

noxious weeds pre-construction, treat 

noxious weeds or noxious weed topsoil 

before construction (e.g., topsoil 

segregation, storage, herbicide treatment), 

and revegetate with appropriate native 

species. 

Soils 

• Build new facilities on soils suitable for 

development. Minimize soil erosion by 

limiting the time that soil was left exposed 

and by applying other erosion control 

measures, such as erosion matting, silt 

fencing, and sedimentation basins in 

construction areas to reduce erosion, 

surface scouring, and discharge to water 

bodies. Once work was completed, 

revegetate construction areas with native 

plants in a timely period. 

Threatened and Endangered 

Species and Species of Concern 

Mitigation actions would occur during normal 

NPS operations as well as before, during, and 

after construction to minimize immediate and 

long-term impacts to rare, threatened, and 

endangered species. These actions would vary 

by specific project and area of the national 

historical park affected. Mitigation actions 

specific to rare, threatened, and endangered 

species would include the following: 

• Conduct surveys for rare, threatened, and 

endangered species as warranted. 

• Locate and design facilities/actions to 

avoid adverse effects on rare, threatened, 

and endangered species. If avoidance is 

infeasible, minimize and compensate 

adverse effects on rare, threatened, and 

endangered species as appropriate and in 

consultation with the appropriate 

resource agencies. 

• Schedule construction to avoid critical 

seasons for local species. 

• Develop and implement restoration 

and/or monitoring plans as warranted. 

Plans should include methods for 

implementation, performance standards, 

monitoring criteria, and adaptive 

management techniques. 

• Implement measures to reduce adverse 

effects of nonnative plants and wildlife on 

rare, threatened, and endangered species. 

Vegetation 

• Monitor areas used by visitors (e.g., trails) 

for signs of native vegetation disturbance. 

Use public education, revegetation of 

disturbed areas with native plants, erosion 

control measures, and barriers to control 

potential impacts on plants from trail 

erosion or social trailing. 

88 
Mitigative Measures Common to All Action Alternatives 

89 

• Designate river access/crossing points, 

and use barriers and closures to prevent 

trampling and loss of riparian vegetation. 

• Develop revegetation plans for the 

disturbed area and require the use of 

native species. Revegetation plans should 

specify seed/plant source, seed/plant 

mixes, soil preparation, etc. Salvaged 

vegetation should be reused to the 

maximum extent possible. 

Wildlife 

• Employ techniques to reduce impacts on 

wildlife, including visitor education 

programs, restrictions on visitor activities, 

and ranger patrols. 

• Implement a natural resource protection 

program. Standard measures would 

include construction scheduling, 

biological monitoring, erosion and 

sediment control, the use of fencing or 

other means to protect sensitive resources 

adjacent to construction, the removal of 

all food-related items or rubbish, topsoil 

salvage, and revegetation. This could 

include specific construction monitoring 

by resource specialists as well as treatment 

and reporting procedures. 

Water Resources 

• To prevent water pollution during 

construction, use erosion control 

measures, minimize discharge to water 

bodies, and regularly inspect construction 

equipment for leaks of petroleum and 

other chemicals. 

• Minimize the use of heavy equipment in 

waterways. 

• Build a runoff filtration system to 

minimize water pollution from larger 

parking areas. 

• Provide storm water management 

planning to protect water quality and 

quantity. 

Wetlands 

• Delineate wetlands and apply protection 

measures during construction. Wetlands 

would be delineated by qualified NPS staff 

or certified wetland specialists and clearly 

marked before construction work. 

Perform construction activities in a 

cautious manner to prevent damage 

caused by equipment, erosion, siltation, 

etc. 

SUSTAINABLE DESIGN 

AND AESTHETICS 

• Projects would avoid or minimize adverse 

impacts on natural and cultural resources. 

Development projects (e.g., buildings, 

facilities, utilities, roads, bridges, trails, 

etc.) or reconstruction projects (e.g., road 

reconstruction, building rehabilitation, 

utility upgrade, etc.) would be designed to 

work in harmony with the surroundings, 

particularly in historic districts. Projects 

would reduce, minimize, or eliminate air 

and water nonpoint-source pollution. 

Projects would be sustainable whenever 

practicable, by recycling and reusing 

materials, by minimizing materials, by 

minimizing energy consumption during 

the project, and by minimizing energy 

consumption throughout the lifespan of 

the project. 
ENVIRONMENTALLY PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE 

Environmentally preferred is defined as “the 

alternative that will promote the national 

environmental policy as expressed in Section 

101 of the National Environmental Policy 

Act.” Basically, the environmentally preferred 

alternative would cause the least damage to 

the biological and physical environment and 

best protect, preserve, and enhance cultural 

and natural resources. Section 101 of the act 

states that “it is the continuing responsibility 

of the Federal Government to 

1) fulfill the responsibilities of each 

generation as trustee of the environment 

for succeeding generations; 

(2) assure for all Americans safe, healthful, 

productive, and aesthetically and 

culturally pleasing surroundings; 

(3) attain the widest range of beneficial uses 

of the environment without degradation, 

risk to health or safety, or other 

undesirable and unintended 

consequences; 

(4) preserve important historic, cultural, and 

natural aspects of our national heritage, 

and maintain, wherever possible, an 

environment which supports diversity and 

variety of individual choices; 

(5) achieve a balance between population and 

resource use which will permit high 

standards of living and a wide sharing of 

life’s amenities; and 

(6) enhance the quality of renewable 

resources and approach the maximum 

attainable recycling of depletable 

resources. 

After the environmental consequences of the 

alternatives were analyzed, each alternative 

was evaluated as to how well the goals stated 

above would be met. The following discussion 

highlights how each alternative meets these 

goals. 

Two of the above goals failed to make a 

difference in determining the environmentally 

preferred alternative and were not used in the 

determination. Goal 1 is satisfied by each of 

the alternatives because Harpers Ferry is a 

national park system unit and as the steward 

of these units, the National Park Service 

would continue to fulfill its mandate to 

protect Harpers Ferry National Historical 

Park for future generations. Goal 6 was 

determined not to be applicable to the scope 

of this general management plan although 

recycling of materials would be encouraged in 

all alternatives. 

Alternative 1 (no action) represents a 

continuation of the present course of park 

management. The no-action alternative would 

respond to resource impacts and visitor 

demands as they occur rather than formulating a plan to address potential issues 

proactively. Because of this, it lacks the range 

of diversity and individual choices found in 

the other alternatives. It also does not provide 

as much resource protection as the other 

alternatives — more resource impacts would 

be expected with increasing use levels in the 

no-action alternative. Thus, compared with 

the preferred alternative, the no-action 

alternative does not fulfill as well the 

following national environmental policy goals: 

• attain the widest range of beneficial uses 

of the environment without degradation 

• preserve important natural aspects and 

maintain an environment that supports 

diversity and variety of individual choice 

• achieve a balance between population and 

resource use 

Alternative 2 (NPS preferred alternative) 

provides a high level of protection of natural 

and cultural resources while concurrently 

providing for a wide range of neutral and 

beneficial uses of the environment, fully 

meeting goals 3 and 5. The alternative integrates resource protection while maintaining 

an environment that supports a diversity and 

variety of appropriate visitor uses, fully 

meeting goals 2 and 4. The preferred alterna90 
Environmentally Preferred Alternative 

tive surpasses the other alternatives in 

realizing the national environmental policy 

goals. 

Alternative 3, through zoning, has a slight 

reduction in the size of developable portions 

of the national historical park, which would 

partially fulfill resource preservation goals (3 

and 4). Visitor use opportunities at Harpers 

Ferry would be expanded fulfilling visitor 

experience goals 2 and 5. However, with the 

expansion of trails on Short Hill, there could 

be a greater potential for impacts on bald 

eagles, a federally listed threatened species, 

under this alternative when compared with 

other alternatives. Thus, alternative 3 does not 

meet the policy goals as well as alternative 2 

regarding attainment of the widest range of 

beneficial uses without resource degradation 

and risk to health or safety and preserving 

important cultural and natural aspects. 

After analyzing each of the alternatives with all 

applicable goals, the planning team has determined that the environmentally preferred 

alternative for Harpers Ferry National 

Historical Park is alternative 2, the NPS 

preferred alternative. 

91 
ADDITIONAL STUDIES AND IMPLEMENTATION PLANS NEEDED 

Other, more detailed, studies and plans will be 

required to implement specific actions after the 

general management plan is approved. Baseline 

research reports provide the background and 

basis for making management decisions. These 

reports provide specific information regarding 

presence or absence of archeological resources, 

site history, site condition, appropriateness of 

further archeological survey and analysis, and 

other data necessary to make informed 

management decisions. These reports would 

need to be completed before more specialized 

planning studies are undertaken. 

ARCHEOLOGICAL OVERVIEW 

AND ASSESSMENT 

This report describes and assesses the known 

and potential archeological resources in the 

national historical park. The overview section 

reviews and summarizes existing archeological 

data. The assessment section evaluates the data. 

The full report assesses past work and helps 

determine the need for and design of future 

studies. The report may be for the entire 

national historical park or for specific areas in 

the park. The report does not constitute an 

inventory of all archeological resources that 

may exist and does not include any 

archeological fieldwork. 

 Status: 

 Two overviews, one for Maryland Heights 

and one for Loudoun Heights, have been 

completed. A third is in draft form and 

covers Bolivar Heights. 

ARCHEOLOGICAL IDENTIFICATION/ 

EVALUATION STUDIES 

Archeological Identification and Evaluation 

Studies report on the fieldwork undertaken to 

inventory and assess the significance of 

prehistoric and historic archeological resources 

existing in the national historical park area or a 

specific section of the park. Such studies are 

undertaken based on the recommendations 

made in the previous Archeological Overview 

and Assessment reports. 

Numerous major archeological identification 

and evaluation studies have been completed in 

the national historical park but have been 

limited almost exclusively to the Lower Town 

area. Smaller, focused, reports conducted for 

compliance with laws and regulations have 

been produced since the national historical 

park was established. 

Four proposed Identification and Assessment 

studies have been noted and wait funding. 

These studies are at the Hall’s Rifle factory, on 

Camp Hill, the Murphy Farm, and the armory 

grounds. Additionally, this plan will result in 

the need to fund two additional studies, one for 

the Armory canal and one for the Schoolhouse 

Ridge battlefield. 

ETHNOGRAPHIC OVERVIEW 

AND ASSESSMENT 

This basic report emphasizes the review and 

analysis of accessible archival and documentary 

data on national historical park ethnographic 

resources and the groups who traditionally 

define such cultural and natural features as 

important to their ethnic heritage and cultural 

viability. Removal of Native American 

populations in the region in the 18th century 

has dissociated the original inhabitants from 

their traditional lands. 

Status: 

 No ethnographic overview and 

assessment documentation has been 

prepared by or for the national 

historical park. None are currently 

proposed. 

 

92 
Additional Plans and Implementation Studies Needed 

CULTURAL AFFILIATION STUDY 

Using anthropological, archeological, 

ethnohistoric, historic, and other evidence, this 

study satisfies the need to identify cultural ties 

among past and present groups that used and 

may still use or relate to national historical park 

natural and cultural resources, including 

museum objects. 

Status: 

 No cultural affiliation study has been 

prepared by the national historical 

park. None is currently proposed. 

CULTURAL LANDSCAPE REPORTS 

A cultural landscape report provides a historical overview of a park or region and 

identifies and evaluates the cultural landscape 

within historical contexts. It identifies the need 

for further studies and makes recommendations for resource management and 

interpretation. 

Status: The following studies are needed: 

Cultural Landscape Report for Schoolhouse Ridge north 

Cultural Landscape Report for Camp Hill 

Cultural Landscape Report for Murphy 

Farm 

Cultural Landscape Report for Bolivar 

Heights 

Cultural Landscape Report for the Armory 

grounds 

CULTURAL RESOURCES BASE MAP 

A base map (or maps) depicts all known 

historic sites and structures, cultural 

landscapes, long-distance trails and roads, and 

archeological and ethnographic resources. 

Documented troop movements may be 

included. 

 Status: 

 The List of Classified Structures has 

been put into a Geographic Information 

System (GIS) format. All other surveyed 

and identified cultural resources are 

mapped within individual reports and 

studies. This latter information has yet 

to be consolidated into the GIS system. 

The consolidation into one format has 

been proposed and is waiting funding. 

UNESCO WORLD HERITAGE SITE 

DESIGNATION PROJECT 

The designation of Harpers Ferry National 

Historical Park as a UNESCO World Heritage 

Site is highly appropriate. The national 

historical park contains a rich collection of 

nationally and internationally known resources 

that could qualify it for UNESCO World 

Heritage Site designation. The National Park 

Service has assembled and is reviewing 

materials that could eventually lead to such 

designation. 

Status: 

 Underway and current. 

NATIONAL PARK SERVICE-CORPS OF 

ENGINEERS STUDY OF FLOOD 

PROTECTION FOR THE LOWER TOWN 

This study would bring together the expertise 

of two agencies to evaluate appropriate 

techniques for limiting the damage done by 

periodic floodwaters in the Lower Town. This 

would include measures currently in place and 

evaluation of more permanent solutions 

consistent with the preservation of the historic 

Lower Town. 

 Status: 

Current, with future study needed. 

93 
CHAPTER 2: ALTERNATIVES,INCLUDING THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

94 

RESOURCE STEWARDSHIP STRATEGY 

This management plan will include exotics, pest 

control, deer management, fire management, 

native vegetation restoration, etc. in addition to 

management strategies for historic structures, 

cultural landscapes, and archeological 

resources. 

 Status: 

To be developed.
ALTERNATIVES AND ACTIONS CONSIDERED BUT DISMISSED FROM 

DETAILED EVALUATION 

During the planning process for Harpers 

Ferry National Historical Park, several actions 

were discussed during public meetings for 

alternative development that could have 

become part of one or another of the alternatives. These actions were dismissed for the 

following reasons. 

The National Park Service operates the 

Harpers Ferry Interpretive Design Center in a 

modern structure on the campus of the 

former Storer College. During development of 

alternatives, a suggestion that the Interpretive 

Design Center be moved out of the national 

historical park was proposed. The modern 

structure would then either have been 

demolished to remove a nonhistoric structure 

from the landscape or become a combined 

visitor center/NPS headquarters/collections 

and storage facility. The concept was 

dismissed due to the expense of moving the 

design center and because the location was 

not conducive to use as a visitor facility. The 

structure itself is too large to function solely as 

NPS headquarters. 

A suggestion was made during alternatives 

generation to reopen the Harpers Ferry 

Caverns, which was previously open to the 

public under private ownership. The idea was 

dismissed because the caverns have no 

historical connection to any of the Harpers 

Ferry themes, however, the public may be 

allowed access in the future under permit. 

The former Jellystone campground on 

Schoolhouse Ridge was considered with the 

possibility of reopening it to the public. The 

idea was dismissed because of the cost to 

restore the campground and the operation of 

a campground at Harpers Ferry would 

compete with private campgrounds in the 

area. 

A proposal to move all maintenance facilities 

from Camp Hill to Cavalier Heights was 

considered but rejected due to the costs and 

impacts to the viewshed. 

The concept of making all national historical 

park trails accessible to bicycles was considered early in the planning process. Connection to regional bicycle trails was also considered. The idea was eventually determined 

to be inappropriate to the commemorative 

nature of the grounds upon which the siege of 

Harpers Ferry occurred. Bicyclists would still 

have the opportunity to use public roads and 

rights-of-way to access the national historical 

park. 

95 

TABLE 5. SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES

ALTERNATIVE 1, NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE 2, PREFERRED 

• All buildings preserved & managed as NPS exhibits • Building exteriors would remain unchanged 

Cultural Resources • Backyards remain open to public but unimproved • Backyards could be modified to support interpretive stories 

• Archives and collections move to new regional curatorial storage facility • Archives and collections moved to new regional curatorial storage fa

Natural Resources • Managed as backdrop for views and cultural setting • Managed to create more period authentic landscaping 

• Interpretation of the entire history of Harpers Ferry • Restored to mid-1800s (prewar, prosperous appearance) 

• 0ccasional guided tours/interpretive activities • Numerous ranger led tours/activities 

• Museum-like setting with occasional living history and costumed 

personnel 

• Create living period community using costumed personnel, period s

period exhibits, exterior furnishings, and backyard vignettes 

Interpretation 

• Many museum type exhibits moved to new visitor center • Interpretation conducted by National Park Service 

• Interpretation conducted by National Park Service • Some interpretation and special demonstrations could be fee based 

LOWER TOWN • Modern intrusions disrupt the historical setting • Visitors are immersed in 19th century environment • Visitors primarily experience site on foot • Pedestrian-only environment on weekends/seasonally 

Visitor Experience • Greenspace available for “time out” or special events • “Time-out” areas provided 

• Most of experience is self-guided • Most of experience is self-guided 

• Bus system operates between Cavalier Heights and other areas of th

national historical park (“petal system”) 

• Bus system operates between Cavalier Heights and Lower Town 

Transportation 

• Work with town to restrict NPS and personal vehicles on Shenandoa

during high visitation periods (daily/seasonally) 

• Streets remain open to all vehicles 

• NPS offices and residences remain on upper floors • NPS offices, residences, or exhibits on upper floors • Main (Harpers Ferry History Association) bookstore remains in historic • Smaller bookstore operation ((Harpers Ferry History Association) 

structure 

• Reduced/relocated satellite information center. 

Administrative/NPS • Move information center to building 45 

Operations/General 

• Use of artisans, crafters and period shops controlled by NPS; increas

use of volunteers 

• Building exhibits (shops) are for display only; site continues to lack life and 

activity 

• No full-time ranger presence • Greater visibility of NPS staff 

97 
CHAPTER 2: ALTERNATIVES,INCLUDING THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

ALTERNATIVE 1, NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE 2, PREFERRED 

FEDERAL ARMORY 

Cultural Resources 

• Continued monitoring of archeological conditions • John Brown’s Fort remains in its current location • Study feasibility of moving John Brown’s Fort back to original locatio

Natural Resources • Not applicable • Not applicable 

Interpretation • Armory interpreted in machine shop, blacksmith shop and Master Armorer’s house • Armory interpreted through wayside exhibits 

Visitor Experience 

• Visitor access via current trails, • Not connected to trail system 

• Visitor access includes development of trails • Connect to national historical park trail system • Provide conditions to bring people to the area with some limited 

archeological work and use area as interpretation. (clear trees, open vistas, manage vegetation) 

Transportation 

• Dual purpose parking for commuter and national historical park visitors 

(weekends only) 

• Define traffic circulation (in and out of train station parking) • Railroad station as transportation link/portal • Excursion trains from DC via Amtrak or MARC 

Administrative/NPS 

Operations/General 

• Area managed for archeological stabilization and preservation • Fee collections in drop safe (Train station) • Trail with steps to Armory grounds from John Browns monument 

• Area maintained as an archeological preserve 

• Fee collections in drop safe or in train station ticket office 

• Possible access from river wall 

VIRGINIUS 

& HALL’S ISLAND

Cultural Resources 

• Managed for preservation of archeological resources 

• Some stabilization would continue 

• Managed for preservation of archeological resources 

• Expose and/or “ghost-In” structures 

Natural Resources • Primarily natural setting maintained, wetland preserved • Some natural resources manipulated for cultural purposes, wetland preserved 

Interpretation 

• Existing interpretive signs could be supplemented by additional signs. • Interpretation of stabilized/exposed ruins with signs 

• Story of battle between man and natural forces (nature reclaiming t

land) 

• Hall’s Island will be interpreted • Interpretation of stabilized/exposed ruins with signs 

Visitor Experience 

• Trails • Primarily self guided tours • Primarily self-guided & occasional ranger-led tours 

Transportation • Bus access nearby 

Administrative/NPS 

Operations/General • Managed for archeological preservation & natural qualities • Managed as an archeological preserve & natural area 

98 
ALTERNATIVE 1, NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE 2, PREFERRED 

LOUDOUN HEIGHTS 

Cultural Resources 

• Minimal preservation treatment of cultural resources • No renovation of Sherwood house planned 

• Stabilize and preserve Civil War era camps and fortifications • Remove nonhistoric Sherwood house and location developed as Civ

War overlook with interpretation, parking and vista clearing 

Natural Resources 

• Actively managed to maintain natural resources • Actively managed to maintain natural resources 

Interpretation • No onsite interpretation occurs in Lower Town • Interpretive signs and overlook developed 

Visitor Experience. 

• Recreational activities (hiking, fishing, observing nature etc.) • No restroom/drinking water • Opportunities for solitude 

• Recreational activities (hiking, fishing, observing nature etc.). Additio

hiking around new overlook 

• No restroom/drinking water • Becomes part of comprehensive battlefield tour • Opportunities for solitude 

Transportation 

• Formal parking for visitors not planned, Mostly pedestrian access • No bus access, parking at former Sherwood House location 

• Work with States regarding issue of Highway 340 to minimize impa

park and public safety 

Administrative/NPS 

Operations/General 

• Managed and maintained to preserve viewshed and natural resources • Manage for resource protection 

• Assess feasibility of burying or relocating power line 

MARYLAND HEIGHTS 

Cultural Resources • Minimal preservation of earthworks and fortifications 

• Historic roads continue to be used and maintained 

• Stabilize and preserve earthworks and fortifications • Historic roads continue to be used and maintained 

Natural Resources • Limited modification for open vistas 

• Actively managed to maintain natural processes 

• Restore historic military line of fire vistas for interpretive purposes • Actively managed to maintain natural processes • Study and conduct deer population control on Maryland Heights if 

feasible 

Interpretation • Interpretive signs 

• Occasional guided interpretation 

• Provide higher level of interpretation through waysides and site 

brochures 

• Occasional ranger-guided hikes 

Visitor Experience • Recreational activities; viewing historic sites, observing nature, hiking etc. 

• Opportunities for solitude • No restroom or drinking water 

• Recreational activities; viewing historic sites, observing nature, hiking • Opportunities for solitude • No restroom or drinking water • Part of comprehensive battlefield tour 

Transportation • Limited parking • Maintain current parking levels 

Administrative/NPS 

Operations/General • Maintained existing trails • Maintain existing trails and evaluate need for new trails 

99 
CHAPTER 2: ALTERNATIVES,INCLUDING THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

ALTERNATIVE 1, NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE 2, PREFERRED 

SHORT HILL 

Cultural Resources • Minimally protected • Stabilize and preserve earthworks and structures 

Natural Resources • Actively managed to maintain natural processes • Actively managed to maintain natural processes 

Interpretation • No on-site interpretation • No on-site interpretation 

Visitor Experience 

• Hiking, observing nature, etc. • Opportunities for solitude 

• Hiking, observing nature, etc. • No new trails constructed • Opportunities for solitude 

Transportation • No vehicle access allowed • No vehicle access allowed 

Administrative/NPS 

Operations/General 

• Managed for resource protection • Preserved as natural area, viewshed (backdrop for view from Jefferson 

Rock) 

• Managed for resource protection • Preserved as natural area, viewshed (backdrop for view from Jefferso

Rock) 

BOLIVAR HEIGHTS 

Cultural Resources 

• Maintained as a battlefield landscape • Resource actively managed 

• Maintained as a battlefield landscape • Resource actively managed 

Natural Resources • Resource modified to maintain battlefield landscape • Resource modified to maintain battlefield landscape 

Interpretation 

• Occasional demonstration • Wayside interpretive signs 

• Occasional demonstrations • Wayside interpretive signs 

Visitor Experience 

• Visitors primarily experience site on foot • No restrooms/drinking water 

• Limited ADA access 

• Visitors primarily experience site on foot trails • Connect trail from Elk Run/Bolivar heights with Nash Farm and Lowe

Town 

• Restrooms /drinking water • Limited ADA access • Becomes part of comprehensive battlefield tour 

Transportation • Parking 

• Visitor reaches site by personal vehicle 

• Enlarged parking • Visitors reach site by bus when in operation or by personal vehicle 

Administrative/NPS 

Operations/General 

• Field managed to maintain cultural landscape • Field managed to maintain cultural landscape 

100 
ALTERNATIVE 1, NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE 2, PREFERRED 

CAMP HILL 

Cultural Resources 

• Adaptively reused historic buildings (preserved on exterior) • Current level of administrative use of historic houses would continue but 

may be impacting structural integrity 

• Shipley school rehabilitated • Archives and collections move to new regional curatorial storage facility 

• Interiors of historic houses would be adaptively reused — lower floo

for interpretation, upper floors for NPS purposes or lease 

• Development and implementation of period lighting plan 

• Shipley School rehabilitated by a private/public partnership 

• Archives and collections move to new regional curatorial storage fac

Natural Resources 

• Continues to be modified to represent college campus atmosphere • Modified to represent college campus landscape 

• Some historically important and period trees would be planted 

Interpretation 

• Most visitor knowledge derived from Lower Town exhibits • Interpretation is mainly of exterior of buildings through signs but with 

occasional public tours 

• Room in Mather Hall open to public • Building exterior interpretation would mainly be through signs 

• Main interpretation focus is on Storer College history • Archives moved out of Lockwood House. Lockwood House 1st floor 

restored for increased interpretation 

• Room in Mather Hall open to public • Building exterior interpretation would mainly be through signs 

Visitor Experience • Mostly pedestrian experience • Self-guided walking tour with occasional guided tours 

Transportation 

• Maintain existing parking levels, lack of parking for visitors & staff 

continues 

• No bus access from Lower Town or Cavalier Heights • No public facilities 

• Visitor parking would be allowed when shuttle not operating • Visitors and NPS employees would use shuttle system to access Cam

Hill 

• Bus shelter 

Administrative/NPS 

Operations/General 

• Presentation of all time periods reflect historic continuum • NPS headquarters offices remain in Brackett and Morrell and Lockwood. 

(overly confined quarters) 

• Managed as campus environment • Maintenance yard on Storer College property remains • Move Appalachian Trail and Potomac Heritage National Scenic Trail 

offices into Cook Hall 

• Structures reflect 1867 – 1955 period • Brackett and Morrell houses rehabilitated for park offices. Archives 

moved out of Lockwood into new facility. Upper floors of Lockwood rehabilitated for office space. 

• Maintain campus environment but not a return to period landscape

• Move Protection Division to Grandview School 

• Maintenance facility would remain in its current location. Satellite 

maintenance facilities in outlying locations 

• Move Potomac National Scenic Heritage Trail and Appalachian Trail 

offices to Camp Hill. 

101 
CHAPTER 2: ALTERNATIVES,INCLUDING THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

ALTER ATIVE N 1, NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE 2, PREFERRED 

NASH FARM/ 

POTOMAC TERRACE

Cultural Resources 

• Dairy Farm landscape maintained • Stabilize and preserve Nash Farm structures • Grandview School adaptively reused 

• Maintain exteriors as dairy farm for original appearance • Adaptive reuse of interiors at Nash Farm • Grandview School adaptively reused for Protection Division offices 

Natural Resources 

• Existing natural areas would be maintained • Field/ meadow mowed 

• Natural conditions maintained in undeveloped areas 

• Existing natural areas would be maintained • Field/meadow is maintained • Natural conditions maintained in undeveloped areas 

Interpretation 

• No onsite interpretation at Nash Farm • Not interpreted 

• Interpretation done though environmental education programs at N

Farm 

• Exterior wayside panel at Grandview for interpretation as segregated 

school 

Visitor Experience 

• General public visitation not encouraged 

• Trail connections to Lower Town • Opportunities to experience formal and informal education activities • General visitation not encouraged 

Transportation 

• Nash Farm “pull-off” for NPS vehicles • Grandview school accessed by personal vehicle or walking 

• Unpaved parking provided at Nash Farm • Access via private vehicles or by round-the-park trail 

Administrative/NPS 

Operations/General 

• Maintained for preservation of existing cultural resources and historic 

landscape 

• Grandview School used for NPS management functions • Majority of terrace managed for natural resources 

• Mid-20th century farmscape • Environmental education center and outdoor laboratory operated by 

or affiliated organization 

• Majority of terrace managed for natural resources 

CAVALIER HEIGHTS 

Cultural Resources • N/A • N/A 

Natural Resources 

• Heavily modified as modern landscape using native vegetation • Heavily modified for visitor and NPS use 

• Modern landscape but unobtrusive 

Interpretation 

• Continued low level of interpretation • Main orientation center • Limited interpretive programs 

• High level of interpretation • Main orientation center • Expanded interpretation 

Visitor Experience 

• Trail connection to national historical park trail system (lower town, 

Murphy Farm) 

• Occasional special events • Public restrooms and drinking water • Orientation location 

• Trail connection to national historical park trail system (Lower Town

Murphy Farm) 

• Occasional special events • Public restrooms and drinking water • Main orientation and interpretation location 

Transportation 

• Primary access to the national historical park bus system • Bus maintenance facility 

• Primary national historical park bus system access 

102 
ALTERNATIVE 1, NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE 2, PREFERRED 

Administrative/NPS 

Operations/General 

• Continues to be main national historical park entrance with bookstore 

outlet, information desk and fee collection booth and picnic area 

• Primary entrance to national historical park • Emergency cache/bone yard • Grassy areas for special events • Secondary book store location 

• Construction of multipurpose visitor center/entrance complex with 

theater, fee collection and some offices, orientation, exhibits, picnic 

• Primary entrance to national historical park 

• Grassy areas for special events 

• Negotiate for volunteer camping space outside national historical par

• Primary bookstore location 

SCHOOL OUSE RIDGE 

JACKSON’S LEFT/ RIGHT FLANK

Cultural Resources 

• Maintained as battlefield landscape • Managed as battlefield landscape 

• Remove nonhistoric houses and structures • Restore landscape by removing former private campground • Historic structures would be evaluated in connection with restoratio

cultural landscape 

Natural Resources 

• Maintained to represent a battlefield landscape in some areas 

• Some areas left natural 

• Natural resources modified in some areas to present historic landsca• Some areas left natural • Close Harpers Ferry Caverns and John Brown Cave and remove man

made intrusions. May be open by permit only. 

• Return former Jellystone campground site to natural conditions 

Interpretation 

• No on-site interpretation • On-site interpretation of military focus, part of comprehensive Civil W

tour 

• Historic demonstration area 

Visitor Experience 

• Primarily self-directed walking experience • Self guided walking tours 

• Limited primitive group camping 

Transportation 

• No vehicle access, service use only • Access via Trails 

• Develop bus access with turnaround • Work with state to tunnel under route 340 at former Bakerton/Bloo

road for pedestrian access 

• Create parking on edges 

Administrative/NPS 

Operations/General 

• Managed as cultural landscape through agricultural leases • No visitor facilities 

• Maintained to 1862 historic landscape through agricultural leases • Primitive “Historic Camp” for groups • Develop satellite maintenance location • Develop interpretive/hiking trails on existing roads 

103 
CHAPTER 2: ALTERNATIVES,INCLUDING THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

ALTERNATIVE 1, NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE 2, PREFERRED 

POTOMAC FRONTAGE 

Cultural Resources 

• Conditions of canal, dam, associated structures and power station 

monitored and preventive actions to prevent loss are carried out 

• Restore landscape by stabilizing canal walls and headgate structure 

rewatering of canal 

• Power plant rehabbed for interpretive use 

Natural Resources 

• Vegetation continues to reclaim site and revert to natural conditions • Natural processes allowed to continue 

• Manage wetland/aquatic environment in rewatered Canal (beneficia

and adverse ) 

• Manage natural resources for cultural landscape 

Interpretation 

• Occasional ranger led tours 

• Interpret dam, headgates and canal • Power plant building could house exhibits • Turbine in power plant restored for interpretive demonstration • Occasional ranger led tours 

Visitor Experience 

• Fishing, observing nature, hiking • Self-directed tours 

• Fishing, observing nature, hiking • Self-directed tours and occasional ranger led tours 

Transportation • Access by personal vehicle or hiking • Access by personal vehicle or hiking 

Administrative/NPS 

Operations/General • Managed for cultural resources • Managed for cultural and natural resources 

SHENANDOAH CITY/ 

BULL FALLS 

Cultural Resources • Cultural resources to be identified and evaluated • Cultural resources to be identified and evaluated 

Natural Resources • Preserve viewshed from river and maintain natural conditions • Preserve viewshed from river, maintain natural conditions 

Interpretation • No onsite interpretation • No onsite interpretation 

Visitor Experience • Visitation not encouraged, • Fishing • Visitation not encouraged • Fishing 

Transportation • No access • No access 

Administrative/NPS 

Operations/General • Not actively managed • Managed for natural resources and preservation of cultural resource

MURPHY FARM 

Cultural Resources 

• Stabilize and preserve or adaptively reuse Chambers/Murphy farmhouse • Evaluate Chambers/Murphy house for adaptive reuse for park purpo

• Stabilize and preserve John Browns Fort foundation • Stabilize and preserve Civil War earthworks 

Natural Resources • Nonagricultural lands managed for natural processes • Nonagricultural lands managed for natural processes 

Interpretation 

• Interpret John Brown’s Fort foundation • Interpretation of Civil War earthworks • Occasional interpretation tours 

• Manage to reflect 1862-64 and 1894-1906 periods • Occasional interpretive tours • Historic house could be used for multiple NPS purposes. 

Visitor experience 

• Self guided interpretation • No restrooms or drinking water available • Use existing road as hiking trail • Contemplative atmosphere, hiking, scenic overlook 

• Self guided visit with occasional ranger led activities • Restrooms and drinking water • Contemplative atmosphere, hiking, scenic overlook 

104 
105 

ALTERNATIVE 1, NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE 2, PREFERRED 

Transportation 

• No public vehicle access • Access by hiking trail 

• On bus route • Access by hiking trail and pedestrian bridge • Small parking area with bus turn-around 

Administrative/NPS 

Operations/General 

• Agricultural lease used to maintain cultural landscape • Agricultural lease used to maintain cultural landscape 

POTOMA WAYSIDE 

Cultural Resources • None known • None known 

Natural Resources 

• Modified to allow recreational experience • Nonrecreational areas managed for natural resource preservation 

• Modified to allow recreational access 

• Nonrecreational areas managed for natural resource preservation 

Interpretation • Primarily by river recreation companies • Primarily by river recreation companies 

Visitor Experience 

• Temporary toilets; no drinking water • Primitive trails maintained 

• Upgraded restroom facilities may be provided by NPS or private comp

• Hardened access to river for take-out 

Transportation • Limited parking • Evaluate parking/vehicle access with partners 

Administrative/NPS 

Operations/General 

• Maintained for access to river • Minimal visitor facilities • NPS provides debris removal 

• Managed primarily for access to/from river • Minimal visitor facilities 

• Partnership with others for debris removal 

COLLECTIONS • Archives and collections move to new regional curatorial storage facility • Archives and collections move to new regional curatorial storage faOTHER ISSUES 

• Upgrading of directional and interpretive information directed at 

Appalachian Trail users 

• Work with outside entities to create recreational area on water • Intergovernmental maintenance facility outside national historical pa

boundaries 

• Limited public/private partnership Government controls outcome an

mission 

• Must still get good “free” experience • Contracted audio tour (walking/auto) • Collect fair market value for agricultural leases • One visitor contact point • Entrance complex • Development of a park foundation to maintain facilities • Traveling collections brought to national historical park • Maintain core exhibits throughout national historical park 

T

TABLE 6. SUMMARY OF IMPACTS

There would be no impairment of key resources or values associated with any of the impacts presented in the alternatives. 

ALTERNATIVE 1 — NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE 2 — PREFERRED 

CULTURAL RESOURCES Historic Structures Stabilizing and preserving historic structures 

would considerably reduce the loss of historic fabric over time. The result would be beneficial. 

The impacts of alternative 2 on historic structures would be generally positive and minimally adverse 

The impacstructures 

Archeological Resources 

Any discussion of possible impacts on archeological resources is theoretical until such resources are actually found. Archeological testing and/or excavation before any ground disturbance in the park could result in positive and negative impacts. Should archeological testing identify resources of significance, mitigation activities could be implemented or the project could be redesigned to lessen or do away with any impact. There would be an effect, but that effect would not be adverse because the site would remain essentially intact. However, if the project cannot be redesigned to lessen any effect on archeological resources and removal of the site is required, the impact on the site would be adverse despite the mitigating factors of data recovery/research and possible interpretation. Once excavated the context of the site would be lost. 

Alternative 2 would require archeological investigations associated with stabilization/ 

preservation of foundations or structures within the national historical park. Investigations would be coordinated with the West Virginia state historic preservation officer under the requirement of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended. The actions associated with this alternative could have adverse impacts on archeological resources. 

Archeologstabilizatiostructures would be coordinatehistoric prrequiremeHistoric Pramended. alternative archeolog

Cultural Landscapes 

The potential impacts associated with implementing alternative 1 would result in both no adverse effects and adverse effects on the national historical park’s cultural landscapes. 

The impacts of alternative 2 would generally be not adverse. 

The impacgenerally 

107 
CHAPTER 2: ALTERNATIVES,INCLUDING THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

ALTERNATIVE 1 — NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE 2 — PREFERRED 

NATURAL RESOURCESWater Resources This alternative would have no new effects. Alternative 2 would result in long-term, 

minor beneficial impacts on wetlands and a long-term negligible adverse impact to water resources in the national historical park. 

This alternminor benwater resopark. 

Floodplains This alternative would have no additional 

effects on floodplains. 

This alternative would cause long-term, negligible adverse impacts on floodplains. 

There wou

Soils Implementing the no-action alternative 

would have long-term negligible adverse impacts on soil resources. 

The impacts of implementing the preferred alternative would be short and long term, minor, and adverse. 

The impacalternative adverse. 

Cave and Karst Resources 

This alternative would create no additional impacts on this resource. 

Alternative 2 would result in long-term, minor to moderate beneficial impacts on cave resources. 

Alternativminor bennegligible 

Vegetative Communities 

Implementing the no-action alternative would have a long-term negligible adverse impact on native vegetative communities. 

Alternative 2 would result in long-term minor adverse impacts on vegetative communities. 

Alternativminor advcommunit

Fish and Wildlife Implementation of this alternative would 

have no effect. 

Implementing this alternative would result in long-term negligible adverse impacts and long-term minor beneficial impacts. 

This alternnegligible minor ben

Special Status Species 

Implementing the no-action alternative would have no effect on the Indiana bat, bald eagle or species of concern. 

Implementing alternative 2 would have no effect on bald eagles, bats, or federal species of concern. There would be longterm, minor adverse impacts on state listed plants in the Armory Canal. 

There woubald eaglea result of 

Soundscapes Alternative 1 would have no new effect on 

natural soundscapes in the national historical park. 

Alternative 2 would result in short-term minor adverse impacts, long-term moderate beneficial impacts, and long-term negligible adverse impacts on soundscapes in the national historical park. 

Alternativminor to mterm modlong-term soundscap

Lightscapes This alternative would have a long-term, 

minor beneficial impact on lightscapes. 

This alternative would have a long-term, minor beneficial impact on lightscapes. 

This alternminor ben

108 
T

109 

ALTERNATIVE 1 — NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE 2 — PREFERRED 

VISITOR EXPERIENCE

While implementing the no-action alternative would not create any new impacts on visitor use or experience, it would result in the continuation of actions and conditions that give rise to long-term minor adverse impacts on visitor experience. 

Implementing alternative 2 would result in long-term minor to moderate beneficial impacts on visitor experience. 

Implemenlong-term impacts o

SOCIOECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT

Implementing alternative 1 would have a long-term, minor adverse impact on the gateway communities and a long-term, negligible adverse impact on the regional economy. 

Implementing alternative 2 would have a long-term, moderate beneficial effect on the economy of the gateway communities and a long-term minor beneficial effect on the regional economy. 

Implemenlong-term economy a long-terregional e

NPS OPERATIONS 

The no-action alternative would result in long-term minor adverse impacts on staffing, maintenance, and law enforcement. There would be no change in emergency response times.

The preferred alternative would have shortterm, minor adverse impacts and long-term, minor to moderate beneficial impacts on NPS operations. 

Alternativadverse imbeneficial 
CHAPTER 2: ALTERNATIVES,INCLUDING THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

TABLE 7. SUMMARY OF COSTS BY ALTERNATIVE

The following applies to costs presented through this general management plan: 

• The costs are presented as estimates and allow for flexibility in application of 

components. 

• These costs are not appropriate for budgeting purposes. 

• The costs presented have been developed using industry standards to the extent available. 

• Actual costs will be determined at a later date, considering the design of facilities, 

identification of detailed resource protection needs, and changing visitor expectations. 

• Approval of the general management plan does not guarantee funding or staffing for 

proposed actions will be available. 

• Full implementation of the general management plan may be many years in the future. 

• All estimates are in 2007 dollars and rounded up to the nearest $100,000. 

Alternative 1 Alternative 2

(NPS Preferred) 

Alternative 3

Annual Operating Costs (ONPS)(1) $6,400,000 $6,600,000 $6,300,000

Staffing - FTE(2) 92 95 92 

Total One-time Costs $17,900,000 $24,200,000 

Facility and non-facility cost 0 $17,700,000 $23,600,000

Other(3) 0 $200,000 $200,000

Removal of buildings 0 0 $400,000

(1) Annual operating costs are the total annual costs for maintenance and operations associated with each 

alternative, including: maintenance, utilities, supplies, staff salaries and benefits, and other materials. 

(2) Total full-time equivalents (FTEs) are the number of staff required to maintain the assets of the national 

historical park at a good level, provide acceptable visitor services, and protect resources. Park managers 

would explore opportunities to work with partners, volunteers, and other federal agencies to effectively 

and efficiently manage the national historical park. FTE salaries and benefits are included in the annual 

operating costs. T to facilitate comparison among the alternatives, the staffing numbers include the 

conversion of subject to furlough employees and temporary employees. 

(3) Other costs include resource studies or inventories, and archeological research. 

110 
Chapter 3

Affected Environment

INTRODUCTION 

This chapter describes the existing environment of Harpers Ferry National Historical 

Park and the surrounding region. It focuses on 

national historical park resources, uses, 

facilities, and socioeconomic characteristics 

that have the potential to be affected if any of 

the alternatives were implemented. 

In addition to the information provided in this 

chapter, information on the natural, cultural, 

and human environment of Harpers Ferry can 

be found on the national historical park's web 

page (http://www. nps.gov/hafe) and 

bibliography (http:// www1.nature.nps. 

gov/nrbib/index.htm). 

LOCATION AND SETTING 

Throughout its history, Harpers Ferry has 

been the backdrop for remarkable and 

unparalleled events. Here, in one setting, 

several themes in the American story 

converge: Native Americans, industry and 

transportation, the African American 

experience, John Brown, the Civil War, and 

the natural environment. Harpers Ferry 

became part of the national park system in 

1944. It was named after a river ferry service 

operated by Robert Harper and his family 

from the mid-1700s until the early 1800s. 

Harpers Ferry National Historical Park is 

situated along a deep gap in the northern 

section of the Blue Ridge Mountains at the 

confluence of the Potomac and Shenandoah 

rivers. Most of the national historical park lies 

in the northeast corner of West Virginia, while 

the Short Hill section of the national historical 

park is in Virginia, and Maryland Heights is 

across the Potomac River in Maryland. 

The national historical park ranges in 

elevation from 275 feet to 1,300 feet above sea 

level. The character of the land varies from 

river frontage flats to lofty forested ridges. 

The district within the corporate limits of 

Harpers Ferry, West Virginia, is a narrow strip 

on the triangular section of land in the confluence between the Potomac and Shenandoah 

rivers. This district, divided into two areas 

known as Lower Town and Camp Hill, rises 

from the river level of 275 feet to approximately 500 feet above sea level. The lower part 

of the district is subject to flooding. 

The Bolivar Heights district, on the same triangular section of land but west of Harpers 

Ferry, ranges from 500 to 600 feet above sea 

level. 

The Loudoun Heights district, across the 

Shenandoah River from the town of Harpers 

Ferry, ranges from the river level of approximately 275 feet to 1,200 feet above sea level. 

CLIMATE 

The national historical park is in the 

transitional zone between the more maritime 

climate of the Atlantic Slope and the drier 

areas of the Allegheny Mountains. The climate 

experienced here is characterized by large 

seasonal temperature differences but is 

somewhat tempered by the nearby marine 

influence. High temperatures reach over 90 

degrees Fahrenheit in July and August, 

whereas lows can fall below 15 degrees (F) in 

January. On average, annual high and low 

temperatures here are 63 and 40 degrees (F) 

respectively. The average annual precipitation 

from rain, Atlantic coastal storms, and snow 

combine to equal 38 inches in the national 

historical park. Most precipitation is from rain 

in the summer.

113 
CULTURAL RESOURCES 

OVERVIEW 

Prehistoric Background 

Paleo-Indian Period (10,000–8000 BC). The 

earliest generally agreed upon culture period 

identified in North America is known as 

Paleo-Indian. There is evidence of human 

occupation of the Middle Atlantic area from at 

least 10,000 BC. Current theories suggest that 

this occurred after the migration of Asiatic 

people across the Bering Strait and the gradual 

warming of the northern part of the continent. 

No evidence of Paleo-Indian occupation has 

been identified in Harpers Ferry at this time. 

Archaic Period (8,000 BC to 1200 BC). The 

major difference between Archaic and PaleoIndian cultures is an apparent change in 

subsistence strategies and group sizes. Early 

Archaic peoples successfully adapted to the 

changing environment by modifying or 

developing the tools needed to exploit newly 

available resources. Group size seems to have 

remained small and people appear to have 

continued to follow a nomadic lifestyle. 

Woodland Period (1000 BC to AD 1700). 

Pottery, suggesting an increased reliance on 

plant resources, first appears in the regional 

archaeological record around 1200 BC and is 

widely considered the hallmark trait which 

separates the Woodland from the Archaic 

Period. 

During this period there was an increase in 

production specialization and social status 

differentiation and a more varied and 

elaborate material culture developed. There 

are indications of the beginning of horticultural practices and an increasingly sedentary 

lifestyle during the Woodland. Archeological 

sites associated with this period are often 

located on high banks directly overlooking 

major rivers. 

Late Prehistoric (AD 1100 to early contact 

— circa 1700). This last period of time before 

contact with European cultures is characterized by the intense cultivation, stockaded 

villages, and relatively dense populations. 

Although there is evidence scattered throughout West Virginia of prehistoric activities 

representative of all the described culture 

periods in the Inner Piedmont Region. The 

earliest European settlers did not find any 

large or permanent Indian settlements. 

Indian groups living in the region before the 

early 1700s were probably forced out by a 

combination of factors such as diseases 

introduced by Europeans and competition 

between groups for a decreasing amount of 

available natural resources. By the time 

European settlers arrived in the Harpers Ferry 

area in the late 1600s, Iroquois peoples from 

New York and Pennsylvania had pushed out 

groups of Shawnee, Delaware, and Mingo 

who inhabited the area. 

With the exception of an Indian named 

“Gutterman Tom,” who operated a ferry with 

Peter Stephens, there is no mention in the 

records of Harpers Ferry National Historical 

Park of aboriginal occupation of the Lower 

Town area when Robert Harper arrived in 

1747. 

Several prehistoric lithic scatters have been 

documented at Harpers Ferry National 

Historical Park on Cavalier Heights and 

Schoolhouse Ridge. A more substantial 

prehistoric component was documented in 

Lower Town, during an archeological 

investigation of backyards. This excavation 

provided evidence of Terminal Archaic/Early 

Woodland, Early Woodland and Late 

Woodland occupations. Additionally, current 

excavations at the Federal Armory site 

uncovered a prehistoric site along the banks 

of the Potomac. 

114 
Cultural Resources 

Early European Settlement 

The gap in the mountains created by the rivers 

attracted European settlers. The land was part 

of an immense colonial land grant of 

approximately 6 million acres. This land, 

granted by King Charles II was known as the 

"Northern Neck Proprietary." Patents for 

land rights were granted to noblemen. At this 

time the land remained as unexplored and 

unsettled territory. 

The rivers provided an early avenue for travel 

in an area where roads were little more than 

trails. By 1701 the first small settlement at the 

junction of the two rivers was created by a 

Swiss prospector named Louis Michel who 

was making surveys of mineral resources. 

Peter Stevens, a Pennsylvania Dutchman, 

established a ferry crossing on the Potomac 

River near its confluence with the Shenandoah River in 1733. The ferry that Stevens ran, 

in an area known as "The Hole," eased travel 

through the Blue Ridge mountain region. A 

millwright from Pennsylvania named Robert 

Harper recognized the commercial and 

industrial potential of the area and bought 

Stevens out in 1747. Harper, for whom the 

town is named, later purchased an additional 

125 acres from Lord Fairfax at the confluence 

of the Potomac and Shenandoah rivers. In 

addition to operating the ferry, he also built 

and operated a gristmill and a sawmill and 

started construction of a tavern before his 

death in 1782. 

The waterpower of Potomac and Shenandoah 

rivers soon drew settlers. Traveling to the area 

as a young land surveyor, George Washington 

was already familiar with the region and 

appreciated both its abundant water power 

and potential as a transportation hub. After 

becoming President, Washington used his 

familiarity with Harpers Ferry to champion 

the site for a new federal armory and arsenal 

in 1794. 

In addition to the water power provided by 

the rivers, the surrounding mountains 

provided wood for the production of gun 

stocks, charcoal to fire the forges, and iron ore 

for manufacturing gun barrels. By 1801 after 

purchasing the necessary lands from Harper 

the armory was constructed as a series of 

structures along the Potomac River. During 

the early years of operation, the production of 

arms was modest due to deficient waterpower 

and charges of mismanagement. 

With an expansion of the armory in 1808, the 

growth of the town began in earnest. By 1810 

the population had increased to about 700. 

Housing and associated commercial establishments were constructed throughout the 

Lower Town area as well as on the hillsides. 

During this period residents carved 44 steps 

into the rock outcrop that formed the 

foundation for the Harper House Terrace. 

These steps formed a link between Lower 

Town and the upper elevations. Circulation 

and land use patterns developed as a response 

to the topography of the area, which influenced the community's development. Many of 

the buildings in town were constructed with 

the local phylite know as Harpers Shale. This 

stone was readily available and an obvious 

choice for construction. The stone 

contributed to the scenic nature of the town. 

Industrial Development 

The armory, or musket factory, was the 

structural and economic core of Lower Town 

between 1800 and 1860. To a great degree, it 

also established the overall landscape 

character of Lower Town as is reflected in the 

layout of roads and pedestrian paths, the 

platting of open lands and the style, materials, 

and technology used to construct buildings, 

water works, dams, culverts, canals, and 

structural walls. By 1821, there were 20 

workshops, 2 arsenal buildings, and 86 

dwellings for employees. At this time the 

armory employed 271 workers. Between 1801 

and the outbreak of the Civil War in 1861, the 

armory produced more than 600,000 muskets, 

rifles, and pistols. 

115 
CHAPTER 3: AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

Unfortunately, the fluctuating river levels 

made reliable transportation of goods into and 

out of Harpers Ferry difficult. Demand for the 

creation of facilities to deal with the problem 

grew. By 1824 a sturdy timber bridge was built 

at the approximate location of the original 

ferry, and by 1830 the construction of a 

turnpike into Lower Town began to provide 

reliable access for the town and armory. In 

1806 a natural channel was engineered into a 

canal to circumvent the rapids in the 

Shenandoah. This canal was modified into a 

network of channels and millraces in 1823–24 

to furnish water power for industries on 

Virginius and Hall's islands. As a result of 

improved access, a growing community, and 

an abundant waterpower-based industry, 

Harpers Ferry began to flourish. Indeed, in 

the 40 or so years preceding the Civil War, 

Virginius Island boasted a number of private 

industries, including a sawmill, flour mill, 

machine shop, two cotton mills, tannery, iron 

foundry, and a carriage manufacturing shop. 

Prior to 1821, the inventor John H. Hall 

patented a breach-loading, interchangeable 

flintlock rifle and was awarded a contract to 

manufacture 1,000 rifles at the U.S. Armory at 

Harpers Ferry. As a result, between 1821 and 

1840, he helped lead the change from craftbased production to manufacture by machine. 

This means of production revolutionized 

manufacture, and Hall's techniques spread to 

other places and industries. 

By 1833 the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal had 

reached Harpers Ferry as it threaded its way 

west to Cumberland Maryland. Meanwhile, 

track for the Baltimore and Ohio (B&O) 

Railroad, reached the Maryland shore 

opposite Harpers Ferry in 1834. By 1837 a 

railroad bridge spanned the Potomac River. 

The railroad quickly proved its worth and a 

second railroad, the Winchester and Potomac, 

opened its line from Winchester, Virginia, to 

Harpers Ferry in 1836. The convergence here 

of the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad, the 

Winchester & Potomac Railroad, as well as 

the Chesapeake & Ohio Canal in the mid1830s inaugurated an era of economic and 

industrial growth that lasted until the Civil 

War. By mid-century the population of 

Harpers Ferry and the neighboring town of 

Bolivar reached 4,300. 

After the Civil War it became increasingly 

obvious that increasing speed and larger 

railroad engines made realignment of the B & 

0 line necessary. In 1892-94 the line was 

moved from the elevated trestle along the 

Potomac shoreline to an area that ran parallel 

to Potomac Street, a few hundred feet south of 

the existing line. The realignment required 

elevating the new line as well. The new line 

was elevated by creating a berm with the stone 

debris from construction of the railroad 

tunnel through Maryland Heights. This new 

alignment was placed over the now defunct 

armory grounds, including the original 

location of the engine house (John Brown's 

Fort). 

John Brown’s Raid and the Civil War 

John Brown was a champion of the antislavery cause in the Kansas Territory where 

the establishment of slavery in the American 

Territories was focused. John Brown believed 

he could free the slaves. He selected Harpers 

Ferry as his starting point because of weapons 

stored at the U. S. Arsenal and access to slaves 

in the south whom he planned to arm. He was 

determined to seize the 100,000 weapons at 

the arsenal and to use the Blue Ridge 

Mountains for guerrilla warfare. 

Brown, with his three sons, 18 men, and a 

wagon load of supplies, launched his raid on 

Sunday evening, October 16, 1859. His 21-

man "army of liberation" began their attack by 

seizing the watchmen at the bridge over the 

Potomac. They then captured the armory, 

took the watchman hostage, cut telegraph 

wires, and dispatched parties to bring in slaves 

and hostages. 

116 
Cultural Resources 

In the meantime, shooting began between 

Brown's men and some townspeople. Soon 

the militia arrived and by nightfall the 

survivors of Brown's party had taken refuge in 

the armory's fire engine house. The next 

morning, US Marines used a heavy ladder to 

batter down the door and enter the building, 

capturing John Brown. 

Brought to trial in nearby Charles Town, 

jurors found Brown guilty of treason, against 

Virginia, of conspiring with slaves to rebel, 

and of murder. He was hanged on December 

2, 1859. John Brown's short-lived raid failed, 

but his trial and execution focused the 

nation's attention on the moral issue of slavery 

and provided a catalyst for the Civil War. 

The Civil War had a profound and disastrous 

effect on Harpers Ferry, It left a path of 

destruction that wrecked the town's economy 

and forced many residents to depart forever. 

The town's strategic location on the B&O 

Railroad at the northern end of the Shenandoah Valley meant that Union and 

Confederate troops moved through Harpers 

Ferry frequently. The town changed hands 

eight times between 1861 and 1865. 

On April 18, 1861, less than 24 hours after 

Virginia seceded from the Union, Federal 

soldiers set fire to the armory and arsenal to 

keep them out of the hands of Virginia 

secessionists. The arsenal and 15,000 weapons 

were destroyed. However, Confederates 

extinguished the flames at the Armory and the 

weapons-making equipment was shipped 

south. When the Confederates abandoned the 

town two months later, they burned most of 

the factory buildings and blew up the railroad 

bridge. 

In February of 1862 Federal forces reoccupied Harpers Ferry and by March the 

bridge was rebuilt and the first train in nine 

months crossed into Harpers Ferry. Because 

their primary mission was to protect the 

railroad, the troops paid little attention to the 

town. Instead, the soldiers constructed 

earthworks across Camp Hill. 

During the Confederacy's first invasion of the 

North, on September 15, 1862, Maj. Gen. 

Thomas J. "Stonewall" Jackson surrounded 

and captured the 12,693 men of the Union 

garrison stationed at Harpers Ferry. This was 

the largest surrender of Union forces 

throughout the course of the war. When the 

Federals returned to Harpers Ferry after the 

Battle of Antietam (Sharpsburg), they began 

transforming the surrounding heights into 

fortified encampments to protect both the 

town and the railroad. 

The Confederates held Harpers Ferry for the 

last time during the course of Lt. General 

Jubal Early's campaign north from the 

Shenandoah Valley during which he had 

attempted to capture Washington D.C. in the 

summer of 1864. From August 1864 to 

February 1865, Union General Philip H. 

Sheridan used Harpers Ferry as his base of 

operations and destroyed Early's troops as 

well as conquering Confederate troops in the 

Shenandoah Valley. When the Civil War 

ended, the military departed. Harpers Ferry, 

dominated by military presence in the 

preceding years, became nearly a ghost town. 

Many of the industries, stores, and dwellings 

were destroyed or abandoned. 

African American History 

African Americans have been a part of the 

Harpers Ferry story since before the American 

Revolution. The first recorded arrival was a 

slave purchased by Robert Harper in the mid1700s. By the time of John Brown's raid in 

1859, about 10% of the town's residents were 

black. "Free" blacks often worked as laborers 

or teamsters, but some prospered as skilled 

masons, plasterers, butchers, and blacksmiths. 

During the Civil War, Harpers Ferry became 

one of many Union garrison towns where 

runaway slaves, or "contraband," sought 

refuge. 

117 
CHAPTER 3: AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

Following the Civil War, New England 

Freewill Baptist missionaries came to Harpers 

Ferry determined to help both the newly 

liberated slaves and free African Americans. 

To that end they acquired several vacant 

Armory buildings on Camp Hill including the 

Lockwood House from the Federal government, and in 1867 started Storer College. John 

Storer, for whom the college was named, was 

a successful Maine businessman who provided support in the form of $10,000 if the 

Freewill missionaries could raise a matching 

amount within a year. The necessary monies 

were obtained from the Freedman's Bureau 

and private sources. An integrated school 

designed primarily to educate former slaves, 

but open to students of all races and genders, 

was opened. 

Frederick Douglass served as a trustee of the 

college and delivered a memorable oration on 

the subject of John Brown here in 1881. By the 

end of the 19th century, the promise of 

freedom and equality for blacks had been 

buried by Jim Crow laws and legal segregation. To combat these injustices, Dr. W.E.B. 

Du Bois and other leading African Americans 

created the Niagara Movement, the forerunner to the National Association for the 

Advancement of Colored People (NAACP). In 

1906, the Niagara Movement held its second 

conference on the campus of Storer College. 

Ironically the success of organizations like the 

NAACP contributed to the college’s decline. 

In 1954, legal segregation was finally ended by 

the landmark school desegregation decision 

handed down by the Supreme Court in Brown 

v. The Board of Education. A year later Storer 

College closed its doors. 

Historical Relevance of Floods 

Harpers Ferry was slow to recover from the 

Civil War. With abandonment by the federal 

government and the destruction of virtually all 

of the private industry, the town had to 

endure further hardship by the periodic 

inundation of flood waters. Although 

rebuilding occurred, floods were a recurring 

feature and a constant threat to the residents 

and industry of Harpers Ferry. Some of the 

floods were minor and relatively harmless. 

Others were catastrophic. Severe floods in 

1870 and 1889 continued to thwart resident's 

efforts to recover from the war. In May of 

1924 flood waters from both the Shenandoah 

and Potomac Rivers rose to 28 feet above 

flood stage inundating buildings with as much 

ten feet of water. Commerce on the C & 0 

Canal across the Potomac River was halted 

and never resumed. 

Twelve years later in March of 1936 the largest 

and most devastating floods on record hit 

Harpers Ferry. Reaching a record height of 36 

feet above flood stage, both the Shenandoah 

and Potomac rivers raged through town, 

nearly reaching second-story balconies. The 

flood destroyed both the Bollman Bridge 

across the Potomac to Maryland and the 

Shenandoah Bridge to Virginia. Again in 1942 

a flood hit the area even before repairs had 

been completed from the previous flood. 

With the realignment of U.S. Route 340, and 

the construction of new highway bridges 

down river from Harpers Ferry, the town was 

no longer a stop along the highway but was 

bypassed, leaving only the railroads as a major 

point of entry to the community. The 

population continued to decline. 

Though the town's economic viability 

slumped, its potential national significance 

was realized through official recognition as a 

national historic landmark under the Historic 

Sites Act of 1935. After much local organizing 

and the introduction of several bills to 

establish Harpers Ferry as a national historical 

park, the authorization was signed into law on 

June 30, 1944, by President Franklin D. 

Roosevelt. 

118 
Cultural Resources 

NATIONAL REGISTER 

DESIGNATIONS 

Harpers Ferry National Historical Park was 

administratively listed on the National 

Register of Historic Places October 15, 1966. 

The National Register of Historic Places is the 

nation's official list of cultural properties 

worthy of preservation. The national 

historical park's designation acknowledges its 

national significance. 

A formal nomination, prepared to officially 

document the resources comprising the 

district, was approved in May of 1981. Since 

that time the national historical park has 

acquired additional properties, some of which 

had been previously listed in the national 

register. A multiple property documentation 

form was written to consolidate both existing 

and new information and to update the 

national historical park boundaries in 

December of 1999. 

Additional documentation of individual 

properties has been prepared by NPS staff and 

certified by the West Virginia state historic 

preservation officer in support of the existing 

national register listing. 

THE NATIONAL HISTORICAL 

PARK’S CULTURAL RESOURCES 

The national historical park's cultural history 

is represented by cultural landscapes, historic 

structures, archeological resources, and 

museum collections. 

Historic Structures 

A historic structure is a constructed work 

consciously created to serve some human 

activity. Historic structures are usually 

immovable, although some have been 

relocated and others are mobile by design. 

They can include buildings, monuments, 

dams, millraces and canals; bridges, roads, 

railroad tracks and rolling stock; and fences. 

In some cases they may be standing ruins of all 

structural types. 

When the National Park Service assumed 

jurisdiction of the site, on June 30, 1944, 

numerous buildings and structures were in 

poor condition and structurally unsound. In 

some cases the condition of the building 

ultimately required its removal. In the late 

1950s the National Park Service undertook a 

long-term program of building stabilization, 

rehabilitation, and reconstruction. 

The national historical park’s List of Classified 

Structures (LCS) provides the primary 

reference of building types, significance, 

condition, and recommended treatments. The 

current LCS listing identifies 147 structures 

ranging from currently occupied historic and 

modern structures to Civil War earthworks. 

All but four structures contribute to the 

national historical park's National Register of 

Historic Places significance. 

Lower Town. The core area of Lower Town 

is tightly packed and its configuration is 

heavily determined by the topography and the 

stone outcroppings underlying the town. 

Sixty-seven buildings and structures are listed 

on the national historical park's List of 

Classified Structures in Lower Town. 

Historically this area contained many of the 

residences and commercial establishments. 

Most of the standing historic structures are 

currently adaptively reused by the National 

Park Service. Generally, upper levels are used 

for administrative offices and employee 

residences, while lower floors are used for 

visitor services, and interpretation. 

Structural features that remain in Lower 

Town include a variety of structural and 

ornamental walls. Virtually all of these walls 

are shale, many are dry-laid with bedrock 

foundations, and several are remnants 

associated with nonextant building sites and 

developed areas. There is also a major stone 

119 
CHAPTER 3: AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

wall supporting the railroad trestle between 

Market Street and the Point. 

The adjacent hillside contains remnant walls 

and foundation ruins, including the structural 

ruins of the Episcopal Church, and the trail 

connecting Lower Town and Camp Hill. The 

area primarily functions as a buffer and 

boundary element defining the perimeter of 

the developed landscape and the transition 

between Lower Town and Camp Hill. 

Jefferson Rock is along the Appalachian 

National Scenic Trail that passes St. Peters 

Catholic Church between Camp Hill and 

Lower Town. 

Bridge piers of the original B & 0 Railroad and 

the Shenandoah Bridge remain visible in the 

Potomac and Shenandoah rivers respectively 

at the Point. The modern CSX railroad line 

crosses the Potomac River and proceeds to 

the southwest, roughly paralleling the 

Shenandoah River through Virginius Island in 

the Hamilton Street area. The railroad trestle, 

over which the line passes, cuts through the 

site, creating two functionally distinct areas. 

The area between the trestle and the river 

contains remnants of retaining walls, building 

sites, and below-ground foundation ruins. 

Busy Shenandoah Street winds along the 

corridor between the railroad trestle and the 

base of Camp Hill, providing access for NPS 

buses and local traffic. The historic 

Shenandoah canal and additional foundations 

hug the cliff. 

Arsenal Square at the base of Washington 

Street and at the eastern terminus of 

Shenandoah Street includes building 

foundations and ruins from the large and 

small arsenal, as well as contemporary 

structures, walls, paths, and interpretive 

waysides. Arsenal square is the current 

location of John Brown's Fort. The building 

has been moved and reconstructed several 

times since it served as the Federal Armory 

engine house and John Brown's refuge. The 

fort's current location is approximately 150 

feet east of its original location. 

Federal Armory. The Federal Armory is on 

the low lying land between the south bank of 

the Potomac River and the earthen 

embankment along Potomac Street. The site 

lies between the Potomac Hydroelectric 

Power Plant to the west and the remnants of 

the pontoon bridge to the east. 

The remnant foundations of 18 armory 

buildings are in this area. A narrow millrace 

extending from the Armory canal along 

Potomac Street furnished water to turn the 

water wheels and turbines of the various 

Armory workshops. Also running parallel to 

the south bank of the Potomac River is the 

Armory River wall that historically supported 

the original wooden trestle used by the 

Baltimore & Ohio Railroad (B&0) line after it 

crossed the Potomac. 

At the east end of the armory grounds near the 

Point, the railroad line enters Harpers Ferry. 

In the early 1890s the B&0 realigned the rail 

line by creating a 1,500 foot long earthen 

embankment parallel to the raised trestle. This 

embankment covers the millrace that 

extended east from the Armory canal and 

approximately a dozen armory building 

foundations, including the site of the Engine 

House (John Brown's Fort). Today a monument on the embankment shows the original 

location of the fort. Commemorative tablets 

placed near the monument in 1897 have been 

moved to The Point near the original limits of 

Arsenal Square. Because the embankment 

blocked drainage of water from downtown 

Harpers Ferry, especially during a flood, the 

B&0 constructed a drainage culvert, or 

vomitorium, near the east end of Shenandoah 

Street. 

During a second realignment of the railroad in 

1931, the B&O depot was moved several 

hundred yards west to provide continued 

passenger access. The B&0 train station is 

within the limits of the original Armory 

grounds. CSX retains an easement on the 

original B&O depot location as a right of way 

and work yard. 

120 
Cultural Resources 

Potomac River Frontage. The former 

Potomac Power Hydroelectric Plant sits on 

the foundations of a pulp mill (converted from 

the armory rolling mill) along the south bank 

of the Potomac River, west of the main armory 

grounds. Two of the original powergenerating turbines remain in their delivery 

flume below the building. 

The Armory canal runs east from the canal 

intake gates, originally completed in 1801, 

approximately one mile to the power plant. 

Water was conveyed from the Potomac River 

down to the various Armory workshops 

where it provided power to run the machinery 

used in weapons manufacture. A narrow 

raceway extended on from the Armory canal 

parallel to Potomac Street but is now covered 

by the railroad embankment. 

Virginius/Hall's Island. Virginius and Hall's 

islands extend along the Shenandoah River 

south of Shenandoah Street roughly from 

Lower Town to the U.S. 340 bridge. 

Extensive ruins on Hall's Island include 

exposed remains of Hall's Rifle Works where, 

in 1820, John H. Hall began production of his 

breech-loading rifle for the U.S. Government. 

After the Civil War, Hall's Island became the 

site of the Shenandoah Pulp Mill and Lake 

Quigley. Walls from Lake Quigley and the 

ruins of the pulp mill are the most prominent 

features evident to the visitor today. Structural 

remains of some of the water control 

structures can be seen, though many have 

been covered as a result of repeated flooding. 

Virginius Island contains extensive ruins 

associated with the 19th century industrial 

heritage of Harpers Ferry. Visible ruins 

include the canal headgates and intake 

tunnels, a river retaining wall, a cotton/flour 

mill and factory, Herr's Mill, and foundations 

to several single family and worker's 

rowhouses. Additional resources buried 

within the archeological record include a 

water raceway system, sawmill, machine 

shops, carriage and wagon works, foundries, 

granaries, and blacksmith shops. 

The Winchester and Potomac rail line, now 

part of CSX, continues to carry freight trains 

through the island along the original 

alignment established in 1836. 

Camp Hill. Camp Hill maintains a historic 

quality with many structures from the 

antebellum and later periods. Thirteen 

structures on Camp Hill have been included in 

the List of Classified Structures. Four of the 

armory residence structures survived the Civil 

War and became the nucleus of Storer 

College. After the Civil War, Storer College 

was established and the Lockwood house and 

three other former armory buildings were 

donated to the college. Today parts of the 

college have been adapted for NPS administrative purposes and are in this area of the 

national historical park. Other modern 

structures constructed in the 1960s for the 

Mather Training Center, the Harpers Ferry 

Interpretive Design Center, and buildings for 

the NPS maintenance facilities are located in 

Camp Hill. 

Short Hill. This property is about 2.5 miles 

down stream from Harpers Ferry and is part 

of the scenic view of the "gap" featuring the 

confluence of the Shenandoah and Potomac 

Rivers and Maryland and Loudoun Heights. 

The Short Hill property was evaluated and 

determined eligible for listing on the National 

Register of Historic Places, but little is known 

about its resources. Documentation suggests 

that settlement and development of Short Hill 

began during the colonial era and continued 

through the early 20th century. An industrial 

community developed and structures such as 

mills, a dam, distillery, quarries, ferry landings, 

and residences, as well as supporting 

structures were present. 

Schoolhouse Ridge. On Schoolhouse Ridge 

north is an 1890's era house associated with 

the orchard era (early to mid 20th century). It 

is a two story braced frame structure on a 

121 
CHAPTER 3: AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

limestone foundation. The house was 

originally covered with weatherboard siding, 

which has been covered with rough stucco. 

The shallow pitched roof is sheathed with 

raised seam metal; there is one central brick 

chimney. The interior of the house is 

extremely decayed. Windows and some 

moldings appear to be original. Several 

outbuildings are to the rear of the dwelling 

house, all of which appear to be of a later 

construction date than the house. 

Schoolhouse Ridge South is the site of the 

historic Allstadt Farm. Although the original 

Allstadt Ordinary is not on NPS property, a 

later 19th -century farm site was established 

on land that is now managed by the national 

historical park. In addition to this historic 

farm site, a series of early 20th century quarryworkers houses associated with the company 

town of Millville are on the property. 

Although probably not individually eligible, 

these houses are significant in the area of 

industrial history. All of the sites within 

Schoolhouse Ridge South await formal 

National Register evaluation. 

Murphy Farm. Historic structures at the 

Murphy Farm include the historic farmhouse, 

Civil War earthworks, and the foundations for 

John Brown's Fort. The earthworks were 

constructed by Union troops in 1864 and 

remain in relatively good condition. There is 

one set of earthworks near the crest of the 

bluff and another partially down the steep 

banks overlooking the Shenandoah River. A 

third set of earthworks constructed as a “J” 

shaped redoubt is near the southern boundary 

of the farm overlooking the River near the 

Chambers-Murphy farmhouse. On September 

14, 1862, General A.P. Hill's division of 3,000 

men marched to and deployed on the 

Chambers (Murphy) Farm. This maneuver 

was the turning point of the battle, since Hill 

had flanked the Union left, forcing the Federal 

surrender on September 15, 1862. 

In addition to Civil War significance, the farm 

is the location where John Brown’s Fort was 

rebuilt in 1895. In 1896, the Colored Women's 

League visited the site and in 1906, W.E.B. Du 

Bois and members of the Niagara Movement 

conference made a pilgrimage to the Fort on 

this site. The fort remained at this location 

until 1909, when it was moved to the campus 

of Storer College. 

Nash Farm. The Nash farm is a small, early 

20th-century dairy farm complex that is listed 

on the National Register. The farm is comprised of several buildings, including a onestory frame gable-end dwelling set on a 

concrete block foundation that appears to 

have been subject to a 1960s renovation. A 

roofed dairy barn with six bays is also set on a 

concrete block foundation and lies north of 

the house. A frame milk house between the 

house and barn is a one-story gable-roofed 

building, which has been converted into living 

quarters. Just northeast of the barn is a twostory frame tenant house. In a wooded area on 

the side of a ravine is a small framed, one 

room building with German siding and a 

metal covered gable roof. It has the appearance of a small gothic styled ornamental 

chapel or shrine, but may have begun as a 

typical farmstead spring house. East of the 

tenant house, along the northern tree line is a 

complex of framed buildings. 

Cultural Landscapes 

A cultural landscape is a reflection of human 

adaptation to the environment, and the use of 

its natural resources. Such a landscape 

develops from the interrelationships of human 

derived and natural component features such 

as general land use patterns, natural topography, scale, spatial organization, boundaries, 

vegetation, and the arrangement of circulation 

features such as roads. The development of 

these landscapes arises from the interaction 

between humans and their environment 

which in turn are reflective of the community's values and traditions. Development of 

these relationships and features through time 

tends to become solidified and can often 

122 
Cultural Resources 

become traditions in and of themselves, 

thereby providing a visual chronicle of those 

changes. They are an unparalleled source of 

information about the times of their development as well as providing a dynamic view 

through time that is nonetheless intimately 

connected to the present. 

Between 1990 and 1992 NPS staff developed 

two cultural landscape plans. The first focused 

on Virginius Island and reflects people’s 

values and attitudes toward land use. The 

second concentrated on the Lower Town area 

as both a landscape of historic sites associated 

with important events, activities, and persons 

as well as reflecting attitudes toward land use. 

Other NPS areas such as Bolivar Heights, 

Camp Hill, Murphy Farm, Nash Farm and 

Schoolhouse Ridge Battlefield may exhibit the 

attributes of a cultural landscape, but they 

have not been formally identified or evaluated. The national historical park preserves 

these areas in a manner that attempts to reflect 

a semblance of how they may have appeared 

during their period of significance such as in 

1862 during the Civil War occupation. 

Lower Town. The town’s setting retains 

many of the physical patterns, features, and 

artifacts relating to historic periods of early 

settlement, commercial development, industrial enterprise, tourism, and transportation. 

Land use in Lower Town was dramatically 

influenced by the limitations of the natural 

landscape —specifically the rivers and the 

hillsides. 

The response to these limitations is the 

arrangement, construction method, massing, 

and grouping of the individual structures as 

they define public and private spaces, land use 

boundaries, ownership, material, public 

access, circulation and drainage that generally 

establish the backbone of the streetscape and 

give it a distinctive form. 

The streetscape is characterized by a continuum of facades with no set-back, 

occasionally interrupted by relatively small 

open spaces resulting from missing buildings. 

General land use patterns reflect the impact of 

government ownership of large portions of 

the town through the early settlement and 

industrial development. The Hillside above 

and “behind” Lower Town is a strong natural 

feature influencing much of the built landscape. Resources in this landscape include 

remnant walls, foundation ruins, including the 

structural ruins of the Episcopal Church, and 

the trail connecting Lower Town and Camp 

Hill through Harper Cemetery. 

Historically, the primary vegetation 

component was sustenance gardens. These 

gardens have disappeared over time, and 

ornamental trees and shrubs have been 

planted throughout Lower Town. 

Virginius Island/Hall’s Island. The 

landscape of Virginius Island strongly reflects 

the manipulation of the Shenandoah River. 

James Stubblefield's subdivision of the island 

into four parcels originally shaped and 

organized individual properties according to 

their proximity to waterpower. These parcels 

developed into separate industrial clusters, 

with primary structures arranged according to 

the water system. Natural river channels were 

adapted and utilized in the earliest island 

mills. Raceways and water tunnels were 

constructed and further refined to facilitate 

the use of waterpower for the entire island. 

Advances in mill technology influenced 

additional changes in the water systems. On 

Virginius, this progression is evident in the 

landforms found on the island. Foundations 

of native stone quarried from the hillside 

across the canal channel provide evidence of 

the extensive use of stone on the island for the 

construction of the mills, raceways, walls and 

residences. 

Virginius Island is the former privately-owned 

industrial community that was once surrounded by U.S. Armory properties. 

Functionally, the landscape of Virginius Island 

123 
CHAPTER 3: AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

is that of a nature preserve. Vegetation 

conceals many structural features during the 

peak visitor season in the summer. Walking 

along the trails the visitor perceives the island 

as a nature walk with limited interpretation of 

the water-powered industry and historical 

events. Primary access to the site is by foot 

along Shenandoah Street either at the 

trailhead adjacent to the national historical 

park blacksmith shop or by way of Virginius 

Island Bridge across the Shenandoah Canal. 

The trail forks in three directions and 

meanders over the site through the dense 

vegetation. A branch of CSX carries freight 

trains, sometimes as often as three times a day, 

through the island along the original rail 

alignment established as the Winchester and 

Potomac in 1836. 

Schoolhouse Ridge. Schoolhouse Ridge was 

under agricultural cultivation prior to the Civil 

War. For the most part this land has remained 

in agricultural use up to the present time. 

However, the area also exhibits a connection 

to the industrial history of Jefferson County 

and the nearby town of Millville. "The 

Standard Lime and Stone Company" built 

employee homes on the property in the early 

twentieth century" (NPS 2003b: 1). Those 

structures are now in ruins and associated 

landscape components have also suffered 

neglect since the families left. Little survives 

that would constitute a historic vernacular 

landscape of a residential community. 

Murphy Farm. The Murphy farm is the site 

of three landscape components, two of which 

directly relate to the development of Harpers 

Ferry. In addition to the agricultural setting 

that is the dominant component of the 

landscape, the farm contains both Civil War 

earthworks and the lone foundation of the 

1895-1910 location of John Brown's Fort. 

The remnant Civil War earthworks are 

positioned over the Shenandoah River with a 

panoramic view of the river valley. Currently a 

heavily forested ridgeline, during the Civil 

War vegetation around these earthworks was 

cleared to provide an open field of fire to 

anyone approaching Harpers Ferry by road or 

railroad bed. Vegetation has now invaded the 

earthworks themselves with bushes and young 

trees. 

Bolivar Heights. The earliest known 

development of Bolivar Heights consisted of 

agricultural use. During the battle of 1862 

federal Forces were positioned on Camp Hill 

and Bolivar Heights in order to protect the 

town of Harpers Ferry. After being surrounded and bombarded by General 

"Stonewall" Jackson who had arrived to take 

Harpers Ferry, General Miles surrendered 

approximately 12,700 men. The agricultural 

setting of the Heights and the earthworks that 

were constructed to provide protection to the 

federal forces and their artillery remain in 

fairly good condition. 

Archeological Resources 

Archeology is the scientific study of past 

human cultures by analyzing the material 

remains (sites and artifacts) that people left 

behind. 

Archeological sites can provide important 

information regarding human activities, such 

as their religions, technologies, and houses, 

and the environments in which they lived. 

Many of these sites may be eligible for 

inclusion in the National Register of Historic 

Places. Archeological resources representing 

both prehistoric and historic time periods are 

documented at Harpers Ferry. 

Approximately 43% of the national historical 

park land has been surveyed and inventoried 

for archeological sites. This work occurred 

starting in the 1950s and continues today. 

However that work has been mostly limited to 

the Lower Town area, Virginius Island, and 

Maryland and Loudoun Heights. Work 

performed in the 1990s also discovered the 

first evidence of Native American habitation 

at the confluence of the two rivers. 

124 
Cultural Resources 

Inventory and excavation of the extent of 

archeological deposits covering both the 

prehistory and history of Harpers Ferry has 

generated more than 50 reports and over 

500,000 objects. 

Lower Town. Archeological research conducted over the years exhibits a high density 

and diversity of archeological resources 

throughout Lower Town. Baseline data was 

collected throughout the 10 subareas of 

Lower Town through archeological survey 

and excavation beginning in the late 1950s. 

This research coincided with the centennial of 

John Brown's raid and the Civil War. In the 

mid-1970s, extensive excavation provided 

considerable evidence about the location of 

nonextant building foundations, fence lines, 

pathways, privies, and the material culture of a 

multiuse commercial and residential block. 

Reconstruction of the streets and sidewalks of 

Lower Town in the late 1970s and the construction of water and sewer lines during this 

same period prompted additional archeological analysis. Other excavations include the 

investigation of Building 48, a historic armory 

worker's house, the backyards of package 116, 

and excavations of various commercial 

districts throughout town. Although originally 

intended to support the restoration/ 

rehabilitation of historic buildings, the result 

of investigations conducted in 1989 in Lower 

Town revealed archeological evidence of 

Native American presence deeply buried near 

the confluence of the two rivers. 

Work conducted over the years supports the 

notion that substantial archeological deposits 

likely exist throughout Lower Town. 

Federal Armory and Potomac River 

Frontage. A three-year archeological investigation of the Armory Grounds is underway. 

This study is focused on an area referred to as 

the "Lower Armory Grounds" located within 

the northeast quadrant of the armory site. 

Portions of a Warehouse and the Smith and 

Forging Shops are accessible at this location. 

The area west of the train station, referred to 

as the "Upper Armory Grounds," is also a 

prime location for future exploration. 

Approximately 10 additional armory 

structures may be accessible in this area. The 

remainder of armory building foundations are 

beneath the 1894 and 1931 historic 20-foot 

high B&0 railroad embankments upon which 

the Harpers Ferry depot and rail spur sit and 

which forms the southern and eastern limits 

of the current armory property.

Virginius Island/Hall’s Island. When 

Virginius Island was included in Harpers 

Ferry National Historical Park, only ruined 

remnants from the formerly prosperous 

industrial community remained. Flooding and 

vegetative growth on the ruins hastened and 

intensified the deterioration of the features. 

Although the National Park Service has 

maintained the area as an archeological 

preserve, some stabilization also has occurred. 

Restoration of the Shenandoah Canal walls 

and reconstruction of the Virginius Island 

Bridge and more recently stabilization of the 

headgates, cotton/flourmill, cotton mill 

(Valley Mill), portions of the river wall, and 

the water intake tunnels are the most 

prominent preservation treatments efforts. 

Ingenious engineering methods, including a 

series of canals and underground water intake 

tunnels and raceways designed for 

transporting water for powering the mills, 

constitute the remnants of the water system 

and remain in their historical context. 

A chopping mill, machine shop, sawmill, 

foundry, blacksmith shop, and pulp mill, as 

well as foundations of five individual 

dwellings and remnants of the rowhouse 

complex comprise the remainder of the 

structural ruins on the island. Of these sites 

the machine shop, sawmill, West rowhouse, 

Wernwag House, Wernwag Street, and 

Schofield House were located and explored as 

part of an archeological investigation 

conducted in the 1990s. 

125 
CHAPTER 3: AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

In addition, archeological resources on 

neighboring Hall's island include remnants of

the rifleworks foundations, the Lake Quigley 

wall, and the pulp mill. 

Maryland & Loudoun Heights. The majority of remnant fortifications on Maryland and 

Loudoun Heights reflect Federal occupation 

of the area between 1862 and 1865. These 

fortifications also served as the eastern and 

southern segments of a huge federal fortress 

line constructed north of Harpers Ferry. 

Seven of eight major fortifications constructed 

by Union soldiers in 1862 and 1863 sit upon 

Maryland Heights (NPS 1992), including 

earthen redoubts and batteries, a stone fort 

and associated buildings, stone breastworks, 

large campground areas, and an old Union 

military road crisscrossing the mountain. 

Many of these archeological ruins remain 

relatively intact. 

Many of the Loudoun Heights historic 

fortifications, campsites, and domestic sites 

remain. Also extant are remnants of the 

military road, built sometime after 1827 (and 

rebuilt in 1862) and used for both access to 

the timberland and by Confederate troops to 

move supplies and troops to the summit. 

Stone foundations, tent platforms, and 

plateaus cleared of stone for Civil War camp 

areas have been identified on Maryland 

Heights (NPS 1989). Archeological surveys 

recorded 13 campgrounds encompassing 

nearly 60 acres of encampment scattered over 

the mountain. Eight of these campgrounds lie 

adjacent to fortifications or batteries. 

Charcoal hearths and 23 miles of charcoalrelated roads on Maryland Heights helped 

fuel the Antietam Iron Works at the mouth of 

Antietam Creek 12 miles to the northwest. 

Along the Potomac River, the C&O Canal and 

its towpath hug the base of Maryland Heights. 

The Appalachian Trail (AT) follows the 

towpath to the CSX Bridge across the 

Potomac at Harpers Ferry. Domestic sites 

dating from before and after the Civil War are 

found at the base of the mountain's eastern 

slopes. Scant remains of dwellings are also 

found on the eastern side of the Heights. 

Bolivar Heights (and Elk Run Natural 

Area). Bolivar Heights is most famous as the 

location of the surrender of 12,500 Union 

soldiers to General Stonewall Jackson on 

September 15, 1862. During the remaining 

three years of Civil War, Federal forces 

encamped on Bolivar's slopes and erected 

extensive field fortifications as part of a large 

fortress designed to protect Harpers Ferry. 

Remains of these earthworks extend along the 

crest of the ridge. 

Cavalier Heights. Only compliance-driven 

archeological surveys have been conducted at 

Cavalier Heights. These surveys resulted in no 

National Register of Historic Places eligible 

sites being identified. The remainder of the 

area has not been subjected to an intensive 

survey though it is likely that archeological 

sites and materials exist. 

Short Hill. While the area's primary use is for 

viewshed preservation, known historic 

archeological sites on Short Hill include 

Peachers Mill, a substantial ruins complex 

adjacent to the river with an associated 

dwelling, outbuildings, millrace, and dam 

across the Potomac. The Short Hill tract also 

exhibits at least four dwellings and a dam on 

Falls Branch. Also present are a lime kiln, 

several stone fences, and road traces. (NPS 

2003c:1). 

Schoolhouse Ridge. Other than a clearance 

study conducted in concert with the proposed 

construction of the MARS II facility (now site 

of the US Customs and Border Protection 

Advance Training Facility), the majority of 

this area of the national historical park has not 

been formally surveyed for archeological sites. 

Nevertheless, there are remnants of a 20thcentury quarry-workers community as well as 

a 19t century farm site on Schoolhouse Ridge 

Battlefield south. The structures themselves 

126 
Cultural Resources 

127 

are in various stages of collapse and ruin. A 

systematic shovel test pit survey was also 

conducted on the Union Skirmish Line 

Portion opposite Schoolhouse Ridge, north. 

This survey provided archeological clearance 

prior to an agricultural lease agreement. No 

archeological sites were recorded. 

Murphy Farm. Although no formal 

archeological investigations have been 

conducted on the Murphy Farm, objects 

collected by the former owner may indicate 

the presence of a prehistoric site. 

Remnants of a foundation that supported 

John Brown's Fort are on the farm. After 

being displayed at the World Colombian 

Exposition in 1891, the fort was rebuilt on land 

donated by Alexander Murphy. In 1910 the 

fort was dismantled and removed to Storer 

College on Camp Hill. The foundation of 

fieldstone at the Murphy Farm remains 

generally intact. 

The Civil War earthworks have not been 

formally surveyed, although information 

gained from the previous owner indicates that 

he conducted personal excavations at these 

sites. Artifacts collected on the farm have been 

donated to the national historical park; 

however, there is no record to tie artifacts to 

excavations. 

Shenandoah City/Bull Falls. In 1978 the 

NPS Denver Service Center conducted 

archeological surveys on Cavalier Heights and 

along the north shoreline of the Shenandoah 

River as part of the study for a new visitor 

transportation system. A limited reconnaissance survey was conducted in the area of 

Shenandoah City, documenting remnants of 

an historic road trace (Rough and Ready 

Road), bridge abutments associated with the 

historic road, an unidentified structure, ruins 

of an unidentified mill or factory, portions of 

Strider's Mill and head race, portions of 

Strider's Mansion, a portion of the 

Patowmack Canal, and additional unidentified 

structures near the intersection of Shenandoah and Union Street. Historical data alludes 

to approximately 20 structures making up 

Shenandoah City during the time of the Civil 

War. More intensive excavations of this area 

could reveal more of its history. 
NATURAL RESOURCES 

OVERVIEW 

Natural resources at the Harpers Ferry water 

gap have attracted human attention for 

centuries. Native Americans, early settlers, 

railroads, and canal builders used the gap in 

the Blue Ridge Mountains as an avenue of 

travel and transport. The rivers that carved the 

gap also produced power for the town's mills 

and factories. Hardwoods from the mountains 

provided charcoal for industry and fuel for 

stoves. Harpers shale provided excellent 

building material. The battle with nature 

continues as severe floods have repeatedly 

ravaged human-built structures. 

The national historical park is located where 

three physiographic provinces overlap: Valley 

and Ridge, Blue Ridge, and Piedmont. 

Ecological types include riparian zones, 

agricultural fields, upland forests, developed 

areas, wetlands, important geologic 

exposures, rock slide sites, and rare limestone 

glades. There are approximately 15 miles of 

river shoreline and 100 acres of wetlands. 

WATER RESOURCES 

(INCLUDING WETLANDS) 

About 360 million years ago, the Potomac 

River began cutting its way through the 

Appalachian Mountains, forming the water 

gap that lies between Maryland Heights and 

Loudoun Heights. Precipitation collecting at 

the base of the Appalachian Mountains forms 

the Shenandoah River. The Shenandoah and 

Potomac rivers converge at Harpers Ferry and 

flow eastward to Chesapeake Bay as the 

Potomac River. The rivers are not within the 

national historical park's authorized 

boundary. 

In addition to the two major rivers, there are 

three perennial streams and several canals 

within the national historical park boundaries. 

The streams are Elks Run and Flowing Springs 

in West Virginia, and Piney Run in Virginia. 

Piney Run has a scenic set of falls near the 

Potoma Wayside. There is also a small 

ephemeral stream fed by springs on the west 

side of Maryland Heights. Canals include the 

Chesapeake and Ohio Canal (C&O) on the 

east side of the Potomac River, the Federal 

Armory canal on the Potomac frontage, the 

Shenandoah Canal adjacent to the Shenandoah River, and the historic Potomack Canal 

in the Lower Town area. The hydrology and 

topography of the area is such that surface and 

subsurface springs are numerous (NPS 1986). 

Water Quality 

The NPS Natural Resource Information 

Division (NPS 2003e) indicates that natural 

sources of water hardness in Harpers Ferry 

are calcium and magnesium. The presence of 

calcium is very common due to the large 

quantities of limestone (CaCO4) in this region. 

The presence of limestone also helps to buffer 

river waters against acidic conditions. Sodium, 

potassium, iron, and manganese are also 

present in the Potomac and Shenandoah 

Rivers. If large enough amounts are present, 

iron and manganese can be indicators of 

acidic water. 

Both domestic and industrial wastes are 

sources of water pollution in the Harpers 

Ferry area. Agricultural practices, including 

the use of fertilizers and pesticides, and heavy 

rainfall events are primary contributors to 

contamination of the streams and rivers. The 

amount of forest cover, land use, and waste 

from industries each affects sedimentation. 

Most of the suspended materials in the 

Potomac and Shenandoah rivers are the 

products of soil and channel erosion, while 

some are industrial wastes (NPS 2003e). These 

sources of pollution are outside national 

historical park boundaries. 

128 
Natural Resources 

Wetlands 

Wetlands are identified by the presence of 

hydrophytic plants, hydric soils, and 

frequency of flooding. Wetlands within the 

national historical park are mainly along the 

floodplains of the two rivers; however, a 

wetland created by beavers is along Flowing 

Springs Run in Jackson's Right Flank. Historic 

canals and headraces for water-powered 

industry that are no longer used have become 

de facto wetlands. According to the National 

Wetland Inventory (accessed at 

www.nwi.fws.gov), the national historical 

park contains more than 100 acres of 

wetlands. Most of these are classified as 

palustrine, forested (deciduous), and 

temporarily flooded (USFWS 2005). Other 

areas classified as wetlands are within the 

river's banks and not on NPS land. 

The most prominent wetland in the national 

historical park is the 7-acre area adjacent to 

Shoreline Drive that is the former Lake 

Quincy, a man-made lake that was part of the 

Shenandoah Canal. In this wetland, a few 

inches of standing water lie above the 

substrate, with greater duckweed (Spirodela 

polyrhiza) frequently covering the surface. 

This type of habitat supports many species of 

both terrestrial and aquatic invertebrates, 

small mammals, waterfowl, marsh birds, 

reptiles, and amphibians. 

Floodplains 

Floodplains are along the shores of the 

Potomac and Shenandoah rivers, sometimes 

reaching inland along stream banks that drain 

into these rivers. Many of the structures in 

Lower Town are within the floodplains of 

these two rivers and subject to inundation 

during high river flows. Flooding of these 

structures is of a particular concern when they 

house expensive interpretive exhibits or 

irreplaceable museum collections. 

According to the historic record, Harpers 

Ferry may experience a flood over 20 feet 

every 5 to 10 years. The 1936 flood, which 

reached a record height of 36.5 feet, is 

estimated to only occur every 125 years. 

Floods in the national historical park tend to 

be fairly deep, since there is not much room 

for river water to spread out once it overflows 

its banks. Heavy precipitation that produces 

rapid runoff is a major flood-causing factor. 

Flood Water Levels (data from Harpers Ferry 

National Historical Park) 

5 ft. River is considered hazardous for 

recreational use 

16 ft. Approximate level of C&O Canal 

Towpath on the Maryland side of 

river 

18 ft. Official Flood Stage. Low-lying roads 

adjacent to the Shenandoah River 

begin to inundate due to backwater 

effects 

19.5 ft. Water reaches Bruce and Hamilton 

Streets 

20.5 ft. Water begins to flow through tunnel 

(vomitorium) from Potomac River 

into the lower edge of town. Half of 

Market Street is flooded. Water 

covers about half of the shuttle bus 

parking lot 

21.5 ft. Water reaches Shenandoah Street 

adjacent to the shuttle bus pavilion 

22.5 ft. Shenandoah Street flooded to the 

edge of the business district 

29-30 ft. All buildings along Shenandoah 

Street are flooded 

Noteworthy Flood Events (from National 

Weather Service webpage) 

11/25/1877 — 29.2 feet 

06/01/1889 — 34.8 feet 

10/01/1896 — 33.0 feet 

03/19/1936 — 36.5 feet (Highest level ever 

recorded) 

04/27/1937 — 29.0 feet 

10/16/1942 — 33.8 feet 

06/23/1972 — 27.7 feet (Hurricane Agnes) 

129 
CHAPTER 3: AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

11/06/1985 — 30.1 feet 

01/21/1996 — 29.4 feet 

09/09/1996 — 29.8 feet (Hurricane Fran) 

SOILS 

Common soil associations found within the 

national historical park include the BerksWeikert, whose shaley silt loams are very 

conducive to erosion and located in patches 

throughout the town itself. From the Potomac 

River northwest of Harpers Ferry to Bloomery 

Road, the Benevola-Frankstown-Braddock 

Association can be found. The Benevola series 

is clay, whereas the Frankstown series is 

shaley silt loam, and the Braddock series is 

gravelly loam. Most of the BenevolaFrankstown-Braddock Association is 

underlain by limestone and quarried by steel 

corporations for use as blast furnace flux. 

Frankstown soils are included in the USDA 

category of unique farmland. The BraddockLandes-Ashton Association lies along the 

banks of the Shenandoah River, where its 

Landes series, which is a fine sandy loam, is 

subject to occasional flooding (NPS 2003e). 

On the foothills below the Blue Ridge 

Mountains, the Dekalb-Laidig Association is 

found running from the Virginia state line to 

the Potomac River north of Bolivar Heights. 

This soil is well-drained, containing stones 

throughout. Slopes in this association are 

steep, restricting intense land uses. Adjacent 

to the Blue Ridge Mountains is the WeikertBerks Association, with shaley silt loams that 

are severely eroded as a result of streams 

dissecting the association on their way to the 

Shenandoah River. Occupying the foot slopes, 

the side, and the crest of the Blue Ridge 

Mountains is the Edgemont-Laidig-Steep 

Rockland Association. Soils in this Association 

are a shaley silt loam underlain by shattered 

shale and fine-grained sandstone. The only 

local alluvium in the national historical park is 

the Huntington silt loam of the DuffieldFrankstown-Huntington Alluvium 

Association. Generally this association is 

suited to dairy and general farming, and 

orchards, but can also be used for residential 

development (NPS 2003e).

CAVES 

Caves and numerous rock shelters have 

formed in or near the boundaries of Harpers 

Ferry. Subterranean ecosystems are typically 

in an extremely delicate balance and easily 

disrupted by human and natural events. 

Recreational use can be allowed where there 

would be no irreversible damage to cave life or 

other resources. 

There are three known caves on or near the 

national historical park. John Brown's Cave 

and John Brown's Annex Cave are in a bluff 

near the banks of the Potomac east of Elks 

Run. John Brown's Cave is rumored to have 

been used by John Brown to store weapons 

when preparing for his famous raid on the 

Federal Armory. However, due to the relatively small entrance and dampness of the 

cave, this is unlikely. The cave entrance is in 

the CSX railroad right-of-way and has been 

gated. Beyond the entrance, the cave is under 

NPS land. The cave is well known in the 

region and the front portion has been heavily 

vandalized. The back portions of the cave are 

beyond a sump (where the water meets the 

ceiling) that is passable only during dry periods. John Brown's Annex is a small cave above 

John Brown's Cave in the same cliff. 

(Information provided by Bob Bennett of the 

Tri-State Grotto of the National Speleological 

Society, Gerrardstown, West Virginia.) 

Harpers Ferry Caverns are on land that was 

once private and is now owned by the Civil 

War Preservation Trust. Harpers Ferry 

Caverns is relatively small but was developed 

with trails, stairs, and lights and opened for 

tours when it was privately owned. 

The federally endangered Indiana bat uses 

caves as roost sites and may be in the area. A 

federal species of concern, the Allegheny 

130 
Natural Resources 

woodrat, may use caves for its home. John 

Brown's Cave is known to contain three types 

of salamanders and the Eastern pipestrelle bat. 

It is highly probable that other caves and rock 

shelters may harbor some forms of life. 

VEGETATIVE COMMUNITIES 

Native Plants 

Numerous ferns, grasses, sedges, and rushes 

play a valuable role in the national historical 

park's plant communities. Trees such as 

chestnut oak and tulip poplar often dominate 

the forest canopy; whereas red maple and 

hackberry and common shrub species make 

up the understory. A variety of wildflowers 

color the hillsides every spring. 

Many fern species have been found occupying 

a wide variety of habitats. On the rock ledges 

and crevices, woolly lip fern (Cheilanthes 

tomentosa), the locally rare lobed spleenwort 

(Asplenium pinnatifidum), and the common 

polypody (Polypodium virginianum) are likely 

to be found. But on the steep, rocky, and 

partially shaded slopes of Short Hill, 

Maryland Heights, and Loudoun Heights, 

marginal shield fern (Dryopteris mariginalis) 

and Christmas fern (Polystichum acrostichoides) are more common. The floodplains 

and moist, shaded, low slopes surrounding the 

Potomac and Shenandoah Rivers support 

even more fern species, including intermediate shield fern (Dryopteris intermedia), New 

York fern (Thelypteris noveboracensis), and 

fragile fern (Cystopteris protrusa). 

Grasses and grass-like plants, including sedges 

and rushes, are a diverse and important part of 

plant communities. On the dry, rocky ridge 

tops of Maryland Heights, Loudoun Heights, 

and Short Hill, poverty grass (Danthonia 

spicata) and greenish sedge (Carex virescens) 

are the most frequent species encountered. At 

lower elevations on these ridges, cliff muhly 

(Muhlenbergia sobolifera), tall brome-grass 

(Bromus pubescens), and Bosc's panicgrass

(Dicanthelium boscii) are commonly found. In 

floodplain forests, there are species such as 

nodding fescue (Festuca subverticillata) and 

deertongue grass (Dicanthelium clandestinum). 

Prairie grasses such as big bluestem (Andropogon gerardii), the locally uncommon prairie 

cordgrass (Spartina pectinata), and the bankstabilizing Emory's sedge (Carex emoryi) are 

more likely to be seen along the riverbanks of 

the Potomac and Shenandoah. 

Colorful wildflower species such as woodland 

sunflowers (Helianthus strumosus), birdfoot 

violets (Viola pedata), and Virginia bluebells 

(Mertensia virginica) grow in the forest. Along 

the banks of the Potomac and Shenandoah 

rivers, a different group of wildflowers can be 

seen, including monkeyflower (Mimulus 

ringens), wide-leaved joe-pye weed (Eupatorium purpureum), and the New England 

aster (Aster novae-angliae). 

A wide variety of tree and shrub species occur 

in the 70% of the national historical park that 

is forested. Chestnut oak (Quercus prinus) is 

usually the dominant tree in the forest canopy 

on rocky soils of higher ridges such as Maryland Heights. Black oak (Quercus velutina) is 

also important on south, west, and east facing 

slopes. Northern red oak (Quercus rubra) is 

found with chestnut oak on rocky, northfacing slopes, where eastern hemlock (Tsuga 

canadensis) was formerly prominent. Red 

maple (Acer rubrum), black gum (Nyssa sylvatica), and flowering dogwood (Cornus florida) 

are frequent understory trees, while mountain 

laurel (Kalmia latifolia), black huckleberry 

(Gaylussacia baccata), Blue Ridge blueberries 

(Vaccinium pallidum) and deerberry (V. 

stamineum), and maple leaf viburnum 

(Viburnum acerifolium) are common shrubs. 

Lower elevation, north-facing slopes with 

base-rich soils support a mixed mesophytic 

forest of northern red oak, white ash 

(Fraxinus americana), sugar maple (Acer 

saccharum), basswood (Tilia americana), 

hackberry (Celtis occidentalis), bitternut 

hickory (Carya cordiformis), slippery elm 

131 
CHAPTER 3: AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

(Ulmus rubra), and tulip poplar (Liriodendron 

tulipifera). Shrubs of the mesophytic forests 

include spicebush (Lindera benzoin), hop 

hornbeam (Ostrya virginiana), American 

bladdernut (Staphylea trifolia), and pawpaw 

(Asimina triloba).

There are two extensive types of floodplain 

riparian forests along the Potomac and 

Shenandoah Rivers: lower areas that flood an 

average of once everyone to three years have 

silver maple (Acer saccharinum) as a prominent component with associated species such 

as sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), green ash 

(Fraxinus pennsylvanica), and cottonwood 

(Populus deltoides); higher parts of floodplains 

have a diverse forest of sycamore, white and 

green ash, tulip poplar, bitternut hickory, 

hackberry, sugar maple, black walnut (Juglans 

nigra), and the locally rare Shumard oak 

(Quercus shumardii). Spicebush, pawpaw, 

American bladdernut, and American hornbeam (Carpinus caroliniana) are among the 

most common shrubs of floodplain forests. 

The town of Harpers Ferry was generally 

cleared of vegetation in 1859, except for a few 

trees retained to provide shade. Most of the 

remaining ground was covered with grass or 

ornamental vegetation. Upland areas were 

completely cleared for fuel, building material, 

and artillery firing lines at various times. 

Present vegetation is secondary or tertiary 

growth. The original chestnut-oak forests 

have been succeeded by oak-hickory climax 

forests. The once-predominant American 

chestnut was eliminated from the area by the 

1930s (NPS 1986). This extirpation was partly 

a result of a chestnut blight that affected the 

eastern U.S. in the first half of the 20th 

century. 

Nonnative Plants 

Nonnative species, also known as exotic, 

alien, or introduced species, are defined as 

species that occur in a certain place due to 

deliberate, accidental, direct, or indirect 

human actions. Harpers Ferry's long history 

of human habitation is responsible for the 

introduction of many nonnative plant species. 

These were brought into the area as ornamental landscape plantings, livestock feed, or 

for other purposes. Others, such as noxious 

weeds, are undesirable but continue to spread, 

especially in disturbed areas. 

Invasive, nonnative species are capable of 

displacing native species, and therefore 

threaten the diversity and integrity of native 

communities. Based on vegetation inventories 

conducted in the 1990s, over 260 nonnative 

plant species have been identified in the 

national historical park, including the garlicmustard (Alliaria petiolata), Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), tree-of-heaven 

(Ailanthus altissima), Japanese stilt-grass 

(Microstegium vimineum), and wineberry 

(Rubus phoenicoiasius). In 2002-2003, the NPS 

National Capital Region's Exotic Plant Management Team inventoried 51 of the most 

invasive species and mapped their ranges. The 

inventory indicates that these plants inhabit 

over 43,000 acres (cumulative acreage for all 

the nonnative species). Garlic-mustard alone 

inhabits over 2,000 acres of the national 

historical park. 

FISH 

Historically, 43 species of fish have been 

encountered in the national historical park, 

including the Potomac and Shenandoah rivers 

and their tributaries. Freshwater game fish 

include largemouth and smallmouth bass 

(Micropterus salmoides and M. dolomieu), 

channel catfish (Ictalurus punctatus), and 

bluegill sunfish (Lepomis macrochirus). Other 

fish indigenous to the river waters include 

dace, chub, shiner, darter, minnows, bullhead, 

and carp. Eels may also be present here. 

In an inventory study conducted by Richard 

Raesly in 2003, fishes were collected from Elks 

Run, Flowing Springs Run, and Piney Run. A 

total of 632 fishes representing 32 species 

132 
Natural Resources 

from six families were captured and identified 

(for a species list, see appendix C). All species 

have been previously reported from the 

Potomac River. This represents a reasonably 

high diversity of fishes given the limited 

amount of stream habitats within the national 

historical park (Raesly 2003, see appendix D). 

WILDLIFE 

Native Animals 

Harpers Ferry is home to a highly diverse 

animal community of insects, reptiles, 

amphibians, birds, and mammals. Habitat 

types include riparian zones, agricultural 

fields, upland forests, developed areas, wetlands, geologic exposures, rock slide sites, and 

rare limestone glades. 

Approximately 140 insect species, including 

spiders, butterflies, ticks, mites, millipedes and 

centipedes, have been identified in the 

national historical park. Butterfly species that 

have been observed include eastern tiger 

swallowtails (Papilio glaucus), zebra swallowtails (Eurytides marcellus marcellus), meadow 

fritillaries (Boloria bellona bellona), silverspotted skippers (Epargyreus clarus), and 

monarchs (Danaus plexippus). 

The national historical park is home to two 

frog species and eight species of salamanders, 

including the northern green frog (Rana 

clamitans), the wood frog (Rana sylvatica), the 

spotted salamander (Ambystoma maculatum), 

and the seal salamander (Desmognathus 

monticola) . 

Eastern box turtles (Terrapene carolina) and 

Eastern milksnakes (Lampropeltis triangulum) 

are often encountered in the national 

historical park. These reptiles are found in the 

mountains and within the lower historical 

district. Northern red-bellied turtles 

(pseudemys rubriventris) also live in the 

national historical park. Other snakes found 

here include the common water snake 

(Nerodia sipedon) and northern copperhead 

(Agkistrodon contortrix). Lizards frequently 

spotted within the national historical park's 

forests include the broadheaded skink 

(Eumeces laticep) and the fence lizard 

(Sceloporus undulatus). 

Over 170 bird species have been identified in 

the national historical park. The specific 

species depends on the habitat encountered. 

Great blue herons (Ardea herodias) and 

Canada geese (Branta canadensis) are found 

along the banks of the Shenandoah Canal. On 

Maryland or Loudoun Heights, species such 

as the pileated woodpecker (Dryocopus 

pileatus) and Baltimore oriole (Icterus galbula) 

are likely to be seen. A bald eagle (Haliaeetus 

leucocephalus) may be seen over the national 

historical park between late winter and early 

summer. Along with bird species that reside 

here year round, many other species use the 

national historical park during their spring 

and fall migrations. 

Harpers Ferry is home to more than 30 

mammal species. Some of these, however, 

such as the American mink (Mustela vison) and 

the short-tailed shrew (Blarina brevicauda) 

are not frequently observed. On Loudoun 

Heights, gray and fox squirrels (Sciurus 

carolinensis and S. niger), and eastern 

chipmunks (Tamias striatus) are commonly 

seen. The southern flying squirrel (Glaucomys 

volans) was found in the national historical 

park in a 2001 mammal survey. Groundhogs 

(Marmota monax), Virginia opossums 

(Didelphis virginianus), raccoons (Procyon 

lotor) and several bat species are common. 

White-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) 

move and feed throughout undeveloped 

districts of the national historical park. Park 

resource specialists are concerned that deer 

have overpopulated the Maryland Heights 

district and are causing impacts on other 

resources. 

133 
CHAPTER 3: AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

134 

Nonnative Animals 

Invasive, nonnative species are capable of 

displacing native species and therefore 

threaten the diversity and integrity of native 

ecosystems. Nonnative animal species found 

in the national historical park include gypsy 

moth (Lymantria dispar), hemlock woolly 

adelgid (Aldeges tsugae), European starlings 

(Sturnus vulgaris) and house sparrows (Passer 

domesticus). 

SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES 

Federally Listed Species 

and Species of Concern 

In addition to plant and wildlife species that 

are federally listed as threatened, endangered 

or candidate, the National Park Service must 

address potential impacts to federal species of 

concern. Species of concern are those for 

which the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has 

information indicating that protection under 

the Endangered Species Act may be 

warranted. While these species lack formal 

recognition as candidates for possible future 

listing under the Endangered Species Act, it is 

the policy of the National Park Service to 

inventory, monitor, and manage species of 

concern in a manner similar to its treatment of 

federally listed species. 

Table 8 was derived from lists provided by 

Fish and Wildlife Service field offices in West 

Virginia, Maryland, and Virginia. This table 

indicates only those species known or 

probable on national historical park lands. 

The Indiana bat (Myotis sodalis) could 

conceivably be affected by management 

actions because it may use the area for 

foraging and roosting between April 1 and 

November 14. Indiana bat summer foraging 

habitats are generally defined as riparian, 

bottomland, or upland forest, and old fields or 

pastures with scattered trees. The national 

historical park contains all of these habitat 

types. Roosting and maternity habitat consists 

primarily of live or dead hardwood tree 

species such as shagbark hickory, which have 

exfoliating bark that provides space for bats to 

roost between the bark and the bole of the 

tree. Tree cavities, crevices, splits, or hollow 

portions of tree boles and limbs also provide 

roost sites (USFWS-WV 2002). 

TABLE 8. FEDERALLY LISTED SPECIES

State Listed Species Species of Concern 

West Virginia Indiana bat (Myotis sodalis), Butternut (Juglans cinerea) 

Endangered, possible summer

resident Allegheny woodrat (Neotoma magister) 

Cerulean warbler (Dendroica Cerulean)

Migrant loggerhead shrike (Lanius 

ludovianus migrans) 

Dotted skipper (Hesperia attalus Slossonae)

Bigger's amphipod (Stygobromus biggersi)

found in Ditmer Cave

Maryland 

Bald eagle (Haliaeetus

leucocephalus), Threatened, nest 

on island in Potomac River near 

Short Hill

(None known in national historical park) 

Virginia (None) (None known in national historical park)
Natural Resources 

Limestone caves are used for winter 

hibernation by this species. The preferred 

caves have a temperature averaging 37 degrees 

to 43 degrees Fahrenheit in midwinter, and a 

relative humidity averaging 87%. There are 29 

known hibernacula (shelters for winter 

hibernation) for the Indiana bat in the 

limestone region of eastern West Virginia in 

Preston, Tucker, Randolph, Pendleton, 

Pocahontas, Greenbrier, Monroe, and Mercer 

Counties. The population of each 

hibernaculum in West Virginia ranges in size 

from one to 9,000 individuals. Recent data 

indicate that the area within an approximate 

5-mile radius of a hibernaculum is important 

foraging and roosting habitat for the Indiana 

bat in the fall swarming period, August 15 

through November 14. A roosting colony was 

identified along the C & 0 Canal in Maryland 

(USFWS-WV 2002). 

Bald eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) are 

federally listed as threatened. A bald eagle's 

nest is on an island in the Potomac River 

adjacent to the Short Hill portion of the 

national historical park. Eagles have 

successfully bred here for the last 5 years (NPS 

staff). Although the island is not in the 

national historical park boundary, the eagles 

could use adjacent NPS lands. Any action 

prescribed for Short Hill would be analyzed 

for potential impacts to eagles using this 

nesting site. The breeding season for bald 

eagles in Maryland, Virginia, and West 

Virginia is generally December 15 through 

June 15 (sometimes up to July 15 for eagles 

that are nesting later due to earlier failures). 

This species is currently listed as threatened 

but has been proposed for delisting due to 

population recovery. 

The Allegheny woodrat (Neotoma magister), 

a federal species of concern, was found in the 

national historical park in the summers of 

2001 and 2002 (McShea and O'Brien 2003). It 

prefers habitat with cliffs, caves, or rock 

outcrops. 

There is no designated critical habitat for any 

of these species in Harpers Ferry NHP. Also, 

there are no federal threatened or endangered 

plants known in the national historical park. 

State-Listed Species in 

the National Historical Park 

Table 9 shows the state-listed species that 

might occur in the national historical park. 

The American peregrine falcon breeds in 

Mexico, the United States, and Canada. 

Peregrine falcons lay their eggs in "scrapes” in 

the soft earth on the floor of their nests, which 

are typically on ledges and in small shallow 

caves high on cliff walls (USFWS Endangered 

Species webpage). They prefer open territory 

for foraging. In 1999 this species was removed 

from the federal endangered species list after 

making a comeback in the coastal areas of the 

East. However, it continues to be listed as a 

state endangered species in Virginia and 

Maryland. The national historical park is 

cooperating in the Peregrine Falcon 

Restoration Project breeding program and has 

installed nesting boxes on Maryland Heights 

above the Potomac River. This effort has 

successfully raised and released 29 falcons 

since its inception in the summer of 2001. 

To protect the peregrines, NPS staff 

implements an area closure for 300 feet 

around the site when they are present (early 

June through late July). The falcons move out 

of the area by late July and the closure is lifted. 

However, if a breeding pair has established, a 

closure around the nesting location is 

imposed for the nesting period, which could 

be as early as February and as late as July. The 

closure would extend for about one month 

after the chicks fledge (begin flying). Given 

this variability, a closure of the vicinity could 

be February to August. 

135 
CHAPTER 3: AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

TABLE 9. STATE LISTED SPECIES

State Plant Animal 

West Virginia Short's rock-cress Osprey

Wild blue indigo Broad-headed skink 

Glomerate sedge Wood turtle

Chestnut lipfern

Woolly lipfern

Awned cyperus

Hairy swamp loosestrife

Halberd-leaved mallow

Winged-loosestrife

Starflower false Solomon's-seal

Yellow nail-wort

Arrow-arum

Torrey's mountain-mint

Shumard oak

Rock skullcap

Snowy campion

Four-flowered loosestrife

Three-flower melic grass

Flat-stemmed spikerush

Maryland Lobed spleenwort Pepper and salt skipper 

Crested iris Giant swallowtail 

Allegheny woodrat 

Peregrine falcon (reintroduced)

Virginia Short's rock-cress Peregrine falcon (reintroduced)

White trout-lily

Sweet-scented Indian Plantain 

Winged loosestrife 

SOURCE: Derived from lists provided by the state natural resources departments of West Virginia, 

Maryland, and Virginia.

SOUNDSCAPES 

Natural soundscapes exist in the absence of 

human-caused sound. The natural 

soundscape in Harpers Ferry is a result of the 

biological and physical resources of the 

national historical park such as: 

• sounds produced by animal life such as 

birds, frogs, and insects to define 

territories or attract mates 

• sounds produced by physical processes 

wind in the trees, flowing water, or claps 

of thunder 

Natural sounds predominate throughout most 

of the undeveloped outlying portions of the 

national historical park (Maryland Heights, 

Loudoun Heights, and Short Hill). Current 

impacts on the natural soundscape in these 

areas are primarily from trains using the two 

tracks and traffic noise from U.S. Highway 

340. At the Jackson's Right Flank and 

Schoolhouse Ridge (Union Skirmish Line) 

portions of the national historical park, noise 

from agricultural operations could disturb the 

natural quiet at certain times of the year. Also 

at Jackson's Right Flank, noise from operation 

of the adjacent U.S. Customs and Border 

Patrol Firearms Training Facility could 

periodically affect the natural sounds cape in 

that area. 

136 
Natural Resources 

Human-caused sounds are prevalent in the 

developed portions of the national historical 

park within the town limits of Harpers Ferry 

and Bolivar. In certain places near the rivers, 

the natural sound level may be great enough 

to overcome some human sounds. Levels of 

human-caused sound will also fluctuate with 

variations in weather conditions (including 

temperature, wind and humidity) and the 

general topography of these areas. 

LIGHTSCAPES 

The clarity of night skies is important to 

the visitor experience as well as being 

ecologically important. Artificial light 

sources both within and outside the 

national historical park have 

diminished the clarity of night skies by 

creating a “haze” of light that obscures 

views of stars and distant topographic 

features. The primary culprit is any type 

of outdoor lighting that allows light to 

shine up into the sky. Outdoor lighting 

is common throughout the region, 

including inside national historical park 

boundaries. While such lighting may be 

necessary for safety or security reasons, 

there are outdoor lighting fixtures 

available that direct light downward 

and do not allow stray light to scatter 

into the sky.

137 
VISITOR EXPERIENCE 

Harpers Ferry National Historical Park is in 

the eastern panhandle of West Virginia. 

Visitors access the national historical park via 

U.S. 340 from West Virginia or Maryland. The 

national historical park is open year around. It 

is a day-use park, but overnight accommodations such as motels and campgrounds are 

provided in surrounding communities. Hours 

that the facilities and historic structures are 

open vary by season. 

National historical park visitors are 

encouraged to begin their visit at Cavalier 

Heights where the contact station is and the 

boarding area for the shuttle buses to Lower 

Town. Once in Lower Town visitors may 

explore the historic buildings on their own. 

Interpretive talks, tours, or demonstrations 

are held occasionally during the summer. The 

main information center, several museums, 

and public restrooms are in Lower Town. The 

cooperative association (Harpers Ferry 

Historical Association) operates a bookstore 

in Lower Town and a small outlet in the 

visitor contact station. 

VISITATION STATISTICS 

Visitation at the national historical park has 

averaged about 300,000 over the last 15 years. 

During this period, there has been a 

downward trend in national historical park 

visitation numbers as shown in Table 10. Part 

of this trend can be attributed to the drop in 

NPS visitation nationwide (NPS Public Use 

Statistics Office). Summer (June through 

August) is the heaviest visitor use season, with 

winter (December through February) being 

the lightest. The Business Plan for the national 

historical park states that 80% of visitation 

occurs between May and October, 53% 

occurs on weekends, and 28% occurs during 

holidays and special events (NPS 2002). 

TABLE 10. NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK VISITATION

YEAR VISITS 

2005 237,500 

2004 267,555 

2003 264,470 

2002 286,289 

2001 321,022 

2000 318,945 

1999 338,730 

1998 354,830 

1997 337,385 

1996 325,074 

1995 412,967 

1994 397,757 

1993 379,957 

1992 471,515 

1991 474,000 

1990 576,000 

Source: NPS Public Use Statistics Office 

A portion of the interstate Appalachian 

National Scenic Trail goes across the national 

historical park from Loudoun Heights 

through Lower Town. The National Park 

Service has recently acquired additional land 

that was the location of Civil War activity. 

Because these areas are new to the national 

historical park, no public use data are 

available. 

In 2003, the Economic Restructuring Committee conducted a survey in the commercial 

area of downtown Harpers Ferry. The area 

surveyed encompasses the area known as 

Lower Town. The sample consisted of 518 

participants. Though not a true random 

survey (due to fewer than required random 

distribution times, dates, or people sampled), 

it offers valid information about visitors not 

available through the annual visitor use survey 

done in the national historical park by the 

National Park Service each year. 

The purpose of the survey was to identify the 

users at Harpers Ferry National Historical 

Park and determine how visitors could 

138 
Visitor Experience 

become attracted to the site. Originally the 

survey was to help Main Street merchants 

determine strategies for economic revitalization. Today, the results are being used to 

determine Harpers Ferry user groups their 

needs, and their expectations. 

A compilation of the 2003 survey results 

showed that visitors arrive at the national 

historical park in a variety of ways. A large 

number of visitors arrive in Lower Town by 

foot or car and do not use mandated alternate 

transportation. Bus riders only comprise 44% 

of total visits to the national historical park. Of 

overall visitation, 53% of visitors arrive via 

alternative means, 38% by car and 15% by 

foot, bike or trail. The NPS shuttle transported 44% of visitors polled. Of the 

remaining visitors traveling to and within 

Lower Town, 53% traveled of their own 

accord, either by vehicle, bicycle, hiking, or 

walking. 

When asked about visiting shops in lower 

town, 75% of visitors frequented shops, while 

23% did not. Of the 23% that did not visit 

shops, 32% stated that they had no time, and 

28% stated no interest in shopping. Of those 

people that did not visit shops, 5% stated that 

no information or directions to the shops 

were available. Some visitors were lost and did 

not know their location, 3% had pets or 

children and did not visit with 3% stating 

stairs and weather prevented an enjoyable 

visit. 

When visitors were asked how often they 

visited the national historical park, 43% were 

first-time visitors, 20% were second-time 

visitors, 8% were there for the third time, and 

28% were there for the fourth time or more. 

From this data, we can determine that 56% of 

visitors to the national historical park have 

come before. When asked why they visited the 

national historical park, 62% of visitors 

participated in a recreational activity or were 

seeking one. Of these, one third walked, rode, 

bicycled to, or camped in the national 

historical park. Of visitors that frequent the 

national historical park, 21% were 40-55 years 

old, 19% were 25-39 years old, 12% were 55 

and older, and 6% were 25 years old or 

younger. Of those, 23% were described as one 

adult with persons under 18, with the second 

most common group between 40-55 years old. 

The 518 people in the survey were asked to list 

a reason they came to the national historical 

park. Thirty seven percent (191) took a day 

trip, 122 stated history (24%) drew them to 

the national historical park, 82 said they 

enjoyed hiking, bicycling, and/or walking 

(10%), 28 enjoyed shopping and eating (5%), 

and the remaining 84 respondents (24%) 

visited the national historical park to enjoy the 

scenery, visit family, participate in field trips, 

raft, attend conferences, volunteer, and 

celebrate birthdays and anniversaries. Of this 

group, 29 (5%) did not respond. 

The visitor use survey identified additional 

issues:

• a very small percentage of foreign 

visitors 

• unhappy with the commercial vendors 

or service 

• lack of good quality food, cost of food 

• inadequate national historical park 

map access 

• lack of designated overnight facilities 

for scouts or other youth 

organizations 

While in the national historical park, visitors 

engage in viewing interpretive displays, 

attending interpretive programs, viewing 

historic structures, and hiking/walking. 

Hikers, nature observers, and people wanting 

to explore historic sites visit the outlying 

natural areas such as Maryland Heights and 

Loudoun Heights. Visitor use of Short Hill 

and the Shenandoah City area is not 

encouraged. There are no amenities for 

visitors at the recently acquired Civil War 

battlefield sites on Schoolhouse Ridge. 

139 
CHAPTER 3: AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

Visitors primarily use self-guided walking 

tours to sites. They may tour the historic 

buildings and locations at their own pace and 

in their own order. Outside Lower Town, 

however, there is little directional or 

interpretive information available so visitors 

are on their own. 

The national historical park sponsors 

occasional special events, such as music 

concerts on the Green in Lower Town or at 

Cavalier Heights. Fourth of July fireworks 

shows were once presented by the national 

historical park, however, due to the large 

crowds and security concerns, this event is no 

longer offered. 

Some popular recreational activities of the 

past have been curtailed because they are not 

appropriate to the purpose and mission of 

Harpers Ferry National Historical Park. These 

activities included water play in the rivers, atlarge picnicking on national historical park 

grounds, and informal sports such as playing 

ball. 

Complaints from visitors are relatively few, 

but most revolve around problems in wayfinding to and around the national historical 

park. Some visitors find it unclear how to 

enter the national historical park from U.S. 

340 and, once in Lower Town, have difficulty 

locating the information center. A smaller 

number of complaints are received about the 

number of closed shops and restaurants 

during the off-season. 

ORIENTATION AND WAYFINDING 

The common pattern is for visitors to enter 

the national historical park at the Cavalier 

Heights entrance. Here, they can enter the 

information center to receive initial orientation and then board the shuttle bus. On the 

bus ride visitors receive a 5-minute recorded 

interpretive message. The bus lets visitors off 

at the bus pavilion in Lower Town. 

Once in Lower Town, visitors may see the 

historic buildings on their own, but are 

encouraged to visit the information center 

first to get an overall orientation to the 

national historical park's history. First-time 

visitors may be at a loss of where to go because 

it is not clear where the information center is. 

Visitors are also able to drive straight to 

Lower Town and begin their visit there. Information on the outlying Civil War locations is 

provided to visitors upon inquiry at the contact station and information center. There is 

no public transportation to the outlying areas. 

Visitors interact primarily with NPS personnel 

at three staffed stations — the NPS entrance 

station, Cavalier Heights visitor information/ 

contact station, and the information center in 

Lower Town. There are also interpreters and 

maintenance workers occasionally on the 

streets or in the buildings to answer questions. 

INTERPRETATION AND EDUCATION 

Interpretation and resource education is 

received primarily through self-guided walks 

among the historic structures and settings. 

Wayside exhibits and brochures deliver the 

messages. Many NPS buildings in Lower 

Town contain in-depth interpretation on the 

national historical park's themes. Personal 

orientation and interpretive services can be 

obtained at the visitor contact facility and 

during interpretive presentations. At the 

visitor information center in Lower Town, the 

broad outlines of the Harpers Ferry “town in 

history” story are established. Branch 

museums amplify key aspects of the broad 

story (e.g. John Brown, the Federal Armory, 

etc.). The national historical park brochure 

provides basic information about the park, 

maps to help visitors find opportunities and 

services, and a general historical overview of 

park interpretive themes. 

According to the 1986 "Statement for 

Management," approximately 24% of visitors 

attend interpretive programs, with the 

140 
Visitor Experience 

141 

remaining number obtaining information and 

interpretation from nonpersonal sources such 

as brochures and interpretive displays. 

Harpers Ferry National Historical Park offers 

a variety of educational programs designed to 

teach students of all ages about the cultural 

and natural resources at the park. These 

programs have been developed to enhance 

classroom instruction. School groups 

participating in class outings or education 

trips account for much of the visitation in the 

spring. Groups are encouraged to make 

reservations, but many arrive at the national 

historical park unannounced, creating 

congestion. 

Teachers and educators planning a field trip 

are encouraged to access the national 

historical park's Online Educator's Guide 

where they can obtain information on 

program guidelines, choices for ranger-guided 

programs, opportunities for self-guided 

programs, and how to make program 

reservations. 
SOCIOECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT 

This section summarizes the detailed socioeconomic baseline, describing the demographic, economic, and governmental trends 

in the communities adjacent to Harpers Ferry 

National Historical Park. The descriptions are 

relevant to the evaluation of the social impact 

assessment and financial implications of the 

alternatives that have been developed for this 

plan. The complete analysis is detailed in 

appendix E. 

GROWTH: A REGIONAL 

PERSPECTIVE 

To understand the pressures on the local 

communities that are directly influenced by 

Harpers Ferry National Historical Park, a 

broad look at the region must be taken. It is 

the regional trends and the movement of 

urbanization toward the once rural areas 

which contribute to changing demographics 

of the neighbors and the users of the national 

historical park. 

Regional Population 

The tri-state region, long important for agricultural production, is now growing steadily 

influenced by development along the I-81 and 

I-70 transportation corridors. These transportation conduits have become convenient 

locations for a variety of light manufacturing 

and service industries, and as a "bedroom 

community" for major metropolitan areas. 

Since 2000 the eastern panhandle, which is 

comprised of Jefferson, Berkeley, and Morgan 

Counties, had an annual population growth 

rate of 3.2%. The growth far exceeds the rates 

for West Virginia (0.1%) and United States 

(1.0%). 

Once dependent on the rural life, the 

populations of these three counties in the 

eastern panhandle now have a portion of their 

economic roots in the major urban centers, 

including those as far away as Washington, 

D.C., Arlington, Virginia; and Baltimore, 

Maryland. The trend for this region is continued growth as more of the urban population moves into the eastern panhandle. This 

migration will result in additional local jobs as 

well as residents looking to commute to 

employment in the major urban centers. 

Improved highways and commuter rail service 

are increasing the opportunities for residents 

to live locally and work regionally. Given the 

lowest inflation rates in West Virginia, and 

Jefferson County's proximity to metropolitan 

Washington, D.C., and Baltimore, Maryland, 

more than 50% of Jefferson County's workforce commutes out of the county to their 

workplace. 

Because the eastern panhandle region is near 

many of the fastest growing counties in the 

United States, it has also become one of the 

fastest growing regions in West Virginia. 

Harpers Ferry National Historical Park is in 

Jefferson County, the fastest growing county 

in West Virginia, with 9.6% annual growth. 

The national historical park is adjacent to 

Loudoun County, Virginia, which the U.S. 

Census Bureau has ranked as the second 

fastest growing county in the United States. 

From 2001 to 2003, Loudoun County had a 

population growth of 30.7 %. Two other 

Virginia counties (near Washington, D.C.) 

were ranked high for population growth 

Stafford (9th) and Spots1vania (13th). 

Regional Employment 

The West Virginia bureau of business and 

economic research reports that from 1998 to 

2003 the average annual job growth rate for 

the eastern panhandle was 1.6% and exceeded 

the rates for West Virginia (0.2%) and the 

142 
Socioeconomic Environment 

United States (0.6%). The employment 

structure of this region is not nearly as 

concentrated in natural resources and mining 

as it is for much of West Virginia. 

The largest employment industry in the 

eastern panhandle region is government, with 

23.3 % of all jobs. The concentration of 

federal jobs in the region reflects its proximity 

to Washington, D.C., and the location of large 

federal employers (Veterans Administration 

Center, U.S. Department of Treasury (IRS), 

U.S. Coast Guard, and National Park Service). 

The trade, transportation, and utilities 

industries (18.7 %) follow, with the distribution facilities of General Motors and other 

major corporations. The next largest industry 

is leisure and hospitality, providing 12.9 % of 

the area's employment, which reflects the 

presence of parks, resorts, spas, and gaming 

activity in the region (including Charles Town 

Races). 

Manufacturing is another major industry in 

the region that provides for 9.3% employment; these businesses produce industrial 

machinery, wood products such as furniture, 

and rubber and plastic products, among 

others. However, while the other industries 

described above have increased employment, 

the manufacturing sector has seen a steady 

decline. 

Decisions made by the fast-growing counties, 

such as Loudoun County, West Virginia, and 

Frederick County, Maryland, will continue to 

influence the growth and employment in the 

eastern panhandle region of West Virginia. As 

described in the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 2004 (JCCP), the county is a viable 

residential option within a reasonable commute of major economic centers. Jefferson 

County enjoys significantly lower housing 

costs and property taxes than in nearby states. 

The county's natural environment and smaller 

population also makes it an attractive place to 

live. 

Urban growth and changing social demographics from major metropolitan areas, such 

as Washington D.C., will continue along the 

primary transportation corridors heading 

toward the gateway communities of Harpers 

Ferry National Historical Park. This growth 

will bring new opportunities and problems to 

a changing rural community with more 

diverse demands on open spaces and greater 

urban influences to the national historical 

park. 

COUNTY INFLUENCE 

Portions of the national historical park are in 

three counties — Jefferson County, West 

Virginia; Loudoun County, Virginia; and 

Washington County, Maryland, but the NPS 

headquarters and most visitation occurs in 

Jefferson County, West Virginia. 

The national historical park is adjacent to the 

fastest growing county in the nation 

(Loudoun County, Virginia, 30.7 % annual 

growth last year) and is in the fasting growing 

county in West Virginia (Jefferson County, 

West Virginia, 9.6%). 

As population in the three counties continues 

to grow, housing and commercial 

construction is thriving. 

Jefferson County, West Virginia 

The national historical park is on the eastern 

border of Jefferson County, West Virginia. 

The county is adjacent to the Blue Ridge 

Mountains at the confluence of two major 

rivers. The county is bordered on the 

northwest by Berkeley County, West Virginia, 

on the northeast by the Potomac River and 

Washington County, Maryland; to the 

southeast by the Blue Ridge Mountains and 

Loudoun County, Virginia, and to the 

southwest by Clarke County, Virginia. 

Jefferson County is one of the most 

agriculturally productive counties in West 

Virginia. The total land area in the county is 

approximately 212.41 square miles. The 

143 
CHAPTER 3: AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

county is about 58 miles from Washington, 

D.C., and 67 miles from Baltimore, Maryland. 

Jefferson County contains five incorporated 

municipalities: Bolivar, Charles Town (county 

seat), Harpers Ferry, Ranson, and Shepherdstown, many of which are considered bedroom 

communities for the greater Washington, 

D.C., area. Since the 1960s the trend has been 

that population growth in the incorporated 

municipalities has remained stable, while 

substantial increases in population growth 

have occurred in unincorporated areas of the 

county. This resulted in land use changes from 

agriculture to suburban style developments 

with larger lots. The rapid residential 

development of formerly open or agricultural 

land has caused numerous issues for Jefferson 

County. These issues are similar to other areas 

where outpaced growth has resulted in: (1) 

inadequate road and highway systems that 

were not designed to accommodate the large 

volume of residential and commercial traffic, 

(2) concerns about appropriate wastewater 

treatment, (3) increased demands for clean 

water, (4) encroachment on public parks and 

scenic viewsheds from new developments, 

and (5) a changing community character. 

The U.S. Census Bureau estimates that the 

population of Jefferson County was 43,545 in 

2001. The population grew by 17.4% from 

1990 to 2000. The median household income 

in 1999 was $44,374 in the county. The 

average income per capita was $20,441 and the 

number of persons living below the poverty 

level was 10.3%. Statewide in West Virginia, 

the average income per capita was $16,477 

with 17.9% of the population living below the 

poverty level (Census Bureau 2003). 

The economy of Jefferson County (based on 

number of employees) depends on retail 

trade, manufacturing, lodging and food 

services, and arts/entertainment/ recreation 

(Census Bureau 2003). Lodging and food 

services are related to tourism. 

Today, the 10 largest employers in Jefferson 

County are associated with health care, 

education, historic preservation, 

manufacturing, human services and retail. 

• PNGI Charles Town Gaming 

• Jefferson County Board of Education 

• Shepherd College 

• AB&C Group, Inc 

• Jefferson Memorial Hospital 

• Wal-Mart Stores, Inc 

• National Park Service 

• Royal Vendors, Inc 

• Augmentation, Inc 

• Genesis Eldercare Network Services 

Loudoun County, Virginia 

The U.S. Census Bureau estimates that the 

population of Loudoun County was 190,903 

in 2001. The population grew by 96.8% from 

1990 to 2000. The median household income 

in 1999 was $80,648. The average income per 

capita was $33,530, and the number of people 

living below the poverty level was only 2.8%. 

In Virginia the average income per capita was 

$23,975 with 9.6% of the population living 

below the poverty level (Census Bureau 2003). 

The economy of the county (based on number 

of employees) relies on the retail trade, 

construction, professional and technical 

services, and transportation/ warehousing 

(Census Bureau 2003). 

Washington County, Maryland 

The U.S. Census Bureau estimates that the 

population of Washington County was 

133,197 in 2001. The population grew by 8.7% 

from 1990 to 2000 (Census Bureau 2003). The 

median household income in 1999 was 

$40,617. The average income per capita was 

$20,062, and the number of people living 

below the poverty level was 9.5%. Statewide in 

Maryland the average income per capita was 

$25,614 with 8.5% of the population living 

below the poverty level (Census Bureau 2003). 

144 
Socioeconomic Environment 

The economy of the county (based on number 

of employees is based on manufacturing, retail 

trade, health and social services, and 

finance/insurance (Census Bureau 2003). 

GATEWAY COMMUNITIES 

For purposes of this plan, the focus is on the 

national historical park's gateway communities, which consist of the incorporated towns 

of Bolivar and Harpers Ferry, West Virginia. 

The ability to harness the power of the two 

rivers for economic development was the 

foundation of these two West Virginia towns. 

Today, the rivers continue to contribute to the 

economic and social activities of the two 

communities, although more for their 

aesthetic, recreational, and quality of life 

values than the water power for industry. 

The role that both towns played in American 

history does not compare to the size of these 

communities. Harpers Ferry is 0.6 square mile, 

and Bolivar is 0.5 square mile in size. Land 

access to the two communities is from U.S. 

340, connecting with Interstate 70 at 

Frederick, Maryland, and then crossing the 

Potomac River in Virginia and entering 

Harpers Ferry at the Shenandoah River, and 

then through Bolivar and south to Charles 

Town and beyond. 

Town of Bolivar, West Virginia 

Bolivar, West Virginia, is a town with a population of 1,045 residents. It is a community 

that benefits from the quality-of-life attributes 

from open spaces, scenic vistas, flowing rivers, 

and historic ties to early America. It is a town 

whose land use is dominated by housing and 

surrounded by farms and forests. Its local 

economy consists of a family medical center, 

junior high school and scattered small 

businesses along the main streets such as 

antique stores, restaurants and bars. Although 

Bolivar, West Virginia is one of the major 

gateways to Harpers Ferry National Historical 

Park, the majority of residents are not dependent upon the tourism industry to survive. 

Community Characteristics. The town of 

Bolivar, West Virginia population increased 

by about 50% during the 1980s and then 

slowed throughout the next 10 years resulting 

in a 3% increase between 1990 and 2000. 

Today, the town has limited space to allow for 

any large-scale increase in housing and other 

kinds of developments and therefore the 

future population of Bolivar is expected to 

remain relatively stable. 

Bolivar is a community where 90% of the 

residents are Caucasians and the median age is 

39 years of age. The majority of the population 

is within the age groups associated with "the 

earning years." Children of school age and 

younger make up 22% of the population and 

retirees account for 17%. This representation 

of all ages indicates a need for a range of 

outdoor recreational opportunities that 

includes open spaces for organized field 

games and playgrounds, natural settings for 

passive recreation such as reflection and 

walking, and more active outdoor pursuits 

such as trail use, river rafting and fishing. 

The 1999 median household income for 

Bolivar was $42,375. This is $10,000 less than 

the neighboring town of Harpers Ferry but 

similar to Jefferson County as a whole. Based 

on the 2000 Census, 14% of Bolivar's 

households were classified as "high income," 

66% of households were considered "middle 

income," and 20% were classified as "low 

income." The 2000 census also estimated a 

12.5% poverty rate in Bolivar, a rate which has 

remained constant since the 1990 survey. 

In Bolivar, the educational attainment 

reported by the 2000 Census reflects the same 

trends reported for Jefferson County, West 

Virginia. Of Bolivar's population age 25 and 

older, the percentage of residents that did not 

graduate from high school is 23%. This 

represents an 11% decrease from 1990 when 

35% of the residents did not graduate from 

high school. The percentage of residents who 

145 
CHAPTER 3: AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

obtained college or advanced degrees was 

22%. 

Employment. The 2000 Census estimated 

that 95% of Bolivar's residents who participate in the workforce held jobs outside the 

community. Of which 55% of those were 

located outside of West Virginia while 39% 

worked within Jefferson County. This trend is 

also reflected in the travel time it takes going 

one way to work for which 53% of the residents have commutes that are over 30 minutes 

(of which, 32% had one-way commutes 

longer that 45 minutes) contrasted with only 

13% of residents who arrive at work in less 

than 10 minutes. Although Bolivar, West 

Virginia, is adjacent to the Harpers Ferry 

National Historical Park, the majority 

(approximately 77% of the workforce) of its 

residents support themselves working in 

industries that are not dependent upon 

tourism. The educational and health

industries employ 19% of Bolivar's workforce. 

Other industries that employ a large share of 

Bolivar's residents are construction (11%), 

manufacturing (9%), professional, scientific,

management, administrative (10%), and 

public administration (8%). The two 

industries that best reflect employment that 

would contribute to the tourism economy and 

provides jobs for Bolivar's residents are retail 

(19% of jobs) and arts, entertainment, 

recreation, accommodation and food service 

(8% of jobs). 

Town of Harpers Ferry, West Virginia 

Harpers Ferry is the focal point of historic 

tourism in Jefferson County and an important 

component of the local economy. The town 

consists of "Lower Town," a commercial 

district that is adjacent to primary attractions 

of the national historical park. Residential 

neighborhoods are mixed with guest houses, 

hotels, small businesses, park sites, and four 

other NPS entities — Harpers Ferry Center, 

the Steven T. Mather Training Center, 

Appalachian National Scenic Trail, and the 

Potomac Heritage National Scenic Trail. A 

major freight and passenger railroad line 

travels through the town and includes a 

functioning railroad station for Amtrak and 

commuter trains. The town owns and 

operates its own municipal waterworks, police 

department, and a volunteer fire department. 

Community Characteristics. The town of 

Harpers Ferry, West Virginia, has a 

population of 307 residents. Between 1980 

and the 1990 census, the town saw a 15% 

decrease in their residential population. With 

limitations in the ability to grow or increase 

density, the population is expected to remain 

stable at its 15-year low into the foreseeable 

future. Although remaining stable in size, the 

demographics of the population are changing. 

Harpers Ferry is a community that is growing 

older than the neighboring community of 

Bolivar, West Virginia. The median age of 

Harpers Ferry's residents is 47 years. Since 

1990, the number of residents in the age group 

of 45 to 59 year olds has increased 6% along 

with a slight increase in the number of retirees. Meanwhile, Harpers Ferry saw a measurable decline in the number of school age 

children and of resident's ages 20 to 24 years. 

Today, residents are better educated. Only 9% 

of residents over 25 years of age did not 

graduate from high school compared to 23% 

in 1990. The percentage of residents that have 

a college or advanced degree was 60% in 2000 

compared with only 39% in 1990. The median 

household income in Harpers Ferry, West 

Virginia and Bolivar, West Virginia was nearly 

equal in 1980. Over the next two decades 

Harpers Ferry has become a more wealthy 

community than its neighbor as reflected in 

the 1999 median household income of $52,344 

reported by the U.S. Census. This amount is 

$10,000 greater than reported for the median 

income for Bolivar, West Virginia. Also based 

upon the 2000 Census, 30% of the households 

had "high income", while 59% were reported 

to fall within the "middle income" range and 

11% were classified as "low income". The 

2000 Census estimated a 2.2% poverty rate for 

146 
Socioeconomic Environment 

Harpers Ferry residents, which is a decline of 

4% from the reported 6.4% in 1990. 

Employment. The 2000 Census estimated 

that 34% of Harpers Ferry's residents who 

participate in the workforce had jobs located 

within the community. In contrast, only 5% of 

Bolivar's residents held jobs within their 

community. Of the 66% of Harpers Ferry 

residents who worked outside the community, 

48% have employment outside of West 

Virginia. This trend is reflected in the one-way 

commute time to work for which 44% of the 

workforce travels more than 30 minutes (of 

which 29% of commutes are longer than 45 

minutes) and contrasts with 23% of residents 

that arrive at work in less than 10 minutes. 

The educational and health industry provides 

employment to 26% of Harpers Ferry 

residents who participate in the workforce. 

Retail and arts, entertainment, recreation, 

accommodation and food service are the two 

industries that are most dependent on a 

tourism economy and which employs 29% of 

residents. Other major industries that provide 

employment to Harper Ferry's residents are: 

information (10%), professional, scientific, 

management, administrative (9%), public 

administration (8%), and construction (8%). 

THE NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK’S 

EFFECT ON LOCAL AND REGIONAL 

ECONOMY 

Economic impact analysis provides another 

way to quantify the relationships between 

Harpers Ferry National Historical Park and 

the adjacent communities. The national 

historical park is an economic generator that 

helps to anchor the economy within the 

gateway community while contributing 

regionally. The national historical park's 

economic influence extends throughout the 

eastern panhandle of West Virginia and to 

communities in the states of Maryland and 

Virginia. There are numerous ways that the 

operations and management of Harpers Ferry 

National Historical Park influence the local 

economy. This section examines the national 

historical park's influences on the economy 

through visitation, budget, and contribution 

to infrastructure, and then highlights economic indicators for the commercial district 

of Harpers Ferry. 

Each year hundreds of thousands of visitors 

are attracted to Harpers Ferry National 

Historical Park. An average annual visitation 

of 305,472 visitors (based on visitation between 1999 and 2003) affects the economy by 

money spent on meals, lodging, fuel, and 

other purchases that contribute millions of 

dollars yearly to the local economy and 

produce sales, tax, and employment benefits. 

The national historical park also contributes 

millions of dollars annually that flows directly 

and indirectly through the local and regional 

economy. Also, the National Park Service supports some of the local community infrastructures with financial contributions to fire 

service and improvements to water/sewer 

systems. 

The National Park Service also operates the 

Mather Training Center, the Harpers Ferry 

Center, the Potomac Heritage National Scenic 

Trail, and the Appalachian National Scenic 

Trail from Harpers Ferry. In 1996 a study was 

completed that reviewed the cumulative 

economic impacts of all five NPS operations. 

The study reports that the direct expenditures 

from the NPS operations and visitors totaled 

$18.5 million. Of this amount, 66% of the total 

($12.2 million) was spent in West Virginia, 

30% in Maryland, and 4% in Virginia. The 

local and state tax benefits in West Virginia 

were estimated to contribute $1.3 million, $0.7 

million in Maryland, and $0.07 million in 

Virginia (Rae 1996). Although these NPS 

institutions contribute to the local and 

regional economy, the general management 

plan focuses its attention only on actions 

related to the proposed alternatives for the 

national historical park. 

147 
CHAPTER 3: AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

148 

VISITOR SPENDING 

This section estimates the economic influence 

that visitors to Harpers Ferry National Historical Park might have on the local economy. 

The following analysis uses an economic 

impact framework to quantify the direct and 

indirect expenditures by visitors using data 

from the year 2001. This economic impact 

analysis traces the flow of spending by visitors 

within the local economy to estimate the 

national historical park's contribution to sales, 

income, and jobs in the area. A detailed 

description of this analysis is described in 

appendix E. 

To measure the effects of visitor spending on 

the local economy the National Park Service 

developed an economic impact model 

referred to as the Money Generation Model 2. 

This model estimates the economic impacts by 

measuring sales (values of goods and services), 

tax, and employment benefits. The model's 

logic is that Harpers Ferry National Historical 

Park is part of the local economy. When visitors from outside the local area spend money 

within the local area for meals, lodging, and 

other goods and services, this expenditure 

provides an economic stimulus to the local 

economy. In this analysis, visitor spending 

only covers economic effects on the local area 

around the national historical park. The 

economic modeling does not include impacts 

of the NPS operations/employees, 

construction activity, or visitor spending 

outside the local area. 

Harpers Ferry National Historical Park 

hosted 264,470 recreational visits in 2003. Of 

all these recreational visits, 20% were local 

residents on day trips, 55% were visitors on 

day trips from outside the local area, 20% 

were visitors on overnight trips staying in local 

lodging, and 5% were camping. The 0.26 

million recreational visits represent 0.13 

million party days (number of days a party of 

visitors spend in the area) in the local area 

(days are equated to nights for overnight 

trips). On average, visitors spent $89 per party 

per day in the local area. Total visitor 

spending was $11.65 million in 2003 (table 11). 

The direct effects of this spending cover sales, 

income, and jobs in businesses selling goods 

and services directly to visitors. The direct 

effect of the $11.65 million spent by visitors to 

Harpers Ferry National Historical Park was 

$9.64 million in sales, $3.47 million in personal 

income (wages and salaries), $5.21 million in 

value added, and 230 jobs. The largest direct 

effect was $3.31 million in the hotel sector, 

$2.73 million in food and drinking places, 

$1.25 million in amusements, and $1.38 

million in retail trade. As visitor spending 

circulates through the local economy, 

secondary effects created an additional $1.59 

million in personal income and 60 jobs (table 

12). 

In sum, visitors to Harpers Ferry NHP spent 

$11.65 million dollars in 2003, which 

supported a total of $14.02 million in sales, 

$5.06 million in personal income, 290 jobs, 

and $ 7.96 million in value added. 

TABLE 11. VISITS AND SPENDING BY VISITOR SEGMENT (2003) 

Local

Day Trips 

Non-local

Day Trips Hotel Camp Total 

Recreation Visits 52,896 145,463 52,896 13,224 264,478

Segment Shares in Rec. Visits 20% 55% 20% 5% 100%

Party Days 21,159 58,186 42,317 10,597 132,256

Avg. Spending Per Party Day $37 $56 $166 $59 $89

Total Spending (millions) $0.77 $3.24 $7.02 $0.62 $11.65
Socioeconomic Environment 

TABLE 12. ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF VISITOR SPENDING BY SECTOR (2003) 

Sectors 

Sales

(millions) 

Personal 

Incomes 

(millions) 

Jobs 

Value 

Added 

(millions) 

Direct Effects 

Motel, Hotel, B&B and Cabins 

$3.31 $1.08 70 $1.64

Campsites $0.15 $0.05 4 $0.07

Restaurants & Bars $2.73 $0.93 75 $1.29

Admissions & Fees $1.25 $0.43 36 $0.71

Retail $1.38 $0.70 37 $1.10

Others $9.63 $3.47 11 $5.21

Total $9.64 $3.47 230 $5.21

Secondary Effects $4.38 $1.59 60 $2.74

Total Effects $14.02 $5.06 290 $7.96

LOCAL NATIONAL HISTORICAL 

PARK EXPENDITURES 

Revenues originating from outside the local 

economy are annually funneled into the 

gateway communities through the federal 

appropriations process. This process is what 

finances Harpers Ferry National Historical 

Park's operation/maintenance budget and 

capital improvements to national historical 

park resources and infrastructure. A large 

share of the national historical park's budget 

provides an annual and stable economic 

benefit to the local and regional economy. 

As with visitor expenditures described above, 

local national historical park expenditures 

have direct and secondary economic benefits. 

Table 13 displays the national historical park's 

annual expenditures for Fiscal Year (FY) 1999 

through Fiscal Year 2004. The operations and 

maintenance budget has grown annually but 

at varied rates of growth ranging anywhere 

from 0.24% to 10%. The capital improvement 

budget, which is used for restoration, archeological work, and other one-time improvements, can vary substantially from year to 

year. 

Personnel expenditures constitute the most 

(approximately 85%) of the national historical 

park's operation and maintenance budget. 

These expenditures have the most direct 

impact on local and regional communities as 

NPS employees spend a majority of their 

earnings for living, recreation, education and 

other daily expenses that support the local 

businesses and institutions. Table 14 identifies 

salaries of employees by the communities in 

which they reside and estimates the amount 

TABLE 13. ANNUAL EXPENDITURES FOR FY 1999 TO FY 2004 FOR HARPERS FERRY NATIONAL HISTORICAL 

PARK

Fiscal Year FY 2000 FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY2004 

Operations and 

Maintenance $4,982,900 $5,525,000 $5,675,900 $5,689,900 $5,831,393

Capital 

Improvements $249,741 $2,039,831 $2,840,782 $2,548,437 $4,306,124

Total 

Expenditures $5,232,641 $7,564,831 $8,516,682 $8,238,337 $10,137,517

Source: Harpers Ferry National Historical Park 

149 
CHAPTER 3: AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

TABLE 14. FY 2004 ACCUMULATIVE GROSS ANNUAL SALARIES OF EMPLOYEES AT HARPERS FERRY 

NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK BY COMMUNITIES IN WHICH THEY RESIDE

Residence of Employees Gross Annual 

Salaries 

Estimated 60% 

Used Locally 

Berkeley County’s WV Communities $611,709 $367,025 

Bolivar & Harpers Ferry $1,490,010 $894,006 

Jefferson County, WV Communities other 

than the towns of Bolivar and Harpers 

Ferry 

$955,620 $597,372 

Maryland, state of (communities) $940,749 $564,449 

Pennsylvania, state of (communities) $102,336 $61,402 

Virginia, state of (communities) $96,575 $57,945 

that was spent locally during FY 2004. The 

estimated local expenditures were based upon 

the Douglas Rae 1999 report where he 

estimated that 60% of the employee's gross 

salaries/benefits were spent in local 

communities. 

The national historical park budget also 

includes monies for supplies and equipment, 

services, transportation and utilities. The 

Douglas Rae 1999 report estimated that 75% 

of supplies/equipment and services and 100% 

of utilities were spent in local or regional 

businesses. Again, based upon Douglas Rae 

factors, it is estimated that for FY 2004 this 

amounted to approximately $656,032 spent by 

the national historical park within the local 

economy. 

The Rae report also suggests that the indirect 

impacts of NPS spending can be summarized 

that for every dollar spent by the national 

historical park generates an additional $0.68 in 

spending by others, and the employment 

multiplier is 34 jobs per million dollars in 

spending. 

CONTRIBUTION TO 

INFRASTRUCTURE 

The presence of a large tract of public lands in 

an area that is quickly becoming urbanized 

contributes to the quality of life for residents 

in the eastern panhandle. As a large neighbor 

to both Harpers Ferry and Bolivar, Harpers 

Ferry National Historical Park continues to 

support the local communities in ways that are 

beyond the routine payment of utilities. This 

section highlights some of the larger contributions from the national historical park. 

In addition to annual spending, Harpers Ferry 

National Historical Park also contributes 

directly to specific infrastructure needs of the 

town of Harpers Ferry and Bolivar, West 

Virginia. The following is a summary of these 

community benefits: 

Harpers Ferry National Historical Park 

provides annual financial support to the 

Harpers Ferry Police Department. In FY 2004 

the financial support totaled $82,000. NPS 

rangers also back up Harpers Ferry Police, 

Jefferson County Sheriff, and West Virginia 

State Police. 

Similar to other local government entities, 

Harpers Ferry National Historical Park 

provides annual financial contribution to the 

all volunteer Friendship Fire Department with 

FY2004 support of $4,000. NPS employees are 

also trained and used for emergency service 

work in the local communities and Jefferson 

County. 

Throughout the national historical park's 

history, it has helped fund improvements to 

the Harpers Ferry-Bolivar sewer and water 

systems with a cumulative support of 

150 
Socioeconomic Environment 

$2,607,000 in addition to regular utilities 

payments. 

Harpers Ferry National Historical Park also 

helps support job training programs such as 

the Youth Citizens Conservation Corps of 

West Virginia with a financial support of 

$90,794 in FY 2004 and a free training 

experience for AmeriCorp annually. 

Harpers Ferry National Historical Park helps 

the towns of Bolivar and Harpers Ferry with 

some snow plowing of city streets after winter 

storms. 

HARPERS FERRY COMMERCIAL 

DISTRICT ECONOMIC INDICATORS 

The primary commercial district of Harpers 

Ferry is adjacent to and blends with the 

historical landscape of the national historical 

park. The commercial area is within a 

designated historic district. The services that 

are available, whether they are retail, museum, 

or food and drink, provide national historical 

park visitors with additional features to 

explore and enjoy. The boundaries between 

the national historical park and the town's 

historic district are seamless to visitors. 

The Harpers Ferry Merchant Association and 

the Harpers Ferry Main Street are two local 

organizations that focus on issues related to 

the commercial district. A vision for the 

commercial district as presented by Harpers 

Ferry Main Street is an environment that is 

economically viable while providing a livable 

community where residents and visitors can 

safely enjoy the pristine natural and cultural 

resources of this unique historic town. 

The preservation of the historic fabric of 

Harpers Ferry is guided by the Harpers Ferry 

Historic District, local business organizations, 

The National Trust, and the West Virginia 

Historic Preservation Office. Together, these 

organizations view their niche as part of 

heritage tourism, where opportunities are 

provided to not only see history but have 

hands-on and sensory experiences. 

The Harpers Ferry Main Street program 

measures its success on the community's 

ability to ensure that the quality of life 

attributes can be achieved and maintained for 

local residents and workers while providing a 

quality experience for visitors. The organization has developed 11 market performance 

indicators that allow them to annually 

monitor the success of achieving economic 

and livability goals. 

151 
NPS OPERATIONS 

Harpers Ferry National Historical Park has a 

staff of about 106 permanent employees. This 

staff accommodates more than a quartermillion visitors a year while managing 3,645 

acres of park lands, 80 actively used buildings, 

roads, trails, a shuttle bus fleet, and extensive 

natural areas. There are four other NPS units 

using the national historical park's land or 

facilities — Chesapeake and Ohio Canal 

National Historical Park, Appalachian 

National Scenic Trail, Harpers Ferry Center, 

and the Mather Training Center. The national 

historical park's base budget in Fiscal Year 

2004 was $5,737,000. One-time investments 

(e.g., major repair or construction projects) 

are financed through project money that is 

allocated to parks on a competitive basis and 

is in addition to base budget. 

NPS staff is assisted by seasonal employees, 

volunteers, and the Harpers Ferry Natural 

History Association. NPS operations can be 

divided into the following functions: 

cultural and natural resource management 

visitor and resource protection (law 

enforcement) 

visitor experience and enjoyment 

facility operations and maintenance 

management and administration 

Park headquarters is in the Morrell House on 

Camp Hill. Other park management staff is in 

the Bracket House. The interiors of these 

historic houses have been retrofitted to 

accommodate this use. Additional staff is in 

offices in the upper floors of buildings in 

Lower Town, in Grandview School, and at the 

maintenance facility. 

Streets in Lower Town are not owned by the 

National Park Service, and conflicts arise 

between business owners who want the 

streets open and the National Park Service 

wanting to create an accurate living history 

environment. Public parking is limited, 

especially on weekdays when commuters fill 

the train station lot. 

The park maintenance facility is in a 

residential section of Harpers Ferry town. The 

National Park Service owns and operates the 

transportation system of six buses and a bus 

maintenance facility on Cavalier Heights. The 

buses shuttle visitors between Cavalier 

Heights and Lower Town and include an 

interpretive message. The fleet was replaced 

with all new vehicles in 2004. 

A business plan for the national historical park 

was prepared in 2002. This plan calculated 

actual costs to run the national historical park 

and determined that the park is under-funded 

by roughly 36% (in FY 2002). In light of the 

funding shortfalls, the Harpers Ferry's park 

management team has identified a number of 

strategies to reduce costs and increase 

available funding. This plan is currently being 

implemented. 

152 
Chapter 4

Environmental Consequences

INTRODUCTION 

The National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) requires that environmental 

documents discuss the environmental impacts 

of a proposed federal action, feasible 

alternatives to that action, and any adverse 

environmental effects that cannot be avoided 

if a proposed action is implemented. In this 

case the proposed federal action would be the 

adoption of a general management plan for 

Harpers Ferry National Historical Park. The 

following portion of this document analyzes 

the environmental impacts of implementing 

the alternatives on cultural resources, natural 

resources, the visitor experience, and the 

socioeconomic environment. The analysis is 

the basis for comparing the beneficial and 

adverse effects of implementing the 

alternatives. 

 

Because of the general, conceptual nature of 

the actions described in the alternatives, the 

impacts of these actions are analyzed in 

general qualitative terms. Thus, this 

environmental impact statement should be 

considered a programmatic analysis. If and 

when site-specific developments or other 

actions are proposed for implementation 

subsequent to this General Management Plan, 

appropriate detailed environmental and 

cultural compliance documentation will be 

prepared in accord with the National 

Environmental Policy Act and National 

Historic Preservation Act requirements. 

This chapter begins with a description of the 

methods and assumptions used for each topic. 

Impact analysis discussions are organized by 

alternative and then by impact topic under 

each alternative. 

Each alternative discussion also describes 

cumulative impacts and presents a conclusion. 

At the end of the chapter there is a brief 

discussion of unavoidable adverse impacts; 

irreversible and irretrievable commitments of 

resources; and the relationship of short-term 

uses of the environment and the maintenance 

and enhancement of long-term productivity. 

The impacts of each alternative are briefly 

summarized in the table at the end of the 

“Alternatives, Including the Preferred 

Alternative” chapter. 

METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS 

FOR ANALYZING IMPACTS 

The planning team based the impact analysis 

and the conclusions in this chapter on the 

review of existing literature and studies, 

information provided by experts in the 

National Park Service and other agencies, 

NPS staff insights, and professional judgment. 

The team’s method of analyzing impacts is 

further explained below. It is important to 

remember that all the impacts have been 

assessed assuming mitigating measures have 

been implemented to minimize or avoid 

impacts. If mitigating measures described in 

the “Alternatives Including the Preferred 

Alternative” chapter were not applied, the 

potential for resource impacts and the 

magnitude of those impacts would increase. 

Director’s Order 12, “Conservation Planning, 

Environmental Impact Analysis, and Decision 

Making,” presents an approach to identifying 

the duration (short or long term), type 

(adverse or beneficial), and intensity or 

magnitude (e.g., negligible, minor, moderate, 

or major) of the impact(s), and that approach 

has been used in this document. Direct and 

indirect effects caused by an action were 

considered in the analysis. Direct effects are 

caused by an action and occur at the same 

time and place as the action. Indirect effects 

are caused by the action and occur later in 

time or farther removed from the place, but 

are still reasonably foreseeable. Impacts are 

also analyzed in terms of context or the area of 

consideration. In this document the context is 

assumed to be local unless otherwise noted. 

155 
CHAPTER 4: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

The impacts of the action alternatives describe 

the difference between implementing the noaction alternative and implementing the 

action alternatives. To understand a complete 

“picture” of the impacts of implementing any 

of the action alternatives, the reader must also 

take into consideration the impacts that 

would occur under the no-action alternative. 

Duration of Impacts 

Duration of an action’s impact is defined by 

the time a readily discernible effect would 

occur while taking into consideration such 

factors as revegetation times and the relative 

level of development in the area (e.g., impacts 

on visitor experience from new construction 

in an urban environment would cease as soon 

as construction was completed). Short-term 

impacts on the natural environment would 

last during construction activity and the 

period of revegetation — typically 1 to 1 1⁄2 

years in this climate. Long-term impacts 

would be those that occur longer than 1 1⁄2 

years. 

Location 

If the effects would differ, they are described 

separately for each location within the 

national historical park. 

CULTURAL RESOURCES 

Cultural Resources Listed or Eligible to Be 

Listed in the National Register of Historic 

Places 

Potential impacts on cultural resources 

(archeological resources, prehistoric or 

historic structures, and cultural landscapes) 

either listed in or eligible to be listed in the 

National Register of Historic Places were 

identified and evaluated in accordance with 

the Advisory Council on Historic 

Preservation’s regulations implementing 

Section 106 of the National Historic 

Preservation Act (36 CFR 800, Protection of 

Historic Properties): by (1) determining the 

area of potential effects; (2) identifying 

cultural resources present in the area of 

potential effects that are National Register 

listed or eligible; (3) applying the criteria of 

adverse effect to affected resources; and (4) 

considering ways to avoid, minimize or 

mitigate adverse effects. 

Under the Advisory Council’s regulations a 

determination of adverse effect or no adverse 

effect must be made for affected National 

Register listed or eligible cultural resources. 

An adverse effect occurs whenever an action 

alters, directly or indirectly, any of the 

characteristics of a cultural resource that 

qualify it for inclusion in the National 

Register, i.e., diminishing the integrity (the 

extent to which a resource retains its historic 

appearance) of its location, design, setting, 

materials, workmanship, feeling, or 

association. Adverse effects also include 

reasonably foreseeable effects caused by the 

alternatives that would occur later in time, be 

farther removed in distance or be cumulative 

(36 CFR 800.5(a)(1)). 

A determination of no adverse effect means 

there is an effect, but the effect would not 

meet the criteria of an adverse effect (36 CFR 

800.5(b)). 

Thus, the criteria for characterizing the 

severity or intensity of impacts to National 

Register listed or eligible archeological 

resources, prehistoric or historic structures 

and cultural landscapes are the §106 determinations of effect: adverse effect or no 

adverse effect. 

NATURAL RESOURCES 

Analysis of natural resources was based on 

research, knowledge of existing resources, 

and the best professional judgment of 

planners, biologists, hydrologists, and 

156 
Introduction 

botanists who have experience with similar 

types of projects. Information on the national 

historical park’s natural resources was 

gathered from several sources. As appropriate, 

additional sources of data are identified under 

each topic heading. 

Where possible, map locations of sensitive 

resources were compared with the locations 

of proposed developments and modifications. 

Predictions about short-term and long-term 

site impacts were based on previous studies of 

visitor and facilities development impacts on 

natural resources. 

The definitions below assume that mitigation 

would be implemented. For this document, 

the planning team qualitatively evaluated the 

impact intensity for natural resources, as 

follows: 

Water Resources 

For the most part, potential impacts of actions 

comprising the alternatives cannot be defined 

relative to site-specific locations. 

Consequently, water quality impacts of the 

alternatives were assessed qualitatively. 

Negligible — an action may have an effect on 

water quality or the timing or intensity of 

flows, but it would not be readily 

measurable or detectable. 

Minor — an action would have measurable 

effects on water quality or the timing or 

intensity of flows. Water quality effects 

could include increased or decreased loads 

of sediment, debris, chemical or toxic 

substances, or pathogenic organisms. 

Moderate — an action would have clearly 

detectable effects on water quality or the 

timing or intensity of flows and potentially 

would affect organisms or natural ecological processes. Alternatively, an impact 

would be visible to visitors. 

Major — an action would have substantial 

effects on water quality or the timing or 

intensity of flows and potentially would 

affect organisms or natural ecological 

processes. Alternatively, an impact would 

be easily visible to visitors. 

Floodplains 

The impact assessment for floodplains is 

focused on natural stream processes, historic 

records, and predicted flooding potential and 

frequency. The Floodplain Management 

Guideline (NPS 1993b) and the extent of 

alteration to natural river processes were used 

to define the intensity of impacts. 

Negligible — Impacts would occur outside the 

regulatory floodplain as defined by the 

Floodplain Management Guideline (100-

year or 500-year floodplain, depending on 

the type of action), or no measurable or 

perceptible change in natural river 

processes or aquatic habitat would occur. 

Minor — Actions within the regulatory 

floodplain would potentially interfere with 

or improve river processes or aquatic 

habitat in a limited way or in a localized 

area. Levee maintenance and stream bank 

manipulations that would protect development areas from flooding are examples of 

actions that would result in minor adverse 

impacts. Removing flood protection 

devices or small facilities would result in 

beneficial impacts. 

Moderate — Actions within the regulatory 

floodplain would interfere with or enhance 

river processes or aquatic habitat 

appreciably or in a large area. An example 

of an adverse moderate impact would 

include substantial modification of stream 

banks to protect roads or structures. 

Major — An action would permanently alter 

or improve a floodplain or substantially 

alter or improve natural river processes or 

aquatic habitat. An example might include 

permanent hardening and/or relocation of 

a braided river channel that prevents the 

river from meandering over time. 

 

157 
CHAPTER 4: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

Soils 

Predictions about site impacts were based on 

knowledge of impacts on natural resources 

from development of visitor and operations 

facilities under similar situations. The 

following categories were used to evaluate the 

potential impacts on soils: 

Negligible — the impact on soil resources 

would not be measurable. Any effects on 

productivity or erosion potential would be 

slight. 

Minor — an action would change a soil’s 

profile in a relatively small area, but it 

would not appreciably increase the 

potential for erosion of additional soil. 

Moderate — an action would result in a 

change in quantity or alteration of the 

topsoil, overall biological productivity, or 

the potential for erosion to remove small 

quantities of additional soil. Changes to 

localized ecological processes would be of 

limited extent. 

Major — an action would result in a change in 

the potential for erosion to remove large 

quantities of additional soil or in 

alterations to topsoil and overall biological 

productivity in a relatively large area. 

Important ecological processes would be 

altered, and landscape-level changes would 

be expected. 

Cave and Karst Resources 

Information on potential impacts to caves and 

karst features was gathered from effects of 

past actions and analysis by subject matter 

experts. The following definitions were used 

to qualify the severity of impacts from 

implementing the alternatives. 

Negligible —Effects of an action on caves or 

karst features may occur but would not be 

measurable and would be confined to a 

relatively small area. 

Minor — the effects on caves or karst features 

would be detectable but slight, and the area 

affected would be small. 

Moderate — the effects on caves or karst 

features would be readily apparent and 

slightly change the characteristics or 

features over a relatively large cave or 

karstic system. 

Major — the effect on caves or karst features 

would be readily apparent and would 

substantially change the geologic, 

hydrologic, or ecologic characteristics over 

a large area in and out of the national 

historical park. 

Vegetation 

Impacts were assessed qualitatively. Sitespecific information was gleaned from general 

documents such as resource management plan 

and results of national historical park surveys. 

Predictions about impacts were based on 

previous studies of visitor and facilities 

development impacts on natural resources. 

Negligible — the impact on vegetation 

(individuals and/or communities) would 

not be measurable. The abundance or 

distribution of individuals would not be 

affected or would be slightly affected. 

Ecological processes and biological 

productivity would not be affected. 

Minor — an action would not necessarily 

decrease or increase the area’s overall 

biological productivity. An action would 

affect the abundance or distribution of 

individuals in a localized area but would 

not affect the viability of local or regional 

populations or communities. 

Moderate — an action would result in a 

change in overall biological productivity in 

a small area. An action would affect a local 

population sufficiently to cause a change in 

abundance or distribution, but it would not 

affect the viability of the regional population or communities. Changes to ecological 

processes would be of limited extent. 

158 
Introduction 

Major — an action would result in an overall 

biological productivity in a relatively large 

area. An action would affect a regional or 

local population of a species sufficiently to 

cause a change in abundance or in 

distribution to the extent that the 

population or communities would not be 

likely to return to its/their former level 

(adverse), or would return to a sustainable 

level (beneficial). Important ecological 

processes would be altered. 

Wildlife 

Impacts on wildlife are closely related to the 

impacts on habitat. The evaluation considered 

whether actions would be likely to displace 

some or all individuals of a species in the 

monument or would result in loss or creation 

of habitat conditions needed for the viability 

of local or regional populations. Impacts 

associated with wildlife might include any 

change in roosting or foraging areas, food 

supply, protective cover, or distribution or 

abundance of species. 

Negligible — the impact would not be 

measurable on individuals, and the local 

populations would not be affected. 

Minor — an action would affect the 

abundance or distribution of individuals in 

a localized area but would not affect the 

viability of local or regional populations. 

Moderate — an action would affect a local 

population sufficiently to cause a minor 

change in abundance or distribution but 

would not affect the viability of the 

regional population. 

Major — an action would affect a regional or 

local population of a species sufficiently to 

cause a change in abundance or in 

distribution to the extent that the 

population would not be likely to return to 

its former level (adverse), or would return 

to a sustainable level (beneficial). 

Special Status Species 

Through coordination with the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, species of special concern 

were identified that were generally located in 

or near the national historical park. This 

included information on each species, 

including their preferred habitat, prey, and 

foraging areas. For special status species, 

including federally listed species, the 

following impact intensities were used. These 

definitions are consistent with the language 

used to determine effects on threatened and 

endangered species under section 7 of the 

Endangered Species Act. 

No effect — the action would cause no effect 

on the special status species or critical 

habitat. 

Not likely to adversely affect — the action 

would be expected to result in discountable effects on a species or critical habitat 

(that is, unlikely to occur and not able to be 

meaningfully measured, detected, or 

evaluated), or it would be completely 

beneficial. 

Likely to adversely affect — the action would 

result in a direct or indirect adverse effect 

on a species or critical habitat, and the 

effect would not be discountable or 

completely beneficial. 

Soundscapes 

Context, time, and intensity together determine the level of impact for an activity. For 

example, noise for a certain period and 

intensity would be a greater impact in a highly 

sensitive context, and a given intensity would 

be a greater impact if it occurred more often, 

or for longer duration. It is usually necessary 

to evaluate all three factors together to determine the level of noise impact. In some cases 

an analysis of one or more factors may 

indicate one impact level, while an analysis of 

another factor may indicate a different impact 

level, according to the criteria below. In such 

cases, best professional judgment based on a 

159 
CHAPTER 4: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

documented rationale must be used to 

determine which impact level best applies to 

the situation being evaluated. 

Negligible — Natural sounds would prevail; 

human-caused noise would be absent or 

very infrequent and mostly immeasurable. 

Minor — Natural sounds would predominate 

in zones where management objectives call 

for natural processes to predominate, with 

human-caused noise infrequent at low 

levels. In zones where human-caused noise 

is consistent with national historical park 

purpose and objectives, natural sounds 

could be heard occasionally. 

Moderate — In zones where management 

objectives call for natural processes to predominate, natural sounds would prevail, 

but human-caused noise could 

occasionally be present at low to moderate 

levels. In areas where human-caused noise 

is consistent with national historical park 

purpose and objectives, it would 

predominate during daylight hours and 

would not be overly disruptive to noisesensitive visitor activities in the area; in 

such areas, natural sounds could still be 

heard occasionally. 

Major — In zones where management 

objectives call for natural processes to predominate, natural sounds would be 

impacted by human-caused noise sources 

frequently or for extended periods of time. 

In zones where human-caused noise is 

consistent with national historical park 

purpose and zoning, the natural 

soundscape would be impacted most of the 

day; noise would disrupt conversation for 

long periods of time; and/or make 

enjoyment of other activities in the area 

difficult; natural sounds would rarely be 

heard during the day. 

VISITOR EXPERIENCE 

This impact analysis considers various aspects 

of visitor use and experience at Harpers Ferry 

National Historical Park, including the effects 

on: visitors’ ability to experience the national 

historical park’s primary natural and cultural 

resources; overall visitor access to the national 

historical park; the freedom to experience the 

resources at one’s own pace, opportunities for 

recreational activities, and opportunities for 

people with disabilities. The analysis is based 

on how visitor use and experiences would 

change with the way management prescriptions were applied in the alternatives. The 

analysis is primarily qualitative rather than 

quantitative due to the conceptual nature of 

the alternatives. 

Impacts on visitor use and experience were 

determined considering the best available 

information regarding visitor use and experience. Information on visitor use and visitor 

opinions was taken primarily from information and data gathered during this planning 

process, including opinions from national 

historical park visitors and neighbors and 

information provided by NPS staff. 

Intensity of Impact 

Impacts were evaluated comparatively 

between alternatives, using the no-action 

alternative as a baseline for comparison with 

each action alternative: 

Negligible — Visitors would likely be unaware 

of any effects associated with implementation of the alternative. 

Minor — Changes in visitor use and/or 

experience would be slight but detectable, 

would affect few visitors, and would not 

appreciably limit or enhance experiences 

identified as fundamental to the national 

historical park’s purpose and significance. 

Moderate — Some characteristics of visitor 

use and/or experience would change, and 

many visitors would likely be aware of the 

effects associated with implementation of 

the alternative; some changes to experiences identified as fundamental to the 

national historical park’s purpose and 

significance would be apparent. 

160 
Introduction 

Major — Multiple characteristics of visitor 

experience would change, including 

experiences identified as fundamental to 

the national historical park’s purpose and 

significance; most visitors would be aware 

of the effects associated with 

implementation of the alternative. 

SOCIOECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT 

The National Park Service estimated the 

impacts on the social and economic situation 

resulting from each alternative. Economic 

data, historic visitor use data, and future 

developments of the national historical park 

were all considered in identifying, discussing, 

and evaluating expected impacts. 

Assessment of potential socioeconomic 

impacts was based on comparisons between 

the no-action alternative and each of the 

action alternatives. 

Duration of Impact 

In general, short-term impacts are temporary 

in duration and are typically transitional 

effects associated with implementation of an 

action (e.g., related to construction activities); 

they are less than a few years. In contrast, 

long-term impacts may have a permanent 

effect on the socioeconomic environments 

and their effect extends beyond a few years 

(e.g., operational activities). 

Negligible —The effects on socioeconomic 

conditions are below or at the level of 

detection and localized. 

Minor — The effect on socioeconomic 

conditions are slight but detectable, and 

only affect a small number of national 

historical park services and/or a small 

portion of the surrounding population. 

The impact would be considered slight and 

not detectable outside the affected area. 

Moderate — The effects on socioeconomic 

conditions are readily apparent. Any 

effects would result in changes to socioeconomic conditions on a local scale in the 

affected area. 

Major — The effects on socioeconomic conditions are readily apparent. Measurable 

changes in social and economic conditions 

at the county level occur. The impact is 

severely adverse or exceptionally beneficial 

within the affected area. 

Type of Impact 

NPS Director Order #12 calls for the effects of 

the alternatives to be characterized as being 

beneficial, adverse, or indeterminate in nature. 

With respect to economic and social effects, 

few standards or clear definitions exist as to 

what constitutes beneficial or positive changes 

and what constitutes adverse or negative 

changes. For example, rising unemployment is 

generally perceived as adverse, while increases 

in job opportunities and average per capita 

personal income are regarded as beneficial. In 

many instances, however, changes viewed as 

favorable by some members of a community 

are seen as unfavorable by others. For 

example, the impact of growth on housing 

markets and values may be seen as favorable 

by construction contractors and many 

homeowners, but adverse by renters, local 

government officials, and community groups 

concerned with affordability. Consequently, 

some of the social and economic impacts of 

the alternatives may be described in such a 

manner as to allow the individual reviewing 

this document to determine whether they 

would be beneficial or adverse (impact is 

indeterminate with respect to “type”). 

NPS OPERATIONS 

The impact analysis evaluated the effects of 

the alternatives on the following aspects of 

NPS operations: 

• staffing, infrastructure, visitor facilities, 

and services 

161 
CHAPTER 4: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

• operations of other entities such as the 

Harpers Ferry Interpretive Design Center, 

Mather Training Center, the Potomac 

Heritage National Scenic Trail office, and 

the Appalachian Trail Park Office. 

The analysis was conducted in terms of how 

NPS operations and facilities might vary 

under the different management alternatives. 

The analysis is qualitative rather than quantitative because of the conceptual nature of the 

alternatives. Consequently professional 

judgment was used to reach reasonable 

conclusions as to the intensity, duration, and 

type of potential impact. 

Duration of Impact 

Short-term impacts would be less than one 

year since most construction is generally 

completed within a year’s timeframe and 

would last only until all construction-related 

action items are completed. Long-term 

impacts would extend beyond one year and 

have a permanent effect on operations. 

Intensity of Impact 

Negligible —NPS operations would not be 

affected or the effect would be at or below 

the lower levels of detection, and would 

not have an appreciable effect on NPS 

operations. 

Minor — The effects would be detectable, but 

would be of a magnitude that would not 

have an appreciable effect on NPS 

operations. 

Moderate —The effects would be readily 

apparent and would result in a substantial 

change in NPS operations in a manner 

noticeable to staff and the public. 

Major — The effects would be readily 

apparent and would result in a substantial 

change in NPS operations in a manner 

noticeable to staff and the public and be 

markedly different from existing 

operations. 

Type of Impact 

Beneficial impacts would improve NPS 

operations and/or facilities. Adverse impacts 

would negatively affect NPS operations 

and/or facilities and could hinder the staff’s 

ability to provide adequate services and 

facilities to visitors and staff. Some impacts 

could be beneficial for some operations or 

facilities and adverse or neutral for others. 

CUMULATIVE IMPACT ANALYSIS 

A cumulative impact is described in the 

Council on Environmental Quality’s 

regulation 1508.7 as follows: 

Cumulative impacts are incremental 

impacts of the action when added to 

other past, present, and reasonably 

foreseeable future actions, regardless of 

what agency (federal or nonfederal) or 

person undertakes such other action. 

Cumulative impacts can result from 

individually minor, but collectively 

significant, actions taking place over a 

period of time. 

Actions outside Harpers 

Ferry National Historical Park 

To determine potential cumulative impacts, 

other projects within and surrounding the 

units of Harpers Ferry National Historical 

Park were identified. The area included Jefferson, Loudoun, and Washington counties. 

Projects were identified by discussions with 

the NPS staff, federal land managers, and 

representatives of county and town governments. Potential projects identified as 

cumulative actions included any planning or 

development activity that was currently being 

implemented, or would be implemented in the 

reasonably foreseeable future. Impacts of past 

actions were also considered in the analysis. 

162 
Introduction 

These past, present, and future actions are 

evaluated in conjunction with the impacts of 

each alternative to determine if they would 

have any cumulative effects on a particular 

natural, cultural, or socioeconomic resource 

or visitor use. For those cumulative actions 

that are in the early planning stages, the 

qualitative evaluation of cumulative impacts is 

based on a general description of the projects. 

Land acquisition by the National Park Service 

has halted development of structures and the 

clear cutting of vegetation along ridges. 

Preservation of historic buildings within the 

community near the national historical park 

has encouraged private preservation of other 

community historic structures. Removal of the 

parking area on Hamilton Street near the 

Shenandoah River in Lower Town has 

removed a modern intrusion and source of 

resource damage from the heart of the 

national historical park but has also resulted in 

a more contemplative, natural area less 

reminiscent of its historic rural small town 

appearance. The rerouting of U.S. 340 to its 

new location outside Lower Town has 

allowed the restoration of the historic area 

and vehicular congestion but also has resulted 

in higher speed traffic through other areas of 

the community and the national historical 

park. Redevelopment of the train station 

would ensure this important historic 

community structure was preserved for the 

future and that its use remains as a train 

station for Amtrak and MARC trains. NPS 

development of facilities on Cavalier Heights 

has allowed the removal of vehicular congestion and vehicle parking from the national 

historical park in Lower Town and increased 

use at commercial establishments by provide 

more parking at Cavalier Heights than was 

previously available throughout the Lower 

Town. 

Residential and commercial development has 

occurred throughout the region since the 

1700s but has greatly increased in the last 20-

30 years. Loudoun County in Virginia is one 

of the fastest growing counties in the nation 

(see the “Socioeconomic Environment” 

section in the Affected Environment chapter). 

Most of the growing populace commutes to 

work in the District of Columbia metropolitan 

area. 

Establishment and growth of Harpers Ferry 

National Historical Park has resulted in the 

long-term preservation of thousands of acres 

of land amid the development. Outlying areas 

such as Maryland Heights, Short Hill, and 

Loudoun Heights were acquired to maintain 

the natural viewshed as seen from the national 

historical park. These areas have become de 

facto nature preserves where ecological 

processes are allowed to occur. Other areas 

such as the Schoolhouse Ridge battlefield 

were acquired to protect sites of Civil War 

events. 

The area around the confluence of the two 

rivers has always been important to travel. 

Buggy paths, canals, railroads, and modern 

highways are an integral part of the Harpers 

Ferry history. Vehicle thoroughfares have 

changed somewhat over the years as various 

combinations of roads and bridges have been 

tried with mixed success. All traffic used to go 

through the middle of town and now bypasses 

town on the Virginia side of the Shenandoah 

River. This bypass has reduced traffic through 

town, which may have resulted in some negative economic impact, although the national 

historical park brings far more visitors than 

previously visited the town. Construction of 

the bypass and other roads has resulted in 

adverse impacts to river shores and other 

natural resources. Noise from the current 

highway impacts the soundscape throughout 

the valley. Two sets of piers from abandoned 

bridges remain in the rivers possibly 

disrupting flow, causing scouring of the 

substrate, and collecting debris. 

163 
CHAPTER 4: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

Actions inside Harpers 

Ferry National Historical Park 

The primary projects and actions in the 

national historical park that could contribute 

to cumulative effects are summarized below. 

Parking and Cavalier Heights. During the 

late 1970s and early 1980s, a plan was 

developed to remove parking from Lower 

Town. A new national historical park entrance 

was created at Cavalier Heights with parking, 

a kiosk, a visitor contact station, restrooms, 

and a bus staging facility. This removed 

vehicles congesting the narrow streets of 

Lower Town and opened up areas to 

pedestrians that were formerly used for 

parking that had adverse effect on the 

resource. 

Potoma Wayside. With the growth of the 

popularity of river rafting in the 1970s and 

1980s, the use of the Shenandoah River by 

individuals and commercial river rafters began 

to impinge upon the river front area of Lower 

Town. Rafters entered the river upstream of 

the national historical park and took out in 

Lower Town. This raised competition for 

parking spaces with visitors to the national 

historical park attractions in Lower Town. As 

a solution to the dilemma, a take-out was 

designed at the Potoma Wayside on the west 

side of the Potomac River just below the 

confluence of the two rivers that allowed the 

recreational river use to be separated from the 

national historical park’s visitor use that was 

dependent upon the historical resources of 

Lower Town. 

Historic Preservation. The national 

historical park is undertaking a program of 

preservation of historic ruins on Virginius and 

Hall’s islands. The projects consist of 

exposing foundations and other structural 

features, stabilizing them and interpreting 

them to the public. A major purpose is to 

provide some protection for these ruins to 

allow them to withstand the ravages of 

periodic flooding. 

Another project currently underway is the 

identification of structures within the historic 

armory. This archeological work will provide 

valuable information about the location of 

armory buildings, working conditions during 

its time of operation and samples of material 

culture for research. The archeological 

investigations will also provide information 

necessary to accurately outline building 

locations for interpretation. 

A program of preservation is ongoing on all 

historic structures throughout the national 

historical park. Work included is that 

necessary to bring buildings up to acceptable 

preservation levels based on building 

significance and purpose. 

A new dormitory lodge for use by Mather 

Training Center has been studied by the 

National Park Service but has not been 

advanced due to funding considerations, and 

other options to possibly co-locate dorm use 

at another agency’s facilities. The design is 

complementary in scale and style to the other 

structures within the Storer campus but 

clearly a modern construction. 

Historic Buildings and Structures. The 

Harpers Ferry area has a history of tourism 

based on its dramatic location at the 

confluence of the Shenandoah and Potomac 

rivers and the historic significance of its past. 

With the designation of the national historical 

park, a comprehensive program of inventory 

and preservation was undertaken, primarily in 

Lower Town and on Camp Hill. A period of 

significance was determined for Lower Town 

to be from the town’s founding to about 1900. 

Structures from that period received 

preservation treatment, while structures from 

the later period were removed. On Camp Hill 

structures from the Storer College tenure 

were preserved. This has resulted in an 

extraordinary number of historic buildings 

and structures within the national historical 

park. Outside the national historical park the 

community has worked to preserve other 

historic structures and homes that give 

164 
Introduction 

Harpers Ferry its distinctive historic 

appearance. 

During the first half of the 20th century, 

numerous buildings were destroyed or so 

extensively damaged by floods that they had 

to be removed. These structures were 

generally located along Shenandoah Street 

and consisted of a wide range of building 

types though primarily commercial and 

residential. 

Once a bustling manufacturing community, 

Virginius and Hall’s islands have been almost 

completely transformed into a natural area as 

a result of flooding. 

The former armory firehouse that became 

known as John Brown’s Fort after the raid is 

an icon of abolition and the American Civil 

War. Soon after the end of the war the 

structure began a journey that resulted in its 

disassembly and reconstruction in several 

locations before being returned to Lower 

Town. However, the history of the building 

may have only increased because of its travels. 

The John Brown Fort was returned to its 

present location, several hundred feet from its 

original location, by the National Park Service 

in 1967. 

With the continuing growth of urban 

Washington, D.C., suburban development has 

moved up the Potomac Valley towards 

Harpers Ferry. The result has been the loss of 

older buildings and structures outside the 

national historical park as new development 

has taken over. 

Through stabilization, rehabilitation, and 

ongoing maintenance Harpers Ferry National 

Historical Park has provided protection and 

preservation of historic structures that have 

been subjected to numerous floods, past 

periods of neglect and historic financial 

fluctuations that affected the upkeep of the 

town. This work has resulted in no adverse 

effect. 

Cultural Landscapes. Past decisions to 

interpret the national historical park primarily 

based on its 19th century importance has 

appreciably altered the landscape through the 

removal of a number of historic buildings and 

structures. The most dramatic of these 

changes has occurred in Lower Town with the 

removal of numerous structures leaving open 

lots in the once tightly faced rows of buildings. 

Numerous structures were removed between 

Shenandoah Street and the Shenandoah River. 

Removal of buildings has occurred on Camp 

Hill as well. 

The circulation pattern of the national 

historical park was dramatically changed with 

the creation of Shoreline Drive, a road linking 

the Cavalier Heights visitor contact facility to 

Lower Town via Shenandoah Street. 

Flooding resulted in the eventual loss of all 

historic structures within the once bustling 

community of Virginius and Hall’s islands. A 

community of large factories, numerous 

houses, streets, and activity has now been 

nearly reclaimed by nature. However, evidence of the rich history of this industrial 

community has been preserved in the 

archeological record. Due to the recurring 

threat posed by flooding, and NPS policy not 

to do reconstruction, no effort has been made 

to restore the islands to their historic 

appearance. 

Archeological Resources. The National 

Park Service has undertaken considerable 

archeological work within Harpers Ferry 

National Historical Park to assist preservation 

and interpretation of historic resources and to 

understand the prehistory and history of the 

area. Ongoing work within the national 

historical park, such as that on the armory 

grounds and on Virginius and Hall’s islands is 

being undertaken to stabilize remaining 

foundations. 

Museum Collections. The national historical 

park has extensive collections of museum 

items associated with the history and 

165 
CHAPTER 4: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

development of Harpers Ferry. Examples of 

museum objects are from the manufacturing, 

Civil War, and Storer College periods. Many 

of these items are stored at the National Park 

Service’ Museum Resource Center (MRCE) in 

Landover, Maryland. An NPS curator 

oversees the preservation of museum objects 

within the collections. 

Acquisition of Scenic Areas Beneficial to 

Animals and Fish. Areas of the national 

historical park that were purchased to protect 

the view from Jefferson Rock are being 

allowed to revert to a more natural condition. 

A program of structures removal, nonnative 

species removal, and landscape restoration is 

underway as funding permits. 

Acquisition of Land for View Protection. 

Because the views from Harpers Ferry are of 

great importance to the historical landscape, 

the national historical park has acquired the 

heights along the Potomac and Shenandoah 

rivers to ensure that they will never be 

deforested or developed. 

Future Actions 

New development in the form of small and 

large residential lots (concentrated and open 

development) is expected to increase in the 

foreseeable future on the West Virginia and 

Maryland sides of the national historical park. 

Some commercial development is expected to 

accompany the new residential neighborhoods. The 2004 Jefferson County 

Comprehensive Plan predicts that Jefferson 

County (West Virginia) population is 

expected to increase by 20,000 people by the 

year 2020. This plan also states that the 

population is increasing the fastest in the rural 

areas rather than municipalities. This trend is 

common to most of the surrounding counties. 

The 2004 Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan

calls for encouraging economic development, 

farming opportunities, and planned land 

development. It also calls for natural features, 

particularly stream valleys, to be conserved as 

green spaces. 

Highway 340 is a major access point to the 

eastern part of West Virginia. The highway 

narrows to two lanes through the park and 

there is pressure from the public and the states 

to widen the road to four lanes. 

In the national historical park, historic structure preservation and natural resource 

management actions would continue according to current park service policies and as 

funding allows. 

There is a planned expansion of the public 

transportation system in Charles Town. This 

would include an expanded bus system, the 

addition of commuter rail stations, and new 

bicycle paths. Construction of new commuter 

rail access near Charles Town could take some 

commuter traffic out of Lower Town in 

Harpers Ferry and relieve the traffic congestion and parking problems now being 

experienced. It can be assumed that historic 

structure preservation and natural resource 

management actions would continue. 

IMPAIRMENT OF NATIONAL 

HISTORICAL PARK RESOURCES 

In addition to determining the environmental 

consequences of implementing the preferred 

and other alternatives, NPS Management 

Policies 2006 (section 1.4) requires analysis of 

potential effects to determine whether or not 

proposed actions would impair national 

historical park resources and values. 

The fundamental purpose of the national park 

system, established by the Organic Act and 

reaffirmed by the General Authorities Act, as 

amended, begins with a mandate to conserve 

parks’ resources and values. NPS managers 

must always seek ways to avoid, or to minimize to the greatest degree practicable, 

adverse impacts on parks’ resources and 

values. However, the laws do give the 

166 
Introduction 

167 

National Park Service the management discretion to allow impacts on parks’ resources 

and values when necessary and appropriate to 

fulfill the purposes of a park, as long as the 

impact does not constitute impairment of the 

affected resources and values. Although 

Congress has given the National Park Service 

the management discretion to allow certain 

impacts within a park, that discretion is 

limited by the statutory requirement that the 

National Park Service must leave resources 

and values unimpaired unless a particular law 

directly and specifically provides otherwise. 

The prohibited impairment is an impact that, 

in the professional judgment of the 

responsible NPS manager, would harm the 

integrity of park resources or values, including 

the opportunities that otherwise would be 

present for the enjoyment of those resources 

or values (NPS Management Policies 2006 

1.4.5). An impact to any park’s resource or 

value may, but does not necessarily, constitute 

an impairment. An impact would be more 

likely to constitute impairment to the extent it 

affects a resource or value whose conservation 

is: 

• necessary to fulfill specific purposes 

identified in the establishing legislation or 

proclamation of the park; or 

• key to the natural or cultural integrity of 

the park or to opportunities for enjoyment 

of the park; or 

• identified in the park’s general management plan or other relevant NPS planning 

documents as being of significance. 

Impairment could result from NPS activities 

in managing the park, visitor activities, or 

activities undertaken by concessioners, 

contractors, and others operating in the park. 

Impairment may also result from sources or 

activities outside the national historical park. 

This will be addressed consistent with NPS 

Management Policies 2006 sections 1.6 and 1.7 

on Cooperative Conservation and Civic 

Engagement. 

A determination on impairment is made in the 

“Environmental Consequences” section in the 

conclusion section for each required impact 

topic related to the national historical park’s 

resources and values. An evaluation of 

impairment is not required for topics related 

to visitor use and experience (unless the 

impact is resource based), NPS operations, or 

the socioeconomic environment. When it is 

determined that an action(s) would have a 

moderate to major adverse effect, justification 

for a finding of nonimpairment is made. 

Impacts of only negligible or minor intensity 

would by definition not result in impairment. 
IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE 1 — NO ACTION 

CULTURAL RESOURCES 

Historic Structures 

Lower Town. To appropriately preserve and 

protect national register-listed or -eligible 

historic structures, all stabilization, 

preservation, and rehabilitation efforts, as well 

as daily, cyclical, and seasonal maintenance, 

would be undertaken in accordance with the 

Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the 

Treatment of Historic Properties (1995). Any 

materials removed during rehabilitation 

efforts would be evaluated to determine their 

value to the park’s museum collections and/or 

for their comparative use in future preservation work at the sites. Stabilization, 

preservation, and rehabilitation would have 

no adverse effects on historic structures. 

Historic structures could suffer wear and tear 

from increased visitation, but monitoring the 

carrying capacity of historic structures could 

result in the imposition of visitation levels or 

constraints that would contribute to the 

stability or integrity of the resources without 

unduly hindering interpretation for visitors. 

Unstaffed or minimally staffed structures 

could be more susceptible to vandalism. 

However, few, if any, adverse impacts would 

be anticipated. 

Federal Armory. Structures associated with 

the armory, such as the river wall and foundations would be monitored and maintained to 

preserve their historic importance. Limited 

interpretation and visitation of this area would 

continue. These activities would result in no 

adverse effect to historic structures. 

Potomac Frontage. The condition of the 

Armory canal would be monitored and 

occasional maintenance actions implemented. 

Occasional wall blowouts, vegetation growth, 

and periodic flooding could eventually result 

in the loss of canal integrity. Associated 

structures such as the Potomac Power 

Hydroelectric Plant would also continue to 

slowly deteriorate. Occasional maintenance 

activities would be undertaken to secure and 

stabilize the building envelope. Eventually, 

deterioration could outstrip the ability to 

maintain these features and historic integrity 

would be lost. The impact on the historic 

structures of the Potomac Frontage area in 

this event would be adverse. 

Virginius Island / Hall’s Island. Some 

limited stabilization of exposed historic ruins 

on Virginius and Hall’s islands would continue in order to provide for visitor interpretation. Such stabilization activities would 

result in no adverse effect to historic 

resources. 

Camp Hill. Buildings now used for NPS 

administrative purposes would continue to be 

used for those purposes. As with the structures in Lower Town, these structures were 

not designed for the level of use they receive 

and require constant maintenance in keeping 

with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards 

and Guidelines for Historic Preservation. These 

continuing impacts would require increased 

maintenance over the life of the general 

management plan to ensure that such use has 

no adverse effects on the structures. 

Shipley School. If funding was available from 

a non-NPS organization, and the school could 

be rehabilitated, it would be adaptively used 

for a variety of NPS purposes. This action 

would likely impact historic fabric through 

reconfiguration of walls, utility lines, and 

other systems necessary to adapt the building 

for new uses. The result of rehabilitation 

would have no adverse effect. If allowed to 

molder, there would be an adverse effect. 

Loudoun Heights. Preservation actions 

would be limited to those that would protect 

the long-term condition of remnant 

168 
Impacts of Alternative 1 — No Action 

earthworks. There would be no adverse effect 

to earthworks and other military defensive 

works from implementation of this 

alternative. 

Maryland Heights. Stabilization or 

preservation actions would be limited to those 

that would protect the long-term condition of 

the remnant earthworks present. There would 

be no adverse effect to earthworks and other 

military defensive works from implementation 

of this alternative. 

Short Hill. Stabilization-related actions 

would occur to protect the long-term 

condition of the industrial complex and 

domestic sites. There would be no adverse 

effect from implementation of this alternative. 

Schoolhouse Ridge. Under this alternative, 

structures at the former Jellystone campground would be left to deteriorate, or would 

be removed if they posed a safety hazard. 

Other former residences and ruins located on 

Schoolhouse Ridge would be evaluated under 

National Register of Historic Places criteria 

before any action were taken. If the structures 

were found to be eligible for inclusion, their 

removal to restore the appearance of the 

battlefield would result in an adverse effect. 

NPS staff would consult with the state historic 

preservation officer and the Advisory Council 

on Historic Preservation to mitigate any 

adverse effect actions. 

Murphy Farm. Stabilization of the Murphy 

farmhouse would be undertaken to halt 

deterioration. The results would have no 

adverse effect on this historic structure. 

There would be stabilization-related actions 

to protect the long-term condition of remnant 

Civil War earthworks. As a result, there would 

be no adverse effect from implementation of 

this alternative. 

There would continue to be stabilization of 

the foundation of John Brown’s Fort. The 

foundations would be preserved, resulting in 

no adverse effect on this structure. 

Nash Farm. The structures on the Nash 

Farm would be stabilized and maintained. 

Stabilization of the structures would permit 

eventual long-term preservation. Structural 

stabilization would result in no adverse effect 

to the Nash farm buildings. 

Potomac Terrace. Grandview School would 

be adaptively rehabilitated as office space. 

This rehabilitation would be primarily limited 

to the interior of the structure and could 

impact some historic fabric. However, these 

impacts would be expected to be minimal and 

would result in no adverse effect to the 

historic building. 

Cumulative Effects — Over the years, 

historic structures in the park and general 

vicinity have been adversely impacted by 

natural processes such as weathering, and 

historic structures outside the park have been 

demolished for agriculture and development. 

Historic structures in the park have also been 

adversely impacted by wear and tear 

associated with visitor access. In addition, 

since the formation of the park the National 

Park Service has removed 35 structures 

identified as either unsafe, unstable, or out of 

character with the 19th century period of 

significance. These removals occurred 

primarily in Lower Town, although several 

structures on Camp Hill were also removed. 

The removal of these structures resulted in 

adverse effects. 

As described above, the potential impacts 

associated with implementation of alternative 

1 would result in both no adverse effects and 

adverse effects on the national historical 

park’s historic structures. The adverse impacts 

of implementing alternative 1, in combination 

with the adverse impacts of other past, 

present, and reasonably foreseeable future 

actions, would result in an adverse cumulative 

impact. The adverse impacts of alternative 1, 

169 
CHAPTER 4: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

however, would only contribute minimally to 

the overall adverse cumulative impact. 

Conclusion — Stabilizing and preserving 

historic structures would considerably reduce 

the loss of historic fabric over time. The result 

would be beneficial. When compared with the 

impacts of past and present actions, and those 

reasonably foreseeable future actions, this 

alternative contributes only a minimal amount 

to the adverse effect of the total of all such 

actions. 

Because there would be no major, adverse 

impacts to a resource or value whose 

conservation is (1) necessary to fulfill specific 

purposes identified in the establishing 

legislation or proclamation of Harpers Ferry 

National Historical Park; (2) key to the natural 

or cultural integrity of the national historical 

park; or ((3) identified as a goal in relevant 

NPS planning documents, there would be no 

impairment of the national historical park 

resources or values. 

Archeological Resources 

Archeological resources adjacent to or easily 

accessible from trails and developed areas could 

be vulnerable to surface disturbance, 

inadvertent damage, and vandalism. A loss of 

surface archeological materials, alteration of 

artifact distribution, and a reduction of 

contextual evidence could result. However, 

continued ranger patrol and emphasis on visitor 

education would discourage vandalism and 

inadvertent destruction of cultural remains, and 

any adverse impacts would be expected to be 

minimal if any. 

Federal Armory. In this alternative, the 

Federal Armory grounds would continue to 

be managed for the protection of 

archeological remains. This would include 

protection from vandalizing, looting, or other 

visitor-related impact to archeological sites. 

Continued patrolling by NPS staff would 

provide security from visitor impacts resulting 

in no adverse effects. 

Select removal of trees and other invasive 

vegetation would be accomplished through 

means that would not disturb archeological 

deposits. These actions would have no 

adverse effect on archeological resources. 

Virginius Island / Hall’s Island. Continued 

stabilization of the historic structural remains 

could impact associated archeological 

deposits such as artifacts and cultural features. 

Archeological investigations would be 

conducted in order to identify and recover 

any such artifacts and associated contextual 

information prior to structural stabilization 

efforts. The results of these investigations 

could adversely affect any associated 

archeological remains. 

Select removal of trees and other invasive 

vegetation would be accomplished through 

means that would not disturb archeological 

deposits. These actions would have no 

adverse effect on archeological resources. 

Potomac River Frontage. Continuing 

current maintenance policies would allow 

vegetation to reclaim the site. The result 

would be large trees and other vegetation 

continuing to disturb archeological deposits 

and structural features. These actions would 

have an adverse effect on archeological 

resources. 

Maryland Heights, Loudoun Heights, and 

Short Hill. There would be no anticipated 

effects on the archeological resources of 

Maryland or Loudoun Heights. 

Cumulative Effects — Past development 

in the national historical park may have 

resulted in the disturbance and loss of some 

archeological resources during excavation and 

construction activities. In addition, agricultural practices and the development and 

expansion of communities in and near the 

park may also have previously disturbed 

170 
Impacts of Alternative 1 — No Action 

archeological resources. The continuation of 

current activities could also result in future 

adverse impacts on archeological resources. 

As described above, implementation of 

alternative 1 could potentially disturb 

archeological resources at the national 

historical park — resulting in adverse effects. 

Any adverse impacts associated with the 

implementation of alternative 1, in 

combination with the impacts of other past, 

present, and reasonably foreseeable future 

projects, would result in adverse cumulative 

impacts. However, alternative 1 would be 

expected to contribute only minimally to the 

overall adverse cumulative impacts. Thus, any 

adverse impacts on archeological resources 

resulting from implementation of alternative 1 

would be a very small component of the 

adverse cumulative impact. 

Conclusion — The discussion of possible 

impacts on archeological resources above is 

theoretical until such resources are actually 

found. Archeological testing and/or 

excavation before any ground disturbance in 

the park could result in positive and negative 

impacts. Should archeological testing identify 

resources of significance, mitigation activities 

could be implemented or the project could be 

redesigned to lessen or do away with any 

impact. There would be an effect, but that 

effect would not be adverse because the site 

would remain essentially intact. However, if 

the project cannot be redesigned to lessen any 

effect on archeological resources and removal 

of the site is required, the impact on the site 

would be adverse despite the mitigating 

factors of data recovery/research and possible 

interpretation. Once excavated the context of 

the site would be lost. 

Because there would be no major, adverse 

impacts to a resource or value whose 

conservation is (1) necessary to fulfill specific 

purposes identified in the establishing 

legislation or proclamation of Harpers Ferry 

National Historical Park; (2) key to the natural 

or cultural integrity of the national historical 

park; or (3) identified as a goal in relevant NPS 

planning documents, there would be no 

impairment of the national historical park 

resources or values. 

Cultural Landscapes 

To appropriately preserve and protect 

national register-listed or -eligible cultural 

landscapes, all stabilization, preservation, and 

rehabilitation efforts, as well as daily, cyclical, 

and seasonal maintenance, would be undertaken in accordance with the Secretary of the 

Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of 

Historic Properties (1995). Stabilization, 

preservation, and rehabilitation would have 

no adverse effects on cultural landscapes. 

Lower Town. The streets in Lower Town are 

under the jurisdiction of the town of Harpers 

Ferry. Vehicles use the streets throughout the 

day when visitors are in the national historical 

park. In this alternative unrestricted vehicular 

access to streets in the national historical park 

would continue to bring nonhistoric elements 

into the historic scene, adverse visual and 

noise impacts on the historic scene of Lower 

Town. 

The cultural landscape of Lower Town would 

not change appreciably in this alternative. 

Actions undertaken would be designed to 

maintain the landscape in its present condition. Maintenance activities would result in 

no adverse effects. 

Federal Armory. The current stairway 

providing access to the armory grounds from 

the top of the railroad berm at the approximate location of John Brown’s Monument 

would remain. This nonhistoric element 

would continue to be an adverse visual effect 

on the cultural landscape of the Federal 

Armory grounds. 

Selective removal of trees and shrubs would 

continue under existing maintenance policies. 

Eradication of such vegetation would be 

beneficial to the overall condition of the 

171 
CHAPTER 4: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

cultural landscape of the Armory. These 

actions would have no adverse effect on the 

cultural landscape. 

Potomac River Frontage. Evaluation and 

implementation of stabilization and 

preservation measures on historic structures 

such as head gates and canal walls would be 

undertaken. 

Periodic evaluation for structural failure 

would ensure the integrity of the cultural 

landscape. This stabilization would have no 

adverse effect on historic properties.

Virginius Island / Hall’s Island. No 

landscape actions are proposed under this 

alternative. 

Maryland Heights, Loudoun Heights, Short 

Hill. Stabilization or preservation actions at 

Maryland Heights, Loudoun Heights, and 

Short Hill would be limited to those that 

would protect the long-term condition of the 

remnant earthworks present. The result 

would not be adverse. 

Schoolhouse Ridge. Schoolhouse Ridge 

would continue to be maintained as a 

battlefield landscape utilizing agricultural 

leases. Leaving nonhistoric intrusions on the 

historic cultural landscape of the battlefield 

would be an adverse effect. 

Cumulative Effects — During the first 

half of the 20th century several major flooding 

episodes inundated what is now Harpers 

Ferry National Historical Park. The most 

extensive impacts occurred in Lower Town 

where the loss of buildings left open lots in the 

tight rows of structures. Additional loss of 

contiguous sets of structures on Shenandoah 

Street near The Green and structures in the 

Hamilton Street area also occurred. As a 

result, the loss of these structures adversely 

impacted the historic cultural landscape 

through the removal of a substantial portion 

of the historic setting. 

Past interpretation by the national historical 

park that emphasized its 19th century history 

has resulted in the removal of numerous 

historic structures and landscape features not 

associated with that period. Other structures 

were removed for reasons of public safety. 

The scale of structures removed from the 

streetscape has altered the cultural landscape 

dramatically and has resulted in an adverse 

effect. 

In 1969 John Brown’s Fort was moved from 

Storer College to its present site about 100 

yards from its original location. It was not 

possible to move the fort to its original 

location due to a berm constructed by the B & 

O Railroad. The fort’s proximity to the 

original location has had a generally beneficial 

impact on the cultural landscape. Adequate 

interpretation of the history of the site is 

possible at this location. The return of the 

John Brown Fort to Arsenal Square has 

resulted in no adverse effect. 

The elimination of historic streets and the 

creation of nonhistoric pedestrian trails have 

resulted in changes in access and movement 

through a considerable section of Lower 

Town. Reconfiguring the circulation pattern 

of the national historical park by the addition 

of a connector road between the Cavalier 

Heights visitor contact facility and Lower 

Town has also generally had an adverse effect 

upon the cultural landscape. 

Through stabilization, rehabilitation, and 

ongoing maintenance, Harpers Ferry National 

Historical Park has provided protection and 

preservation of historic structures that have 

been subjected to numerous floods, past 

periods of neglect and historic financial 

fluctuations that affected the upkeep of the 

town. This work has resulted in no adverse 

effect. 

Beyond the national historical park 

boundaries, population growth, primarily 

associated with the development of metropolitan Washington, D.C., has spread into 

172 
Impacts of Alternative 1 — No Action 

previously rural locations, and local towns. 

The increasing impacts of new buildings and 

urban development are altering the character 

of the historic cultural landscape. In 

particular, transportation corridors have 

altered the landscape as buildings and 

transportation related improvements are 

completed. The results of these impacts have 

had an adverse effect on the rural character of 

the cultural landscape surrounding the 

national historical park. 

As described above, the potential impacts 

associated with implementing alternative 1 

would result in both no adverse effects and 

adverse effects to the national historical park’s 

cultural landscapes. The adverse impacts of 

alternative 1, in combination with the adverse 

impacts of other past, present, and reasonably 

foreseeable future actions, would result in an 

adverse cumulative impact. The adverse 

impacts of alternative 1, however, would only 

contribute minimally to the overall adverse 

cumulative impact. 

Conclusion — The potential impacts 

associated with implementing alternative 1 

would result in both no adverse effects and 

adverse effects on the national historical 

park’s cultural landscapes. The adverse 

impacts of alternative 1 would only contribute 

minimally to the adverse cumulative impact. 

Because there would be no major, adverse 

impacts to a resource or value whose conservation is (1) necessary to fulfill specific purposes identified in the establishing legislation 

or proclamation of Harpers Ferry National 

Historical Park; (2) key to the natural or 

cultural integrity of the national historical 

park; or (3) identified as a goal in relevant NPS 

planning documents, there would be no 

impairment of the national historical park 

resources or values. 

 

NATURAL RESOURCES 

Wetlands and Water Resources 

Former canals in the national historical park 

have become de facto wetlands and these areas 

would continue to be managed and protected 

for their wetland habitat values. This alternative would not result in any changes in 

management that would affect the quality or 

quantity of water resources. No impoundment of surface water is anticipated and there 

would be no removal of water or discharge 

into the national historical park’s water bodies 

resulting from this alternative. Water quality 

would continue to be monitored in the 

national historical park, and actions would be 

taken to identify and alleviate the source if 

degradation is discovered. 

In summary, alternative 1 would have no 

effect on water resources in the national 

historical park. 

Cumulative Effects — Water resources in 

the Potomac and Shenandoah river basins 

have been adversely affected by 200 years of 

human use and activity. Both domestic and 

industrial wastes are sources of water 

pollution in the region. Agricultural practices, 

including the use of fertilizers and pesticides, 

are primary contributors to contamination of 

the streams and rivers. The amount and type 

of forest cover, land use, and waste from 

industries each affect sedimentation and the 

quality of the river bottoms. These sources of 

water quality degradation are located outside 

national historical park boundaries. 

Some wetlands within the region have been 

filled in to make more land available for 

development. This practice decreases wetland 

areas and removes their natural beneficial 

values. However, closure of the waterpowered industries and nonuse of the canals 

has led to the creation of a wetland on 

Virginius Island and a smaller one in the old 

Armory canal in the national historical park. 

173 
CHAPTER 4: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

This is a beneficial effect that may somewhat 

offset the loss of other wetlands in the region. 

Illegal activities such as inadequate or 

nonfunctioning septic systems, dumping of 

waste in the rivers or unauthorized horse use 

near waterways adversely affects water 

quality. 

Several state and federal agencies are involved 

in an initiative to clean up and protect the 

Chesapeake Bay watershed, of which the 

Potomac River is a contributor. This effort 

will produce long-term minor to moderate 

beneficial impacts on the watershed that 

extends from West Virginia to New York by 

fixing past adverse impacts. 

The no-action alternative would not contribute to these effects and so would have no 

cumulative impacts on water resources. 

Conclusion — This alternative would 

have no new effects and, therefore, no 

cumulative effects on water resources. There 

would be no impairment of this resource as a 

result of this alternative. 

Floodplains 

The natural and beneficial values of 

floodplains would continue to be 

compromised by the development around the 

confluence of the Potomac and Shenandoah 

rivers. Occasional damage to national 

historical park structures from floodwaters 

would continue. No additional development 

would occur in the floodplain. 

When flooding does occur, local, state, and 

federal warning systems are activated and the 

flow velocities through town are relatively 

slow, so the potential that visitors or NPS 

employees could be injured or lose their lives 

is low. 

Cumulative Effects — Floodplains of the 

Potomac and Shenandoah rivers have been 

adversely affected by 200 years of human use 

and activity. Construction of roads, canals, 

housing and commercial development has 

adversely affected the original floodplains as 

well as constrained the natural meandering of 

the rivers. This would continue. 

Establishment of the national historical park 

and preservation of the outlying natural areas 

has maintained the beneficial values of the 

floodplains along those undeveloped areas. 

Floodplains would continue to be adversely 

affected by the development that prevents 

natural river movement and sediment 

deposition. 

The no-action alternative would have no 

beneficial or adverse contribution to these 

effects. Therefore, there would be no 

cumulative impacts on floodplains as a result 

of implementing this alternative. 

Conclusion — This alternative would 

have no additional effects on floodplains and 

no project-related cumulative effects. There 

would be no impairment of a key national 

historical park resource or value as a result of 

this alternative. 

Soils 

Implementing this alternative would result in 

adverse impacts to soil resources from 

ongoing structural renovation and 

stabilization and minor construction. These 

actions would disturb soil layers and affect 

topsoil. This would occur in previously 

disturbed areas and mitigation such as dust 

abatement and silt fencing would be applied 

to reduce the potential for soil loss during 

construction. The anticipated impacts from 

this alternative would be short and long term, 

negligible, and adverse. 

Cumulative Effects — Impacts from 

existing roads and developments in the 

national historical park would remain under 

the no-action alternative. In addition, foresee174 
Impacts of Alternative 1 — No Action 

able future actions of further development in 

the vicinity of the national historical park 

would adversely impact soils through compaction and displacement from construction 

activities — such as residential development 

on the Maryland side of the Potomac River. 

The no-action alternative would result in 

negligible adverse impacts. When the impacts 

of this alternative are combined with other 

past, present, and future actions, there would 

be minor to moderate adverse cumulative 

effects on the soil resource. Alternative 1 

would only have a slight contribution to the 

overall cumulative effect. 

Conclusion — Implementing the noaction alternative would have long-term 

negligible adverse impacts on soil resources. 

When this alternative is combined with other 

past, present, and future actions, there would 

be minor to moderate adverse cumulative 

effects on the soil resource. There would be 

no impairment of this resource. 

Cave and Karst Resources 

The no-action alternative would not create 

any changes to current conditions or situations affecting cave and karst resources. 

Existing impacts to cave resources from 

unauthorized entry (e.g., graffiti, trash) would 

continue at the same level and intensity as 

they are now. 

Cumulative Effects — Subterranean 

ecosystems are typically in an extremely 

delicate balance and easily disrupted. Natural 

processes can change the cave environment 

including daily exchanges of air, introduction 

of organic material from water flow or large 

animals; and a rock fall closing an entrance or 

passageway. Humans entering the caves 

described above have altered the natural 

balance by introducing foreign matter (dead 

skin, hair, clothing lint, and other introduced 

organic matter), exhaling carbon dioxide, 

trampling cave life, as well as intentional 

littering and vandalism (graffiti, breaking 

formations). These human-caused effects 

result in short-and long-term, minor to 

moderate adverse impacts. 

The no-action alternative would not 

contribute to these cumulative effects on cave 

resources. 

Conclusion — This alternative would 

create no additional impacts on this resource 

and so there would be no project-related 

cumulative effects. There would be no 

impairment of a key national historical park 

resource or value as a result of this alternative. 

Vegetative Communities 

Implementing this alternative would result in 

adverse impacts to vegetation from ongoing 

structure renovation and stabilization and 

minor construction. These actions would 

disturb or destroy existing vegetation. This 

would occur in previously disturbed areas 

where there are very few natural vegetative 

communities. 

NPS staff would continue vegetation trimming, clearing, and agricultural use to maintain historic vistas and historic landscapes. 

This would occur on previously disturbed 

vegetation and would continue short- and 

long-term negligible adverse impacts. 

The anticipated impacts from this alternative 

would be long-term, negligible, and adverse. 

Cumulative Effects — Native vegetation 

in the region has been systematically disturbed 

for thousands of years. From early Native 

American cultures through the Industrial era, 

humans relied on the vegetation for food, fuel 

and shelter. As more people came into the 

region, nonnative plants came with them. 

These actions altered the vegetation in 

relatively small areas throughout most of the 

region. 

175 
CHAPTER 4: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

The establishment of Harpers Ferry National 

Historical Park has resulted in moderate 

beneficial impacts to vegetation through 

protection of native vegetation and nonnative 

species eradication efforts. 

Social trails occur in almost all areas of the 

national historical park. These are unplanned 

and unmaintained trails created by visitors. 

They can damage vegetation, disrupt animal 

habitats, and cause soil erosion. Seeds of 

nonnative plants carried by wind and humans 

have created infestations of noxious weeds 

and other invasive species that cause longterm adverse effects on native vegetation. 

The national historical park would continue 

vegetation trimming, clearing, and agricultural 

use to maintain historic vistas and historic 

landscapes, resulting in continued long-term 

beneficial impacts. 

The no-action alternative would cause 

negligible adverse impacts. When combined 

with the moderate adverse effects of other 

past, present, and future actions alternative 1 

would have a moderate adverse cumulative 

effect on vegetative resources. Alternative 1 

would contribute only slightly to these 

cumulative effects. 

Conclusion — Implementing the noaction alternative would have a long-term 

negligible adverse impact on native vegetative 

communities. When combined with the 

moderate adverse effects of other past, 

present, and future actions, this alternative 

would have a moderate adverse cumulative 

effect on vegetative communities. There 

would be no impairment of this resource as a 

result of this alternative. 

Fish and Wildlife 

The no-action alternative would cause no new 

effects on fish and wildlife populations or 

their habitat. Existing conditions and 

situations would continue. There would be no 

changes in the current status of fish or wildlife 

communities either in terms of species 

composition or population dynamics other 

than those brought about by natural 

environmental processes. 

Cumulative Effects — Actions affecting 

wildlife are occurring in the region around 

Harpers Ferry as a result of agriculture, and 

urban development. Actions taken on private, 

state, and federal land can disrupt or fragment 

habitat, displace individuals or otherwise 

cause stress to animals. Incremental development of the region has affected the abundance 

and diversity of wildlife by changing the 

capacity of habitats to provide necessary food, 

shelter and reproduction sites. Wildlife is 

slowly becoming more restricted by current 

land uses, increasing development and human 

activity, causing individuals and populations 

to either adapt or move. This has caused 

minor to moderate adverse impacts. 

Establishment of the national historical park 

has resulted in long-term benefits for fish and 

wildlife populations. Acquisition of the 

natural areas has curtailed development and 

allowed more natural environmental 

processes to continue. These protected areas 

in the national historical park are highly 

beneficial because of the quality fish and 

wildlife habitat they provide. 

The impacts of ongoing and reasonably 

foreseeable future actions such as visitor use, 

facility maintenance and natural resources 

management, when analyzed in combination 

with proposals in this alternative, would have 

no effect and there would be no projectrelated cumulative impacts on fish and wildlife 

resources. 

Conclusion — Implementation of this 

alternative would have no effect and there 

would be no project-related cumulative 

impacts to wildlife populations. Therefore, no 

impairment of any wildlife species would 

occur. 

 

176 
Impacts of Alternative 1 — No Action 

Special Status Species 

This alternative would continue current 

management of the national historical park 

with no changes in plant or wildlife management. No change from the current status of 

the Indiana bat or bald eagle would result 

from implementation of this alternative. No 

changes in national historical park development or visitor use would occur that would 

affect habitat used by these species. 

Inventory and monitoring of state and 

federally listed species would continue and 

protective measures implemented when 

necessary. This alternative would have no new 

effects on federal or state special status 

species. 

Cumulative Effects — Habitat loss or 

disruption is the most common reason for a 

terrestrial wildlife or plant species to become 

threatened or endangered. Loss or fragmentation of habitat has occurred in the region as a 

result of commercial and residential development and agriculture. Actions that change the 

use of land on private, state, and federal land 

can disrupt or fragment habitat, displace 

individuals or otherwise cause stress to 

animals. Incremental development of the 

region has changed the capacity of habitats to 

provide necessary food, shelter and territory, 

resulting in the decrease of population 

numbers. Past impacts on threatened and 

endangered species from human activities 

have been moderate to major and adverse. 

Establishment of the national historical park 

has resulted in long-term benefits for special 

status species. Acquisition of the natural areas 

has curtailed development and allowed more 

natural environmental processes to continue. 

These protected areas in the national historical park will become increasingly important in 

providing quality habitat for rare species in 

the region. 

Residential development in Maryland and 

West Virginia would continue to reduce 

habitat for special status species, resulting in 

long-term minor to moderate adverse impacts 

on these species. 

Because this alternative would not contribute 

to the impacts of other past, present and 

reasonably foreseeable future actions, there 

would be no project-related cumulative 

impacts to listed, candidate or other special 

status species. 

Conclusion — Implementing the noaction alternative would have no effect on the 

Indiana bat, bald eagle, or species of concern. 

There would be no project-related cumulative 

impacts on special status species. No 

impairment of special status species would 

occur as a result of the no- action alternative. 

Soundscapes 

This alternative would not result in any 

changes to the quality of existing natural 

soundscapes. Impacts to soundscapes from 

the highway and rail lines would continue. 

The level of human-related noise in all areas 

of the national historical park is not 

anticipated to change substantially from 

existing levels as a result of the no-action 

alternative. 

Cumulative Effects — Because portions 

of the national historical park are in an urban 

setting, human-caused sounds tend to dominate. Disruptions come from development 

and other human activities inside and outside 

the national historical park. Traffic on 

Highway 340 creates constant noise and trains 

create high aural impacts regularly over the 

course of a day. Sounds of a modern town, 

such as vehicles, phones and so on, have 

intruded on the historic setting in Lower 

Town. 

Establishment of the national historical park 

and subsequent land acquisitions has 

preserved natural soundscapes in the outlying 

areas. 

177 
CHAPTER 4: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

Continuing trends of population growth in the 

area would result in additional adverse 

impacts on natural soundscapes. 

Because this alternative would not contribute 

to the impacts of other past, present and 

reasonably foreseeable future actions, there 

would be no project-related cumulative 

impacts on the national historical park’s 

soundscapes. 

Conclusion — Alternative 1 would have 

no new effect on natural soundscapes in the 

national historical park, and there would be 

no cumulative effects. There would be no 

impairment of a key national historical park 

resource or value as a result of this alternative. 

Lightscapes 

Following NPS policy, existing outdoor 

lighting that is found to be contributing to 

nighttime light pollution would be replaced 

with fixtures that are sensitive to the resource. 

In addition, any new outdoor lighting installed 

as a result of implementing any of the actions 

in this document would be the minimum 

necessary for safety or security and of a design 

that prevents stray light from spreading 

upwards into the sky. NPS staff would work 

with surrounding communities on ways to 

decrease light pollution in the region under 

any alternative. With these standard practices, 

this alternative would result in a long-term 

minor beneficial impact on the national 

historical park’s lightscape. 

Cumulative Effects — The clarity of night 

skies over the national historical park have 

been diminished by artificial light sources 

both within and outside the park that create a 

haze of light obscuring views of stars and 

distant topographic features. The primary 

culprit is outdoor lighting of a type that allows 

light to shine up into the sky. Outdoor lighting 

is common throughout the region, including 

inside national historical park boundaries. 

Protection of the national historical park’s 

natural areas has a long-term beneficial impact 

by maintaining lightless areas. 

The no-action alternative would contribute a 

beneficial impact to the impacts of other 

actions, resulting in minor and adverse overall 

cumulative effects. 

Conclusion — This alternative would 

have a long-term, minor beneficial impact on 

lightscapes. The no-action alternative would 

result in minor and adverse overall cumulative 

effects. There would be no impairment of a 

key national historical park resource or value 

as a result of this alternative. 

VISITOR EXPERIENCE 

The national historical park’s interpretive, 

education and information programs would 

continue and visitors would not notice any 

difference in their visit if this alternative were 

to be implemented. 

Lower Town 

In this alternative, most of the interpretation 

would be centered in Lower Town. There 

would continue to be little or no interpretation in many outlying areas of the national 

historical park. Much of the visitor’s experience within the national historical park would 

be derived from self-guided exploration. NPS 

staff or volunteers would continue to provide 

guided tours and demonstrations during the 

heavy visitor use periods. 

Visitors may continue to lose a sense of where 

they are in relationship to the resources when 

disembarking in Lower Town. Visitors being 

separated from their vehicles can be uncomfortable for some if they do not understand 

the philosophy behind the NPS alternative 

transportation system. Most visitors would 

continue to see little of the national historical 

park other than Lower Town under this 

alternative. 

178 
Impacts of Alternative 1 — No Action 

Modern intrusions would continue to affect 

visitor experience by distracting from the 

historical setting. The flat, museum-like 

atmosphere of Lower Town would continue. 

A continuation of long-term negligible to 

minor adverse impacts to visitor experience 

would occur. 

Federal Armory 

Visitors would still have to visit three buildings to obtain the story of the Federal Armory, 

none of which are located on the armory 

grounds. This would be a continuation of 

long-term negligible impacts on the visitor 

experience. 

Virginius and Hall’s Islands 

The trails and interpretive panels on Virginius 

Island would remain. There would be no 

interpretation on Hall’s Island, resulting in a 

negligible long-term adverse impact on the 

visitor experience. 

Camp Hill 

Visitors would continue to access Camp Hill 

on their own. Parking would be limited. The 

visitor experience would be restricted to 

viewing only the exterior of the structures and 

the interpretive panels present. Interpretation 

of Camp Hill history and significance would 

continue to be in Lower Town. This alternative would result in the continuance of minor 

adverse impacts on visitor experience at this 

location. 

Cavalier Heights 

The area would remain as the primary 

entrance to the national historical park. 

Visitors would receive their initial orientation 

at the visitor contact station. Visitors who do 

not enter the visitor contact station would 

continue to receive little or no orientation or 

direction on how to visit the national 

historical park. Similarly, if the contact station 

is crowded, visitors may not receive the 

information they need or desire. Departing 

the Cavalier Heights orientation area without 

adequate information and orientation causes a 

moderate long-term adverse impact on visitor 

experience. 

Maryland Heights, Loudoun 

Heights, and Short Hill 

The recreational opportunities now available 

at these national historical park locations, 

such as hiking, viewing historic sites, and 

observing nature would continue. Existing 

trails and vegetation clearings would be 

retained. Visitors would access these areas on 

their own. There would be no effect on visitor 

experience at these locations. 

Schoolhouse Ridge 

Because of the lack of tours and interpretive 

media, outlying civil war sites would continue 

to be less frequented. It is anticipated that 

only avid civil war enthusiasts would tour 

these locations. These sites have no interpretation and visitors would continue to 

arrive unaware of their role in the national 

historical park’s history. This lack of visitor 

services would result in a moderate adverse 

impact on visitor experience at these 

locations. 

Structures associated with the former private 

campground would not be maintained but 

would remain in place until funds become 

available to remove them. Their presence 

could adversely affect future visitor experiences detracting from the historic agricultural 

setting as trails are built on Schoolhouse Ridge 

north. Visitors to Schoolhouse Ridge, south 

could find, if not cleaned up, the tailings and 

collapsed quarry buildings located across 

179 
CHAPTER 4: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

Millville Road unappealing, resulting in a 

minor long-term adverse impact. 

The Murphy Farm 

Visitor access to this location in the national 

historical park would continue to be on foot 

from the road gate or by the trail from the 

visitor center. There would be no on-site 

interpretation of the Civil War earthworks, 

but the John Brown’s Fort foundation would 

be interpreted under this alternative. The lack 

of interpretation and convenient access would 

continue as a long-term minor adverse impact 

on visitor experience at this location. 

The Nash Farm 

There would continue to be limited public use 

and interpretation at this location, which 

would result in long-term negligible adverse 

impacts on the visitor experience. 

Cumulative Effects 

Tourists encounter a variety of opportunities 

in the three-state region centered on the 

confluence of the Shenandoah and Potomac 

rivers. Some of the choices include visiting 

Civil War battlefields and other historic sites, 

going to the races in Charles Town, river 

rafting, taking short walks, and long-distance 

hiking. Additional long- and short-distance 

trails are planned for the region. Access to 

improved trail systems would be a long-term 

benefit to visitor experience. 

Other national park system units contributing 

to the educational and recreation opportunities in the region include Monocacy National 

Battlefield, Antietam National Battlefield, 

Chesapeake & Ohio Canal National Historical 

Park, Appalachian National Scenic Trail, 

Potomac Heritage National Scenic Trail, and 

the Lewis and Clark National Historic Trail, 

which is part of the national historical park. 

The states of Virginia and Maryland have 

advertised programs called Civil War Trails 

that connect the various Civil War sites in 

those states by vehicle. Harpers Ferry is 

associated with many of these programs. 

Current and future partnerships between the 

National Park Service, local businesses, and 

other federal and state historical site managers 

would improve interpretation and visitor 

opportunities in the region. These partnerships would provide additional interpretation, 

orientation, and visitor access to facilities and 

services and would improve the visitors 

experience at the national historical park and 

in the region. Having partners distribute 

national historical park material and orientation information would assist current and 

future visitors before they enter the park 

boundary. 

This variety of high-quality experience 

opportunities in the region leads to an overall 

beneficial effect. When combined with the 

neutral and adverse effects of alternative 1, the 

overall cumulative effect on visitor experience 

would be minor and beneficial. 

Conclusion 

While implementing the no-action alternative 

would not create any new impacts on visitor 

use or experience, it would result in the 

continuation of actions and conditions that 

give rise to long-term minor adverse impacts 

on visitor experience. When combined with 

the neutral and adverse effects of alternative 1, 

the overall cumulative effect on visitor 

experience would be minor and beneficial. 

SOCIOECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT 

Alternative 1 would continue the current 

strategy of interpreting a 19th century 

community, including its historic buildings 

and landscapes. This would enable visitors to 

have a self-guided museum-type experience 

180 
Impacts of Alternative 1 — No Action 

that includes exhibits, brochures, and 

waysides. NPS rangers would host scheduled 

talks, periodic demonstrations, and infrequent 

special events. 

Spending by visitors in the national historical 

park and in the gateway communities for 

meals, lodging, and other goods and services is 

important to the local economy. In this 

alternative it is expected that visitation would 

remain stable at current levels. The envisioned 

level of NPS visitor services and programs 

would continue to have a long-term, moderate 

beneficial effect on the local economy and a 

long-term, negligible beneficial effect on the 

regional economy. The local governments 

would continue to benefit from visitor 

spending in the form of business and 

occupation taxes. Although, the gross sales 

from retail and services have fluctuated with 

the amount and type of visitation, the noaction alternative would continue to have a 

long-term, minor beneficial effect on the 

business and occupation taxes that the 

gateway communities receive. 

The National Park Service would continue to 

financially support some of the physical 

infrastructure in the gateway communities, 

and the national historical park’s annual 

operating expenditures would continue to 

provide revenue for area businesses. The NPS 

budget originates from outside the local and 

regional economy through congressional 

appropriations, but the funds would continue 

to be spent mostly within the gateway 

communities and the regional economy, thus 

providing ongoing benefits. 

As national historical park budgets decline or 

remain relatively stable, there is less revenue 

to flow through the local economy. NPS 

permanent and seasonal staffing continues to 

decline, having a long-term, moderate adverse 

effect on the economy of the gateway 

communities and a long-term, minor adverse 

effect on the regional economy. 

The capital improvement budget of the 

national historical park would continue to 

provide short-term revenues in the gateway 

communities and regional economy. In 

alternative 1, it is expected that dollars 

available for capital improvement would 

remain stable or decline and thereby have a 

long-term, minor adverse impact on the 

gateway communities and a long-term, 

negligible adverse impact on the regional 

economy. 

Cumulative Effects 

In the past, Harpers Ferry National Historical 

Park had a growing visitation and then a 

decline to a stable annual visitation. The 

national historical park’s operational budget 

remains stable but is not keeping up with 

inflation. Another effect on the national 

historical park’s budget is the NPS response to 

other federal mandates that also contributed 

to a decline of permanent and seasonal NPS 

staff. The capital improvement program varies 

by year, with substantial increases and 

declines, and the program will continue to 

have short-term benefits. 

The national historical park has a distinct but 

small fit in the overall size of the regional 

tourism industry. Both the gateway communities and the regional economies have growing 

populations and housing trends that have a 

substantially larger influence on the socioeconomic conditions than that contributed by the 

effect of the national historical park. These 

trends are expected to continue into the 

future. 

The impacts of these other actions in 

combination with the impacts of alternative 1 

would result in long-term, minor beneficial 

cumulative effects in the gateway communities 

and long-term, negligible cumulative effects 

on the regional economy. 

181 
CHAPTER 4: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

Conclusion 

Implementing alternative 1 would have a longterm, minor adverse impact on the gateway 

communities and a long-term, negligible 

adverse impact on the regional economy. 

There would be long-term, minor beneficial 

cumulative effects within the gateway 

communities and long-term, negligible 

beneficial cumulative effects on the regional 

economy. This alternative would contribute a 

small increment to the overall cumulative 

effect to the economy of the gateway 

communities and a slight increment to the 

regional economy. 

NPS OPERATIONS 

The current staffing at Harpers Ferry National 

Historical Park is approximately 100 people. 

Under the no-action alternative, some current 

vacancies could be filled; but no additional 

new positions would be created. Although the 

job will get done, NPS staff will be challenged 

to preserve and make ready for visitation the 

new lands added in 2004 while continuing to 

provide visitor services, maintenance, and 

protection for the entire national historical 

park. 

Maintenance facilities on Camp Hill would 

continue to be somewhat cramped. Workspace, office space, and equipment storage 

space though now adequate could become a 

problem in the future. 

Movement of heavy equipment and materials 

from semi-trucks on the narrow residential 

streets could cause conflict with neighbors. 

Administration (NPS headquarters) would 

remain in the Morrell House and Brackett 

House where space is cramped. Additional 

staff office space would remain in Lower 

Town. These structures were not designed for 

the type of use they are receiving. Protecting 

historic fabric from wear and tear is a constant 

challenge. 

There would continue to be no visitor center. 

A visitor contact facility at Cavalier Heights 

and an information desk in the Master 

Armorer’s House provide visitor information 

and a national historical park brochure. 

Various buildings in Lower Town provide 

exhibits and films designed to help visitors 

understand the town’s history. A bookstore in 

Lower Town and a smaller outlet at Cavalier 

Heights serve the need for further information. However, visitors expecting a traditional 

NPS visitor center with all functions in one 

location would be disappointed. 

Law enforcement staff would be required to 

patrol a larger area with existing staff. Rangers 

would have less time to patrol trails or help 

visitors in emergencies, and would be 

required to spend more time in vehicles 

moving from unit to unit. City fire, police, and 

emergency vehicles response times would not 

likely be affected. 

The no-action alternative would not adversely 

affect the Appalachian Trail Park Office or the 

Potomac Heritage National Scenic Trail 

Office. Headquarters for both would remain 

in Harpers Ferry. Depending on future space 

needs, space availability in national historical 

park buildings and funding available for a new 

office building, these offices might move or 

expand to Camp Hill. The trail route through 

the national historical park would continue to 

be maintained to its current standard. 

Neither the Harpers Ferry Interpretive Design 

Center nor the Mather Training Center would 

be affected by this alternative. The national 

historical park would continue to maintain the 

structures and surrounding landscape. A 

proposed dormitory for the Mather Training 

Center would be constructed if funding 

became available. 

Cumulative Impacts 

In general, the national historical park staff is 

faced with a rising workload resulting from 

182 
Impacts of Alternative 1 — No Action 

183 

new NPS initiatives and program requirements. Static base funding does not allow the 

hiring of more employees to alleviate the 

workload. This causes stress on the employees 

and some needed projects are not 

accomplished due to a lack of time or funding. 

This alternative would contribute short-term 

adverse effects and long-term beneficial 

impacts to the effects listed above. The 

cumulative effects on NPS operations would 

be negligible and beneficial. 

Conclusion 

The no-action alternative would result in 

long-term minor adverse impacts on staffing, 

maintenance, and law enforcement. There 

would be no change in emergency response 

times. The cumulative effects on NPS 

operations would be negligible and beneficial. 

UNAVOIDABLE MODERATE TO 

MAJOR ADVERSE EFFECTS 

Alternative 1 would result in minor adverse 

impacts on museum collections that remain 

within the flood hazard areas. 

 

IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE 

COMMITMENTS OF RESOURCES 

Civil War earthworks would continue to 

erode and return to the earth as part of their 

natural process of decay and deterioration 

resulting from environmental causes and 

human induced actions. These deteriorations 

would continue and would result in an irreversible loss of historic defensive structures 

associated with an important aspect of 

Harpers Ferry’s history. 

This alternative would not result in any new 

development and, therefore, would not result 

in any irreversible or irretrievable 

commitments of natural resources. 

RELATIONSHIP OF SHORT-TERM 

USES OF THE ENVIRONMENT AND 

THE MAINTENANCE AND 

ENHANCEMENT OF LONG-TERM 

PRODUCTIVITY 

Alternative 1 would result in limited new 

development and, thus would have the lowest 

potential for a reduction in long-term 

productivity. 
IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE 2 — PREFERRED 

CULTURAL RESOURCES 

Historic Structures 

To appropriately preserve and protect 

national register-listed or -eligible historic 

structures, all stabilization, preservation, 

rehabilitation, and restoration efforts, as well 

as daily, cyclical, and seasonal maintenance, 

would be undertaken in accordance with the 

Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the 

Treatment of Historic Properties (1995). Any 

materials removed during rehabilitation 

efforts would be evaluated to determine their 

value to the park’s museum collections and/or 

for their comparative use in future preservation work at the sites. Stabilization, preservation, and rehabilitation would have no adverse 

effects on historic structures. 

Lower Town. The exteriors of historic 

buildings would continue to be preserved and 

maintained. Adaptive reuse of these buildings 

could alter the original historic fabric. 

However, any such alterations would follow 

the Secretary’s Treatment Standards, ensuring 

that there would be no adverse effect to the 

qualities that make the property eligible for 

inclusion in the national register. 

Federal Armory. Providing handicapped 

accessibility to the armory could require 

modifying the historic railroad berm by 

building a tunnel through the berm. Another 

route would be to use the vomitorium and 

construct a walkway along the Potomac River 

cantilevered off the river wall. A third 

possibility would be to ramp down the berm 

into the armory yard from the accessible 

overlook at the train station. All solutions 

would provide access to the lower armory 

grounds. Two of the solutions would affect 

the berm while the other would affect the 

historic river wall. Building a tunnel through 

the berm would remove a portion of the 

historic fabric of the berm but would be less 

visually obtrusive than a ramp down that 

would not require removal of historic fabric. 

The ramp solution would cover much of the 

river side of the berm and require anchoring 

into it. The solution that uses the vomitorium 

would be visually less obtrusive because it 

would skirt the edge of the site, but it would 

be anchored into the river wall. The tunnel 

solution would be permanent, while the other 

two solutions could be reversed. All solutions 

would likely have an adverse effect. 

Virginius Island / Hall’s Island. Stabilization 

of foundation ruins would help protect them 

from further flood damage. Any artifacts 

associated with the ruins would be recovered 

through archeological methods. The 

archeological context of the resources would 

be documented. The overall impact of this 

work would not be adverse. 

Potomac River Frontage. Incrementally 

restoring the Armory canal and associated 

structures would improve the preservation 

integrity of this historic site. The necessary 

repairs and other restoration work would 

benefit the structures through improving their 

longevity, resulting in no adverse effect. 

Rehabilitation of the Potomac Power 

Hydroelectric Plant would allow it to be used 

by the national historical park for purposes 

such as a workshop for the NPS Historic 

Preservation Training Center, interpretation, 

or a material storage area. Some historic fabric 

could be removed in this alternative. NPS staff 

would work with the West Virginia state 

historic preservation office to mitigate any 

adverse effects. Limited restoration would 

result in no adverse effect to the building. 

Camp Hill. Harpers Ferry National 

Historical Park headquarters would remain in 

the Brackett and Morrell houses. Those 

structures would undergo rehabilitation to 

better accommodate the function. In addition, 

184 
Impacts of Alternative 2 — Preferred 

areas of the Lockwood House not used for 

interpretation could also become office space 

for park staff. 

The Lockwood House would be rehabilitated 

and the first floor would house a major 

African American history exhibit and public 

restrooms serving Camp Hill visitors. The 

results of such rehabilitation would be 

expected to have no adverse effect on these 

historic structures. 

Loudoun Heights, Maryland Heights, Short 

Hill. After evaluation for inclusion in the 

National Register of Historic Places, select 

standing structures would be removed or 

would be allowed to molder through natural 

processes. There would be no effects to 

historic buildings by the implementation of 

this alternative. 

This alternative would increase the stabilization and preservation of the remaining 

structural ruins through development and 

implementation of a preservation plan for 

Civil War earthworks, campsites and other 

defensive works. These preservation activities 

would be a benefit by reducing the deterioration of structural ruins. As a result, implementation of this alternative would have no 

adverse effect. 

Schoolhouse Ridge. After evaluation for 

inclusion on the National Register of Historic 

Places, nonhistoric buildings and structures, 

including those at the former Jellystone 

campground and Harpers Ferry Caverns, 

would be removed. If National-Registereligible structures were removed, the National 

Park Service would mitigate any adverse 

effects in consultation with the state historic 

preservation office and the Advisory Council 

on Historic Preservation. 

Alternative 2 would increase the stabilization 

and preservation of the remaining structural 

ruins on Schoolhouse Ridge through development and implementation of a preservation 

plan for historic and Civil War earthworks, 

campsites and other defensive works. The 

preservation activities would be a benefit by 

reducing the deterioration of these structural 

ruins. As a result, implementation of this 

alternative would range from no adverse 

effect to an adverse effect. 

Murphy Farm. Stabilization and preservation of the John Brown’s Fort foundations 

would have no adverse effect on this 

structure. 

Implementation of the alternative would 

increase the stabilization and preservation of 

the Civil War earthworks. The resulting 

impact would reduce the deterioration of 

these sites. Therefore, implementation of this 

alternative would have no adverse effects. 

Nash Farm. Rehabilitation of the exteriors of 

the primary residence and barn would 

maintain the appearance of the historic dairy 

farm. The interiors would be rehabilitated for 

use as an education facility, dormitory, and 

residence. This rehabilitation would have no 

adverse effect on historic properties. 

Potomac Terrace. Grandview School would 

be rehabilitated for use by the Resources 

Protection and Public Use Management 

Division. This rehabilitation would be primarily limited to the interior of the structure 

and would include an exterior addition for 

vehicles and storage. Such rehabilitation 

efforts would likely impact some historic 

fabric. However, careful design in consultation with the West Virginia state historic 

preservation office would ensure the impacts 

would be minimal and result in no adverse 

effect to the historic buildings. 

Cumulative Effects — Since the congressional authorization of the national monument in 1944, removal of 35 structures 

identified as either unsafe, unstable, or not in 

keeping with the 19th century period of 

significance has occurred. These removals 

occurred primarily in Lower Town, although 

several structures on Camp Hill were also 

185 
CHAPTER 4: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

removed. The removal of many of these 

structures from the national historical park 

left gaps in the 19th century community that 

today would be considered adverse. 

Since the creation of the national historical 

park, many restoration and rehabilitation 

projects have been accomplished, resulting in 

the preservation of historic structures. These 

structures were generally located along 

Shenandoah Street and consisted of a wide 

range of building types though primarily 

commercial and residential. In general, the 

rehabilitation of these buildings resulted in 

their long-term preservation and had no 

adverse effect. 

The Armory fire engine and guard house, 

known as John Brown’s Fort, was moved 

several times and reconstructed to its 

appearance at the time of the raid. However, 

the history of the building and it role have not 

been lost because of its restoration. These 

impacts vary from adverse to beneficial. 

External to the national historical park 

boundaries, population growth associated 

with metropolitan Washington, D.C., has 

impacted the use and character of historic 

buildings in the area. Use of historic structures 

has altered the historic fabric and impacted 

the historic elements of the structures. In 

addition, actions such as weathering, lack of 

maintenance, or structural modifications have 

contributed to the impacts to historic 

structures. The overall impact of urbanization 

on historic structures in the Harpers Ferry 

area has been mixed as many historic 

structures have been lost while others have 

been saved and restored. As described above, 

the potential impacts associated with 

implementing alternative 2 would result in 

predominantly no adverse effects on the 

national historical park’s historic structures. 

However, the few potential adverse impacts 

associated with alternative 2, in combination 

with the adverse impacts of other past, 

present, and reasonably foreseeable future 

actions, would result in an adverse cumulative 

impact. The adverse impacts of alternative 2 

would only contribute minimally to the 

adverse cumulative impact. 

The overall effects of these actions on historic 

structures have been adverse. This alternative 

would contribute both adverse and beneficial 

effects. This alternative’s contribution to these 

effects would be minimal. 

Conclusion — The impacts of alternative 

2 on historic structures would be generally 

positive and minimally adverse and would 

only contribute minimally to the adverse 

cumulative impact. 

Because there would be no major, adverse 

impacts to a resource or value whose conservation is (1) necessary to fulfill specific 

purposes identified in the establishing legislation or proclamation of Harpers Ferry 

National Historical Park; (2) key to the natural 

or cultural integrity of the national historical 

park; or (3) identified as a goal in relevant NPS 

planning documents, there would be no 

impairment of the national historical park 

resources or values. 

Archeological Resources 

Archeological resources adjacent to or easily 

accessible from trails and developed areas could 

be vulnerable to surface disturbance, inadvertent damage, and vandalism. A loss of surface 

archeological materials, alteration of artifact 

distribution, and a reduction of contextual 

evidence could result. However, continued 

ranger patrol and emphasis on visitor education 

would discourage vandalism and inadvertent 

destruction of cultural remains, and any adverse 

impacts would be expected to be minimal if any. 

As appropriate, additional archeological surveys would precede any ground disturbance 

associated with excavation, construction, or 

demolition, e.g., construction or improvement 

of foot trails, installation of wayside exhibits 

or other media, and construction of a museum 

collections storage facility and a pedestrian 

186 
Impacts of Alternative 2 — Preferred 

bridge or tunnel. National register-eligible or 

-listed archeological resources would be 

avoided to the greatest extent possible. If such 

resources could not be avoided, an 

appropriate mitigation strategy would be 

developed in consultation with the 

appropriate state historic preservation officer. 

Before demolition of any national registerlisted or -eligible structure, a survey for 

archeological resources in the general vicinity 

of the affected structure would be conducted. 

The excavation, recordation, and mapping of 

any significant cultural remains, if present, 

would be completed before demolition to 

ensure that important archeological data that 

otherwise would be lost is recovered and 

documented. Any impacts on archeological 

resources would be adverse. 

Federal Armory. This alternative would 

expose archeological ruins at the federal 

armory for interpretive purposes. 

Archeological investigations at the Federal 

Armory would have no adverse effects on the 

resources. 

Virginius Island / Hall’s Island. The 

stabilization and ghosting of foundations on 

Virginius Island would require archeological 

excavations to identify and document the 

archeological record. Likewise, construction 

of a pedestrian bridge adjacent to the existing 

vehicular bridge on Shoreline Drive could 

require archeological investigation. 

Archeological work under this alternative 

would result in no adverse effects to the 

resources. 

Potomac River Frontage. Incremental 

restoration of the Armory canal to a 

semblance of its historic appearance would 

necessitate archeological investigations. 

Excavations would be conducted as part of 

the documentation process and to better 

understand construction methodology of this 

feature. This work would also aid in the 

protection of archeological materials that 

might otherwise be lost. Such archeological 

work would result in a determination of no 

adverse effect. 

Loudoun Heights. Following archeological 

evaluation, construction of an overlook and 

parking at the location of the Sherwood house 

would be designed to avoid disturbance of any 

historic or archeological remains. There 

would be no effect to such resources. 

Maryland Heights. Alternative 2 would 

increase the stabilization activities of 

archeological sites including historic Civil War 

earthworks and other defensive works. The 

preservation activities would reduce the 

effects of deterioration over time. As a result, 

implementation of this alternative would have 

no adverse effects. 

Cumulative Effects — Past development 

in the national historical park may have 

resulted in the disturbance and loss of some 

archeological resources during excavation and 

construction activities. Also, agricultural 

practices and the development and expansion 

of communities in and near the park may also 

have previously disturbed archeological 

resources. The continuation of current 

activities could also result in future adverse 

impacts on archeological resources. 

As described above, implementing alternative 

2 could potentially disturb archeological 

resources at the national historical park — 

resulting in adverse effects. Any adverse 

impacts associated with the implementing 

alternative 2, in combination with the impacts 

of other past, present, and reasonably 

foreseeable future projects, would result in 

adverse cumulative impacts. However, 

alternative 2 would be expected to contribute 

only minimally to the adverse cumulative 

impacts. Thus, any adverse impacts on 

archeological resources resulting from 

implementation of alternative 2 would be a 

very small component of the adverse 

cumulative impact. 

Conclusion — Alternative 2 would require 

archeological investigations associated with 

187 
CHAPTER 4: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

stabilization/ preservation of foundations or 

structures within the national historical park. 

Investigations would be coordinated with the 

West Virginia state historic preservation 

officer under the requirement of Section 106 

of the National Historic Preservation Act of 

1966, as amended. The actions associated with 

this alternative could have adverse impacts on 

archeological resources. The actions associated with this alternative would contribute 

only minimally to the adverse impacts of other 

past, present, or foreseeable future actions. 

Because there would be no major, adverse 

impacts to a resource or value whose conservation is (1) necessary to fulfill specific purposes identified in the establishing legislation 

or proclamation of Harpers Ferry National 

Historical Park; (2) key to the natural or 

cultural integrity of the national historical 

park; or (3) identified as a goal in relevant NPS 

planning documents, there would be no 

impairment of the national historical park 

resources or values. 

Cultural Landscapes 

To appropriately preserve and protect 

national register-listed or -eligible cultural 

landscapes, all stabilization, preservation, and 

rehabilitation efforts, as well as daily, cyclical, 

and seasonal maintenance, would be undertaken in accordance with the Secretary of the 

Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of 

Historic Properties (1995). Stabilization, 

preservation, and rehabilitation would have 

no adverse effects on cultural landscapes. 

Careful design would ensure that the 

improvement and construction of trails would 

minimally affect the scale and visual relationships among landscape features. In addition, 

the topography, vegetation, circulation 

features, and land use patterns of the landscape would remain largely unaltered by such 

actions, resulting in no adverse effect. 

The under-grounding of utilities would have 

minimal, if any, effect on the existing 

topography, spatial organization, or land use 

patterns of cultural landscapes. Once the 

underground utility line is installed and the 

trench is backfilled, the disturbed ground 

would be restored to its preconstruction 

contour and condition. No adverse effects 

would be anticipated. 

Lower Town. In The Green and Hamilton 

Street areas, foundations of historic structures 

would be outlined or noted by signs. Stabilization and preservation activities could occur on 

exposed ruins. These actions would have no 

adverse effect on the cultural landscape. 

Regulation of the use of private and NPS 

vehicles during special events in the Lower 

Town would for a specified time remove a 

modern intrusion from the historic setting. 

The reduction of modern vehicles from 

Lower Town would be regulated by a Town of 

Harpers Ferry/NPS traffic control plan and 

would have no adverse effect. 

Federal Armory. Accessibility for the handicapped could be achieved either by tunneling 

through the railroad berm, cutting a sloping 

trail in the side of the berm or by way of a trail 

through the vomitorium and along a walkway 

cantilevered off the river wall. All methods 

could affect the appearance of the armory. 

The effect could be adverse on the cultural 

landscape, but could be mitigated through 

sensitive design. 

Identification of structural ruins on the 

Armory grounds by uncovering foundations 

would facilitate interpretation and improve 

the visual appearance. The overall effect 

would not likely be adverse. 

Virginius Island / Hall’s Island. Identification of structural ruins would be accomplished through signs at these ruins. A 

pedestrian walk next to the vehicle bridge on 

Shoreline Drive would add a nonhistoric 

feature to the landscape. The impacts would 

be minimal and reversible and would result in 

no adverse effect to the cultural landscape. 

188 
Impacts of Alternative 2 — Preferred 

Potomac River Frontage. The armory canal 

would be incrementally restored and 

rewatered, returning it to a semblance of its 

historic appearance. Restoration of the 

armory canal would have no adverse effect on 

the cultural landscape. 

Camp Hill. Implementation of a period 

lighting plan would help to restore a 

semblance of the historic college campus. It 

would unify the landscape of Camp Hill and 

would be less obtrusive than the existing 

lighting systems. Such changes would result in 

a determination of no adverse effect. 

Rehabilitation of the Shipley School through a 

partnership would retain a historic structure 

and have no adverse effect on the streetscape. 

Loudoun Heights, Maryland Heights, and 

Short Hill. Nonhistoric structures at 

Loudoun Heights would be removed in this 

alternative. Removal of such structures would 

help create a more accurate historic landscape. Removal of nonhistoric structures 

would result in no adverse effect to the 

cultural landscape. 

Increased numbers of interpretive signs would 

be installed on Maryland Heights in this 

alternative. The installation of these signs 

could impact historic vistas. However, it 

would be expected that with sensitive 

placement there would be no adverse effect 

on the cultural landscapes of Maryland 

Heights. The historic viewshed of Maryland 

Heights from Lower Town could be altered as 

the result of opening some “field of fire” vistas 

of Civil War artillery by selective removal of 

vegetation. The removal of vegetation would 

enhance the semblance of the historic artillery 

emplacements and would have no adverse 

effect on cultural landscapes. 

Schoolhouse Ridge. The campground and 

other select structures would be removed and 

the land restored to a more historically 

accurate setting. Schoolhouse Ridge would be 

maintained as battlefield landscape using 

agricultural leases to maintain the rural 

landscape condition. By returning Schoolhouse Ridge to its historic agricultural 

condition, there would be no adverse effect 

on the cultural landscape. 

Nash Farm. Rehabilitation of the existing 

farm structures would maintain the appearance of an active dairy farm that would 

coincide with the predominant period of 

significance for the National Register-listed 

property. The dairy farmscape would be 

preserved using an agricultural lease. This 

would result in minimal change to the cultural 

landscape and therefore would have no 

adverse effect. 

Cumulative Effects — During the first 

half of the 20th century several major flooding 

episodes inundated what is now Harpers 

Ferry National Historical Park. The most 

extensive impacts changes have occurred in 

Lower Town where the loss of buildings has 

changed the appearance of the streetscape of 

Shenandoah Street near the Green and 

Hamilton Street areas. The consequence was 

an adverse effect on the historic viewshed. 

In 1969 John Brown’s Fort was moved from 

Storer College to its present site, about 50 

yards from its original location. It was not 

possible to move the fort to its original 

location due to the construction of the B&O 

railroad berm. The structure’s proximity to 

the original location has beneficial impact on 

the cultural landscape. Its return has resulted 

in no adverse effect. 

The elimination of historic streets to the 

Shenandoah River and the creation of 

nonhistoric pedestrian trails have resulted in 

changes in access and movement through a 

considerable section of Lower Town. In 

addition, reconfiguring the circulation pattern 

of the national historical park by the addition 

of a connector road between the Cavalier 

Heights Visitor Center and Lower Town has 

generally had an adverse effect to the cultural 

landscape. However this is offset by the 

189 
CHAPTER 4: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

elimination of the adverse impacts of vehicles 

and river recreation use on the historic 

resources of Lower Town. Revegetation of the 

Green and Hamilton Street areas with turf 

grasses does not accurately reflect the vegetation of any of the historic periods identified in 

the national historical park and is an adverse 

effect to the cultural landscape. However it 

does eliminate severe erosion during floods 

and helps protect archeological resources in 

place. 

Historic land use patterns representative of a 

previously living community have been 

altered through the imposition of the national 

historical park on to the town. The functions 

of a national park system unit are very 

different from those of a quiet small town. 

The result may be an adverse effect on the 

historic landscape. 

Through stabilization, rehabilitation, and ongoing maintenance, Harpers Ferry National 

Historical Park has provided protection and 

preservation of historic structures that have 

been subjected to numerous floods that 

affected the upkeep of the town. The benefit 

of these efforts has been to maintain a 

semblance of an historic townscape, and has 

resulted in no adverse effect. 

Beyond the national historical park 

boundaries population growth, primarily 

associated with metropolitan Washington, 

D.C., has altered the character of the historic 

cultural landscape. Alterations to transportation corridors have affected the landscape. 

The result has been an adverse effect on the 

rural character of the cultural landscape 

surrounding the national historical park. 

As described above, the potential impacts 

associated with implementing alternative 2 

would result in both no adverse effects and 

adverse effects on the national historical 

park’s cultural landscapes. The adverse 

impacts of alternative 2, in combination with 

the adverse impacts of other past, present, and 

reasonably foreseeable future actions, would 

result in an adverse cumulative impact. The 

adverse impacts of alternative 2, however, 

would only contribute minimally to the 

adverse cumulative impact. 

Conclusion — The impacts of alternative 

2 would generally be described as not adverse. 

The actions associated with this alternative 

would therefore be expected to contribute 

only minimally to the adverse impacts of other 

past, present, or foreseeable future actions. 

Although the cumulative impact would be 

adverse, any adverse impacts to cultural 

landscapes resulting from implementation 

would be a very small component of the 

cumulative impact. 

Because there would be no major, adverse 

impacts to a resource or value whose 

conservation is (1) necessary to fulfill specific 

purposes identified in the establishing 

legislation or proclamation of Harpers Ferry 

National Historical Park; (2) key to the natural 

or cultural integrity of the national historical 

park; or (3) identified as a goal in relevant NPS 

planning documents, there would be no 

impairment of the national historical park 

resources or values. 

NATURAL RESOURCES 

Wetlands and Water Resources 

In this alternative, the historic Armory Canal 

would eventually be rewatered, maintaining 

this wetland/water body in the national 

historical park. Natural processes would be 

allowed to occur in the water which, as waterdependent plants and organisms colonize, 

would result in an enhanced wetland area of 

approximately 2 acres. This and all other 

wetlands in public use areas would be 

monitored and actions taken if necessary to 

prevent adverse impacts from visitor use or 

NPS operations. These actions would result 

in long-term, minor beneficial impacts to 

water resources in the national historical 

park. 

190 
Impacts of Alternative 2 — Preferred 

Construction of a headquarters building; 

visitor service facilities such as parking areas 

and vault toilets on Schoolhouse Ridge, the 

Nash farm, and the Murphy farm; and 

expansion of the facilities on Cavalier Heights 

would have the potential to impact water 

runoff and percolation patterns, resulting in 

long-term adverse impacts. Applying 

mitigative measures such as sedimentation 

check dams would make these impacts 

negligible in intensity. 

The preferred alternative would not result in 

any actions that would conflict with the goals 

of the Chesapeake Bay Program because it 

would not result in a loss of riverside resource 

lands or contribute to degradation of water 

quality. 

Cumulative Effects — Water resources in 

the Potomac and Shenandoah river basins 

have been adversely affected by 200 years of 

human use and activity. Agricultural practices, 

including the use of fertilizers and pesticides, 

are primary contributors to contamination of 

the streams and rivers. Both domestic and 

industrial wastes are also sources of water 

pollution in the region. The loss of forest 

cover, changes in land use, and waste from 

industries have adversely affected water 

quality (chemicals in runoff, sedimentation 

from erosion, etc.). These sources of water 

quality degradation are located outside 

national historical park boundaries. Illegal 

activities such as inadequate or nonfunctioning septic systems, dumping of waste in 

the rivers, or unauthorized horse use near 

waterways also adversely affects water quality. 

The Chesapeake Bay Program is an interstate 

and interagency effort intended to protect and 

restore the entire Chesapeake Bay watershed. 

The National Park Service is a partner in this 

effort. Contributing to degradation of the 

watershed is increased urban and rural 

development. This leads to (1) fragmentation 

and loss of resource lands and (2) increased 

impervious surfaces that cause degraded 

water quality. This ongoing effort will result in 

long-term major beneficial impacts to the 

watershed. 

Use of river water for irrigation, Industry, and 

domestic uses has adversely affected water 

quantity. Establishment of the national 

historical park and implementation of 

Chesapeake Bay Program protection initiatives have contributed long-term benefits to 

water resources in the region. 

Some wetlands within the region have been 

filled in to make more land available for 

development. This practice decreases wetland 

areas and removes their natural beneficial 

values. Closure of the water-powered industries and nonuse of the Shenandoah Canal has 

led to the creation of a wetland on Virginius 

Island. This is a beneficial effect that may 

offset the loss of other wetlands in the region. 

Alternative 2 would contribute a long-term, 

beneficial component and a negligible shortterm adverse component to these effects but 

the resulting cumulative effect of this alternative in conjunction with the impacts of 

other past, present, and future actions would 

be minor and adverse. 

Conclusion — Alternative 2 would result 

in long-term, minor beneficial impacts to 

wetlands and a long-term negligible adverse 

impact to water resources in the national 

historical park. Cumulative effects would be 

minor and adverse. There would be no 

impairment of this national historical park 

resource as a result of this alternative. 

Floodplains 

This alternative would not result in any 

additional development in floodplains. There 

would be a small change in land use in the 

floodplains on Virginius and Hall’s islands in 

the form of additional treatment of cultural 

resources. However, since these areas have 

been developed for 200 years, this action 

would have no additional effects on 

floodplains. 

191 
CHAPTER 4: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

A small enhancement of the river take-out at 

Potoma Wayside is proposed for the floodplain. This would most likely involve a 

hardened ramp or pad at the take-out for use 

by the commercial rafting companies. The pad 

would be designed so that impacts on water 

flow and increased scouring of substrate at 

high water would be minimal. Construction 

and use of the take-out facility would have 

long-term, negligible adverse impacts on 

floodplains. 

This alternative would not result in any 

actions that would conflict with the goals of 

the Chesapeake Bay Program because it would 

not result in a loss of riverside resource lands 

or an increase in impervious surfaces that is 

more than negligible. 

Cumulative Effects — Floodplains of the 

Potomac and Shenandoah rivers have been 

adversely affected by 200 years of human use 

and activity. Construction of roads, canals, 

housing and commercial development has 

adversely affected the original floodplains. 

Riverside walls or berms and reinforced banks 

have constrained the natural meandering of 

the rivers. These adverse impacts would 

continue. 

Establishment of the national historical park 

and preservation of riverside natural areas 

such as Loudoun Heights and Short Hill has 

preserved the beneficial values of the 

floodplains along those undeveloped areas. 

Floodplains would continue to be adversely 

affected by the development that prevents 

natural river movement and sediment 

deposition. 

The Chesapeake Bay Program is an interstate 

and interagency effort intended to protect and 

restore the entire Chesapeake Bay watershed. 

The National Park Service is a partner in this 

effort. Contributing to degradation of the 

watershed is increased urban and rural 

development that leads to (1) fragmentation 

and loss of terrestrial habitat and (2) increased 

impervious surfaces that causes degraded 

water quality. This ongoing effort will result in 

long-term major beneficial impacts to the 

watershed. 

Implementing the preferred alternative would 

contribute a negligible adverse effect and, 

when combined with the impacts of other 

past, present, and future actions, would result 

in moderate adverse cumulative effects on 

floodplains in the region. Alternative 2 would 

contribute only slightly to these overall 

cumulative effects. 

Conclusion — This alternative would 

cause long-term, negligible adverse impacts on 

floodplains. Cumulative effects in the region 

would be moderate and adverse. There would 

be no impairment of a key national historical 

park resource or value as a result of this 

alternative. 

Soils 

Construction of visitor service facilities such 

as small parking areas at Schoolhouse Ridge, 

the Nash farm, the Murphy farm, and 

expanded facilities on Camp Hill and Cavalier 

Heights would disrupt soils. These sites total 

approximately 5 acres. There would be shortterm adverse effects as soils would be further 

disturbed and subject to increased wind and 

water erosion until vegetation recovers. Longterm adverse effects in the form of disrupted 

soil properties would occur where new 

facilities are constructed. Construction would 

be localized and primarily in previously 

disturbed areas. Mitigating measures such as 

prompt revegetation and silt fencing would be 

employed to reduce potential adverse impacts. 

The impacts of this alternative would be short 

and long term, minor, and adverse. 

Cumulative Effects — Soils in the region 

have been disrupted by commercial, residential, and agricultural development and use 

over the last two centuries. Foreseeable future 

actions of further development in the vicinity 

of the national historical park would adversely 

192 
Impacts of Alternative 2 — Preferred 

impact soils through compaction and displacement from construction activities for 

roads, residential and commercial development, and associated infrastructures. These 

actions lead to long-term moderate adverse 

impacts. 

This alternative would contribute a localized, 

minor adverse impact to these effects and 

when combined with the impacts of other 

past, present, and foreseeable future actions 

would have moderate adverse cumulative 

effects on the soil resource. 

Conclusion — The impacts of implementing the preferred alternative would be short 

and long term, minor, and adverse. There 

would be a moderate adverse cumulative 

effect on soils. There would be no impairment 

of this national historical park resource as a 

result of this alternative. 

Cave and Karst Resources 

Under this alternative, Harpers Ferry Caverns 

would be restored by removing the intrusions 

introduced when the caverns were open for 

commercial tours. Natural airflow would be 

restored as much as possible and a bat friendly 

gate installed, if required. Management of the 

John Brown Cave would continue as present, 

not allowing public use. Trash and graffiti in 

the cave would be carefully removed. These 

actions would result in long-term, minor to 

moderate beneficial impacts to cave resources. 

Cumulative Effects — Subterranean 

ecosystems are typically in an extremely 

delicate balance and easily disrupted. Natural 

processes can change the cave environment — 

such as daily exchanges of air, introduction of 

organic material from water flow or large 

animals, and rock fall closing an entrance or 

passageway. 

Humans entering the John Brown Cave have 

adversely affected the cave environment 

through littering and vandalism (graffiti, 

breaking formations). Fortunately, the back 

two-thirds of the cave is protected by a sump 

(water-filled passage) that prevents intruders 

from entering further. 

Harpers Ferry Caverns was once developed 

commercially and opened for tours. Development included electric lights, walking trails, 

stairs and handrails. In addition, the entrance 

sinkhole was roofed over and an exit tunnel 

was created. These developments altered the 

cave considerably by: 

• Heating and drying the air, affecting 

growth of speleothems and climate for 

cave-adapted animals 

• Closing off natural flow of both water and 

air. Many forms of life rely on the input of 

waterborne or airborne organic matter 

• Introducing foreign matter that can 

disrupt ecosystems such as lint, microbes, 

rusting metal, etc. 

These human-caused changes are short-and 

long-term, minor to moderate adverse 

impacts. Alternative 2 would contribute longterm, minor to moderate beneficial impacts to 

cave resources and when combined with the 

impacts of other past, present, and future 

actions would result in minor, adverse 

cumulative effects. 

Conclusion — Alternative 2 would result 

in long-term, minor to moderate beneficial 

impacts on cave resources. Cumulative effects 

would be minor and adverse. There would be 

no impairment to this resource as a result of 

this alternative. 

Vegetative Communities 

Under this alternative, there would be 

continuation of some vegetative manipulation 

such as clearing or trimming in certain areas 

on Maryland Heights, Bolivar Heights, 

Schoolhouse Ridge, and the Murphy farm in 

order to maintain historic or scenic vistas. 

This would be limited to small, isolated areas 

193 
CHAPTER 4: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

and would occur that have been previously 

disturbed. Adverse impacts from this activity 

would be long-term, adverse, and negligible to 

minor. 

Agricultural leasing would continue to be used 

on Schoolhouse Ridge Battlefield and Murphy 

farm to maintain the historic landscape. This 

activity would occur on areas of unnatural 

vegetation communities (crops), so adverse 

impacts from these actions to native communities would be long-term but negligible. 

Construction of visitor service facilities such 

as small parking areas on Schoolhouse Ridge 

and at the Nash farm and the Murphy farm, 

and the expanded facilities on Camp Hill and 

Cavalier Heights would alter existing 

vegetation. This construction would involve 

about 5 acres, but because it would occur in 

previously disturbed areas, the adverse 

impacts would be long-term and minor. 

Allowing the Armory Canal to rewater would 

inundate and kill some vegetation. Over time, 

hydrophilic vegetation would become 

established, resulting in both adverse and 

beneficial impacts. 

Continuing control of nonnative species 

would benefit native vegetative communities. 

Cumulative Effects — Native vegetation 

in the region has been systematically disturbed 

for thousands of years. From early Native 

American cultures through the Industrial era, 

humans relied on the vegetation for food, fuel 

and shelter. As more people came into the 

region, nonnative plants came with them. 

These actions adversely altered the vegetation 

throughout most of the region. The vegetation 

has changed from natural, old-growth hardwood forests after being essentially denuded 

of trees for fuel, building material, and 

artillery firing lines by the late 19th century. 

Native, old-growth communities remain only 

on steep slopes or otherwise inaccessible land. 

Many decades of agricultural operations have 

eliminated native communities on portions of 

the Murphy farm, the Nash farm, Bolivar 

Heights, and Schoolhouse Ridge. Small social 

trails occur in almost all areas of the national 

historical park. These are unplanned and 

unmaintained trails created by visitors that 

damage vegetation, disrupt animal habitats, 

and cause soil erosion. 

Seeds carried by wind and humans have 

created infestations of noxious weeds and 

other invasive plant species. These species 

cause long-term adverse impacts on native 

vegetation by competing for available 

resources such as water and nutrients. 

These actions have resulted in long-term 

moderate adverse impacts on native vegetation. The establishment of Harpers Ferry 

National Historical Park has resulted in 

moderate beneficial impacts to vegetation 

through protection of native vegetation in 

outlying areas and nonnative species 

eradication efforts. 

The long-term adverse impacts caused by 

residential and commercial development 

would be expected to continue. 

This alternative would result in a minor 

adverse impact. When combined with the 

impacts of other past, present, and future 

actions, alternative 2 would result in minor 

adverse cumulative effects on vegetative 

resources. 

Conclusion — Alternative 2 would result 

in long-term, minor adverse impacts on 

vegetative communities. The cumulative 

effects would be minor and adverse. There 

would be no impairment of this resource as a 

result of this alternative. 

Fish and Wildlife 

Construction in this alternative would occur 

predominantly on previously disturbed land at 

194 
Impacts of Alternative 2 — Preferred 

Cavalier Heights, Camp Hill, Schoolhouse 

Ridge, the Murphy Farm, and Bolivar Heights. 

Disturbed land provides less desirable wildlife 

habitat when compared to undisturbed land 

and so both the short-term disturbance of 

wildlife and further impacts on habitat 

connections throughout the area are minimized. The adverse impacts of construction 

on wildlife habitat would be short and long 

term but negligible. 

Construction of new trails around the national 

historical park would cause a temporary and 

localized disturbance of animals in the area, 

resulting in short-term, minor adverse impacts 

to wildlife. After construction, human use of 

these trails would cause some fear and 

avoidance reactions in wildlife that are near 

the trails, resulting in long-term minor adverse 

impacts. 

Use of the outlying natural areas (Maryland 

Heights, Loudoun Heights, and Short Hill) by 

visitors and NPS staff is not likely to change as 

a result of this alternative. In addition, there 

would be no actions that would impact identified fish habitat, so there would be no change 

affecting fish or wildlife in these areas. 

Monitoring of deer population on Maryland 

Heights, and continued participation in 

peregrine falcon reintroduction would result 

in long-term benefits to the regional ecology. 

Cumulative Effects — Actions affecting 

wildlife are occurring in the region around 

Harpers Ferry as a result of agriculture and 

urban development. Certain actions occurring 

on private, state, and federal land can disrupt 

or fragment habitat, displace individuals or 

otherwise cause stress to animals. Incremental 

development of the region has affected the 

abundance and diversity of wildlife by changing the capacity of habitats to provide necessary food, shelter and reproduction sites. 

Wildlife is slowly becoming more restricted by 

current land uses, increasing development and 

human activity, causing individuals and 

populations to either adapt or move. This has 

resulted in minor to moderate adverse 

impacts. The presence of human visitors in the 

backcountry areas can disturb wildlife, 

resulting in long-term negligible to minor 

adverse impacts. 

Establishment of the national historical park 

has resulted in long-term benefits for fish and 

wildlife populations. Acquisition of the 

natural areas has curtailed development and 

allowed more natural environmental processes to continue. These protected areas in the 

national historical park are highly important 

because of the quality fish and wildlife habitat 

they provide. Hunting is prohibited in the 

national historical park and the white-tailed 

deer population on Maryland Heights has 

increased to the point where it is being 

evaluated for signs of ecological damage. 

Continued population growth in Maryland 

and West Virginia would reduce habitat 

available to wildlife species, resulting in longterm minor to moderate adverse impacts. 

Ongoing actions potentially affecting fish and 

wildlife populations such as visitor use, facility 

maintenance, and natural resources management would continue. NPS programs such as 

species inventory and monitoring and removal 

of nonnative species continue to benefit native 

animal populations. 

This alternative would result in long-term 

negligible adverse impacts and long-term, 

minor beneficial impacts. When other past, 

present, and future actions are considered in 

combination with proposals in this alternative, 

there would be negligible to minor adverse 

cumulative effects on fish and wildlife 

resources. 

Conclusion — Implementing this 

alternative would result in long-term 

negligible adverse impacts and long-term 

minor beneficial impacts. Cumulative effects 

would be negligible to minor and adverse. No 

impairment of any fish or wildlife species 

would occur. 

195 
CHAPTER 4: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

Special Status Species 

The construction proposed in this alternative 

would not occur in habitat supporting listed 

species. Use of the outlying natural areas 

(Maryland Heights, Loudoun Heights, and 

Short Hill) by visitors and NPS staff is not 

likely to change as a result of this alternative, 

so there would be no change affecting 

sensitive plants or wildlife in these areas. 

There would be no change to existing land 

uses near the eagle nest in the Potomac River, 

or potential bat rooting sites; so there would 

be no effect on bald eagles or bats. 

Allowing the Armory Canal to rewater would 

inundate and destroy some vegetation, 

including some rare plants. This action would 

result in long-term adverse impacts on 

individuals of state species of concern, but is 

not likely to result in a loss of viability in the 

planning area or cause a trend toward federal 

listing or a loss of species viability range-wide. 

Overall, adverse impacts on special status 

plants from implementing this alternative 

would be minor. 

Inventory and monitoring of state and 

federally listed species would continue and 

protective measures implemented when 

necessary. 

Cumulative Effects — Habitat loss or 

disruption is the most common reason for a 

terrestrial wildlife or plant species to become 

threatened or endangered. Loss or fragmentation of habitat has occurred in the region as a 

result of commercial and residential development, and agriculture. Human-related land 

uses on private, state, and federal land have 

disrupted or fragmented habitat, displaced 

individuals, or otherwise caused stress to 

animals. Incremental development of the 

region has changed the capacity of habitats to 

provide necessary food, shelter, and territory, 

resulting in the decrease of population numbers. Past impacts on threatened and endangered species in the region from human 

activities have been moderate to major and 

adverse. 

Establishment of the national historical park 

has resulted in long-term benefits for special 

status species. Acquisition of the natural areas 

has curtailed development and allowed more 

natural environmental processes to occur. 

These protected areas in the national historical park will become increasingly important in 

providing quality habitat for rare species in 

the region. Ongoing NPS programs such as 

rare species inventory and monitoring and 

removal of nonnative species continue to 

benefit animal, fish and plant special status 

species. 

Given the lack of information regarding the 

exact extent of impacts outside the national 

historical park, it is difficult to assess the 

relative scope of the impacts of this alternative 

compared to current and anticipated future 

actions in the region. 

Residential development in Maryland and 

West Virginia would continue to reduce 

habitat for special status species, resulting in 

long-term minor to moderate adverse impacts 

on these species. 

This alternative would contribute a beneficial 

and an adverse component to the impacts of 

other past, present and foreseeable future 

actions, and the cumulative impacts to listed, 

candidate or other special status species 

would be moderate and adverse. 

Conclusion — Implementing alternative 2 

would have no effect on bald eagles, bats, or 

federal species of concern. There would be 

long-term, minor adverse impacts on state 

listed plants in the Armory Canal. Cumulative 

impacts to listed, candidate or other special 

status species would be moderate and adverse, 

due mostly to actions outside the national 

historical park. No impairment of a special 

status species would occur as a result of this 

alternative. 

 

196 
Impacts of Alternative 2 — Preferred 

Soundscapes 

Working with the state and federal 

departments of transportation to reroute U.S. 

340 out of the river valleys would result in 

long-term moderate beneficial impacts on 

soundscapes in most areas of the national 

historical park. Construction to enlarge the 

visitor contact station and bus maintenance 

facility at Cavalier Heights would cause shortterm adverse impacts to the soundscape in 

that area. However, this area is in a zone 

where more human-related noise is 

acceptable. 

Construction of small parking areas and 

facilities at Murphy Farm, Schoolhouse Ridge 

Battlefield, and the Nash Farm would create 

short-term, minor adverse impacts on 

soundscapes in those areas. There would be 

long-term, negligible adverse impacts from 

visitor use-related noise as visitation would 

increase in these areas that are now rarely 

visited. Natural soundscapes in the outlying 

areas (Scenic/Natural Preservation Zone) 

would not be affected. 

Cumulative Effects — Portions of the 

national historical park are located in an 

urban setting where human-caused sounds 

tend to dominate. Lower Town has been part 

of a noisy, bustling community for almost 200 

years. Because Harpers Ferry is a national 

historical park, visitors do not come here 

expecting the quieter, intermittent sounds of 

nature. However, this experience is available 

in the natural areas of the park. 

Disruptions to natural soundscapes come 

from human activities inside and outside the 

national historical park. Traffic on Highway 

340 creates constant noise and trains on the 

rail lines create considerable aural impacts 

throughout the day. Sounds of a modern town 

such as vehicles, phones, and air-conditioning 

units, have intruded on the historic setting in 

Lower Town. 

Continuing trends of population growth in the 

area would result in additional adverse 

impacts on natural soundscapes. 

This alternative would contribute a moderate 

beneficial impact and negligible adverse 

impact to the combined effects of other past, 

present and foreseeable future actions, 

resulting in beneficial cumulative impacts on 

the national historical park’s soundscapes. 

Conclusion — Alternative 2 would result 

in short-term minor adverse impacts, longterm moderate beneficial impacts, and longterm negligible adverse impacts on 

soundscapes in the national historical park. 

There would be beneficial cumulative impacts. 

No impairment of soundscapes would result 

from this alternative. 

Lightscapes 

Following NPS policy, existing outdoor 

lighting that is found to be contributing to 

nighttime light pollution would be replaced 

with fixtures that are more sensitive to the 

resource. In addition, any new outdoor 

lighting installed as a result of implementing 

this alternative would be the minimum necessary for safety or security and of a design that 

prevents stray light from spreading upwards 

into the sky. NPS staff would work with 

surrounding communities on ways to decrease 

light pollution in the region. With these 

standard practices, this alternative would have 

a long-term, minor beneficial impact on the 

national historical park’s lightscape. 

Cumulative Effects — The clarity of night 

skies over the national historical park has 

been diminished by artificial light sources 

both within and outside the national historical 

park that creates a haze of light that obscures 

views of stars and distant topographic 

features. The primary culprit is outdoor 

lighting of a type that allows light to shine up 

into the sky. Outdoor lighting is common 

throughout the region, including inside 

197 
CHAPTER 4: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

national historical park boundaries. Creation 

of the national historical park’s natural areas 

has a long-term beneficial impact by 

maintaining lightless areas. 

As development in the areas around the park 

increases, the amount of light pollution would 

likely increase. 

This alternative would contribute a beneficial 

impact to these effects, resulting in the overall 

cumulative effects being minor and adverse. 

Conclusion —This alternative would have 

a long-term, minor beneficial impact on lightscapes. Overall cumulative effects would be 

minor and adverse. There would be no 

impairment of a key national historical park 

resource or value as a result of this alternative. 

VISITOR EXPERIENCE 

Under alternative 2, national historical park 

visitors would have opportunities to engage in 

a larger variety of recreational activities, have 

access to new facilities, and participate in new 

interactive experiences. Exhibits and displays 

at the visitor center would present the general 

story of Harpers Ferry and introduce the 

interpretive themes. Interpretive media at 

specific locations in the national historical 

park would present the history of that site. 

This improved interpretation would have a 

major beneficial impact on visitor experience. 

More areas of the national historical park 

would become available to visit via connecting 

trails under this alternative and be connected 

through a portable Civil War interpretive 

program such as an audio program available in 

cars or over cell phones. 

Lower Town 

The level of interpretation in Lower Town 

would be increased in this alternative. More 

“life” would be introduced through more 

authentic shop interiors, artisans, and additional historical interpretation. NPS staff or 

volunteers would provide guided tours and 

demonstrations. Modern intrusions such as 

vehicles would be reduced by a traffic control 

plan during special events coordinated among 

the national historical park, the town of 

Harpers Ferry, and Main Street Harpers 

Ferry. These actions would provide more of 

an historical immersion experience resulting 

in short-term, minor beneficial impacts. 

Federal Armory 

Under this alternative, there would be on-site 

interpretation of the armory grounds and 

foundations of the historic structures would 

be marked so that visitors could visualize the 

layout of the armory. An accessible trail to the 

grounds would be constructed. These actions 

would result in long-term minor beneficial 

effects on the visitor experience at this 

location. 

Potomac Frontage/Armory Canal 

The historic armory canal would be rewatered and the former Potomac Power 

Hydroelectric Plant turned into an 

interpretive facility. Visitors would have 

access to this facility, a long-term beneficial 

impact on the visitor experience. 

Virginius and Hall’s Islands 

The addition of interpretive displays or signs 

on both islands, a new pedestrian bridge, and 

trails would improve visitor understanding of 

the islands, resulting in a long-term minor 

beneficial effect on the visitor experience. 

Bolivar Heights 

Bolivar Heights would continue to be 

maintained to resemble its historic Civil War 

era appearance. Interpretation would relate 

198 
Impacts of Alternative 2 — Preferred 

this site to Schoolhouse Ridge Battlefield, and 

a trail would physically connect the two. 

Visitors could access this location via the 

shuttle bus system which would result in a 

minor beneficial impact. 

Camp Hill 

Interpretation of Storer College would be 

moved from Lower Town to a new interpretive space on the ground floor of one or 

more of the buildings on Camp Hill. Additionally, an existing display within Anthony 

Hall would be opened to the public. Installation of more accurate lighting and landscaping 

would occur. Shuttle bus access would be 

available. These actions would improve visitor 

access and understanding of the history of 

Camp Hill and result in minor beneficial 

impacts on visitor experience at this location. 

Cavalier Heights 

The new visitor center would enable visitors 

to learn about elements of all the primary 

interpretive themes and would provide a 

substantial increase in interpretive opportunities over the no-action alternative. 

Additionally, visitors would better understand 

and appreciate the thematic and physical links 

to the cultural and natural resources of the 

national historical park. This would be the 

primary location of park interpretation. 

Visitors would board shuttle buses that would 

take them directly to and from the national 

historical park location they wish to visit. 

These actions would have long term moderate 

beneficial impacts on visitor experience. 

Maryland Heights, Loudoun 

Heights, and Short Hill 

The recreational opportunities now available 

at these national historical park locations, 

such as hiking, viewing historic sites, and 

observing nature would continue. Existing 

trails and vegetation clearings would be 

maintained. Visitors would access these areas 

on their own. Interconnecting national 

historical park trails would provide visitors 

access to additional trail networks. 

A Civil War interpretive overlook with vista 

clearing and parking would be established at 

the Sherwood House site on Loudoun 

Heights. This would result in long-term minor 

beneficial impacts on visitor experience. 

Schoolhouse Ridge 

Construction of a pedestrian overpass or 

underpass at U.S. 340 would allow safe access 

from Bakerton to Bloomery Road for visitors 

walking the national historical park trails. NPS 

areas along Schoolhouse Ridge (Jackson’s 

flanks, Union Skirmish Line) would be maintained to resemble their historic agricultural 

appearance. On-site interpretation (wayside 

exhibits) and walking trails would be added to 

provide understanding of the events that took 

place here. Small roadside parking areas 

would be provided for vehicular access. The 

NPS shuttle bus system would serve one or 

more of these locations at least part of the 

year. A primitive campsite would be provided 

for organized groups on Schoolhouse Ridge 

north. Incorporating these locations into a 

larger battlefield tour would provide present 

and future visitors an opportunity to learn the 

significance of these sites in American history. 

These improvements would result in a longterm moderate beneficial impact to visitor 

experience at these locations. 

The Murphy Farm 

Visitor amenities such as a parking area, 

restrooms, river overlook, and trails would be 

provided in this alternative. The NPS shuttle 

bus system would serve this location at least 

part of the year. On-site interpretation of the 

199 
CHAPTER 4: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

Civil War earthworks, Shenandoah River 

overlook, John Brown’s Fort foundation, and 

the Niagara Movement would be added. 

These improvements would aid visitor access 

and understanding of this site and result in 

long-term minor beneficial impacts on visitor 

experience. 

The Nash Farm 

Establishment of a small NPS or partner run 

resource education center at the Nash farm 

would improve the NPS outreach and 

education programs. Most visitors may not 

benefit from this but the regional community 

would receive long-term negligible to minor 

beneficial effects. 

Cumulative Effects 

Tourists encounter a variety of opportunities 

in the three-state region centered on the 

confluence of the Shenandoah and Potomac 

rivers. Some of the choices are: visiting Civil 

War battlefields and other historic sites, going 

to the races in Charles Town, river rafting, 

taking short walks, and long-distance hiking. 

Additional long- and short-distance trails are 

being planned for the region. Access to 

improved trail systems would be a long-term 

benefit to visitor experience. 

Other national park system units contributing 

to the educational and recreational opportunities in the region include Monocacy National 

Battlefield, Antietam National Battlefield, 

Chesapeake & Ohio Canal National Historical 

Park, Appalachian National Scenic Trail, and 

the Potomac Heritage National Scenic Trail. 

The states of Virginia and Maryland have 

advertised programs called Civil War Trails 

that connect the various Civil War sites in 

those states. Harpers Ferry National 

Historical Park is associated with many of 

these programs. 

Parking is limited in Lower Town and 

congestion can occur around the train station 

during weekday rush hours. Visitor experience in Lower Town can also be adversely 

affected in the winter months because most of 

the shops and restaurants are closed. 

Current and future partnerships among the 

National Park Service, local businesses, and 

other federal and state historical sites would 

improve interpretation and visitor opportunities in the region. These partnerships 

would provide additional interpretation, 

orientation, and visitor access to facilities and 

services and will improve the visitors 

experience at the national historical park and 

in the region. Having partners distribute 

national historical park material and 

orientation information will assist future and 

current visitors before they enter the park 

boundary. 

This variety of high-quality experience 

opportunities leads to an overall beneficial 

effect. Alternative 2 would result in long-term 

minor to moderate beneficial impacts. When 

the effects of this alternative are combined 

with other past, present, and future actions, 

the overall cumulative effect on visitor 

experience would be minor and beneficial. 

Conclusion 

Implementing alternative 2 would result in 

long-term minor to moderate beneficial 

impacts on visitor experience. When the 

effects of this alternative are combined with 

other past, present, and future actions, the 

overall cumulative effect on visitor experience 

would be minor and beneficial. 

SOCIOECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT 

In alternative 2, the national historical park 

would diversify the visitor opportunities and 

programs using NPS employees and 

volunteers to bring to life the historic 

200 
Impacts of Alternative 2 — Preferred 

atmosphere of a 19th century community 

through restored structures, artisans, crafters, 

period ships, and costumed personnel. This 

alternative would complement the heritage 

tourism goals of the Harpers Ferry historic 

district and business community. 

A means to increasing visitation would be the 

ability to market the national historical park 

resources and attractions to potential visitors. 

Because this alternative would bring to life a 

19th century community through more 

diverse interpretation and programming, the 

local and regional business communities 

would use the national historical park as a 

backdrop of opportunities to be enjoyed while 

marketing their own businesses. Also there is 

potential for a weekend excursion train that 

would originate from Washington D.C., which 

would provide day and overnight trip 

opportunities to a wider range of visitors. A 

greater diversity of visitor opportunities and 

programs would be expected to increase the 

visitor’s length of stay, resulting in additional 

tourist dollars spent in the local and regional 

economy. The expected increased in visitation 

to the national historical park would have a 

long-term, moderate beneficial effect on the 

economy of the gateway communities and a 

long-term minor beneficial effect on the 

regional economy. 

Having the period shops and artisans would 

provide unique products that are not widely 

available and thereby create a niche market. 

An increase in visitor spending in the national 

historical park would result in increased 

revenue for the gateway communities in terms 

of the business and occupation taxes and 

result in a long-term minor beneficial effect to 

the economy of the gateway communities. 

The National Park Service would continue to 

financially support some of the physical infrastructure in the gateway communities, and the 

national historical park’s annual operating 

expenditures would continue to provide 

revenue for area businesses. The NPS budget 

originates from outside the local and regional 

economy through congressional 

appropriations, but the funds are spent and 

recycled primarily in the gateway communities and the regional economy, thus providing 

ongoing benefits. 

In alternative 2, there could be an increase in 

the number of NPS employees as a result of 

increase interpretive programs. An operating 

budget that supports additional programs 

could have a long-term moderate beneficial 

effect on the gateway communities and a longterm negligible effect on the regional economy 

if general spending increased. 

The capital improvement budget of the 

national historical park would continue to 

provide short-term revenues in the gateway 

communities and regional economy. In 

alternative 2, it is expected that dollars 

available for capital improvement would 

remain stable or decline and thereby have a 

long-term, minor adverse impact on the 

gateway communities and a long-term, 

negligible adverse impact on the regional 

economy. 

Effective coordination and active marketing of 

regional historic communities could benefit 

the economic vitality of the gateway communities. A high level of historic preservation and 

interpretive programs at the national historical park would provide the anchor and 

attraction that businesses in the gateway 

communities can take advantage of in the 

form of visitor support services. An effective 

marketing as a destination could have a longterm, moderate beneficial effect on the economy of the gateway communities and a longterm minor beneficial effect on the regional 

economy. 

Cumulative Impacts 

In the past, Harpers Ferry National Historical 

Park had a growing visitation and then a 

decline to a stable annual visitation. The 

national historical park’s operational budget 

remains stable but is not keeping up with 

201 
CHAPTER 4: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

inflation. Another effect on the national 

historical park’s budget is the NPS response to 

other federal mandates that also contributed 

to a decline of permanent and seasonal NPS 

staff. The capital improvement program has 

varied by year with substantial increases and 

declines, and the program will continue to 

have short-term benefits. 

Initiatives that would benefit the region 

include the National Trust for Historic 

Preservation and others promoting to 

Congress the establishment of a national 

heritage area that would extend from 

Monticello, Virginia, to Gettysburg, 

Pennsylvania, embracing many of the most 

historic sites in America. 

The national historical park has a distinct but 

small fit in the overall size of the regional 

tourism industry. Both the gateway 

communities and regional economies have 

growing populations and housing trends that 

have a substantially larger influence of the 

socioeconomic conditions than that 

contributed by the existence of the national 

historical park. These trends are expected to 

continue into the future. 

The impacts of these other actions in 

combination with the impacts of alternative 2 

would result in a long-term, moderate beneficial cumulative effects in the gateway communities and long-term, negligible cumulative 

effects on the regional economy. 

Conclusion 

Implementing alternative 2 would have a longterm, moderate beneficial effect on the 

economy of the gateway communities and a 

long-term minor beneficial effect on the 

regional economy. This alternative would 

result in a long-term, moderate beneficial 

cumulative effects in the gateway communities 

and long-term, negligible cumulative effects 

on the regional economy. Alternative 2 would 

contribute a substantial increment to the 

overall cumulative effect on the economy of 

the gateway communities and a small 

increment to the regional economy. 

NPS OPERATIONS 

Implementing alternative 2 would result in 

changes to NPS staffing and workload. In 

addition to projects already underway, 

construction of a new visitor center, 

rehabilitated administrative facilities, new 

curatorial facility, and visitor amenities in 

outlying areas would need staff attention. This 

would result in short-term, minor adverse 

impacts on NPS operations. Long-term 

impacts on NPS programs from having a new 

visitor center would be beneficial. 

Moving and consolidating NPS managerial 

and administrative staff into rehabilitated 

office space in the Brackett, Morrell, and 

Lockwood houses would increase management efficiency and employee morale — a 

long-term, minor to moderate beneficial 

impact. Short-term, minor adverse impacts 

would occur during the move. A similar 

impact would occur following consolidation 

of the Resources Protection and Visitor Use 

Management Division in Grandview School. 

Having maintenance equipment storage 

structures at outlying (satellite) areas would 

reduce transportation and wear on equipment, leading to less-frequent replacement 

costs and benefiting NPS operations. 

Regulating vehicles in Lower Town during 

special events may have a short-term adverse 

effect, but would also have a positive effect on 

the ambience of the Harpers Ferry/NPSsponsored events. 

A new museum collections facility would 

house collections from several area parks as 

well as Harpers Ferry National Historical Park 

and allow the consolidation of park collections and archives into one facility rather than 

several in disparate locations around the 

national historical park. Less time would be 

spent traveling from one storage site to 

202 
Impacts of Alternative 2 — Preferred 

another. All cataloguing, curating, storing, 

research, and exhibit preparation could be 

done more efficiently in one location designed 

to facilitate proper care, maintenance, and 

storage. The facility would be designed to 

meet all appropriate preservation standards 

and would be able to handle growth of the 

collections. 

The Appalachian National Scenic Trail within 

the national historical park would continue to 

be maintained at its current standard. The 

three trail partners would cooperate on a new 

sign plan to assist visitors in hiking the 

Appalachian National Scenic Trail through 

Harpers Ferry National Historical Park and 

learning about the Lewis and Clark National 

Historic Trail and the Potomac Heritage 

National Scenic Trail. This would result in 

beneficial impacts to all these entities. 

Cumulative Effects 

In general, the NPS staff is faced with a rising 

workload resulting from new NPS initiatives 

and program requirements. Static or reduced 

base funding does not allow employees to be 

hired to alleviate the workload. This causes 

stress on the employees, and some needed 

projects are slowed to a lack of time or 

funding. 

This alternative would contribute short-term 

adverse effects and long-term beneficial 

impacts to the effects listed above. The 

cumulative effects on NPS operations would 

be negligible and beneficial. 

Conclusion 

The preferred alternative would have shortterm, minor adverse impacts and long-term, 

minor to moderate beneficial impacts on NPS 

operations. The cumulative effects on NPS 

operations would be negligible and beneficial. 

UNAVOIDABLE MODERATE TO 

MAJOR ADVERSE IMPACTS 

Under alternative 2 there would be a slight 

increase in the development footprint as 

restrooms are constructed at Murphy Farm 

and Schoolhouse Ridge Battlefield and a new 

visitor center is built on Cavalier Heights. This 

would result in unavoidable minor adverse 

impacts. There are no actions in alternative 2 

that would result in unavoidable major 

adverse impacts on resources or visitor 

enjoyment. 

IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE 

COMMITMENTS OF RESOURCES 

Changes to the configuration and use of 

historic buildings for purposes of adaptive 

reuse has the potential to impact new areas 

within historic buildings and could result in 

irreversible loss of historic fabric. 

Implementing this alternative would result in 

the irretrievable loss of 5 acres of vegetation 

and soil productivity due to construction of 

facilities. 

RELATIONSHIP OF SHORT-TERM 

USES OF THE ENVIRONMENT AND 

THE MAINTENANCE AND 

ENHANCEMENT OF LONG-TERM 

PRODUCTIVITY 

The purpose of Harpers Ferry National 

Historical Park is to preserve and commemorate the (developed) location of historic 

events. However, under all alternatives, most 

of the national historical park would be in the 

scenic and natural preservation zone, which 

does not allow development. The National 

Park Service would continue to manage these 

areas under all alternatives to maintain natural 

ecological processes and native biological 

communities. Any actions the National Park 

Service would take would be intended to 

ensure that human uses do not adversely 

203 
CHAPTER 4: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

204 

affect the productivity of existing natural 

biotic communities. 

Under alternative 2 there would be a slight 

increase in the development footprint as new 

structures are constructed at Murphy Farm, 

Schoolhouse Ridge Battlefield, Camp Hill, and 

on Cavalier Heights. However, this would not 

result in a substantial loss of long-term 

productivity because these areas are all 

previously disturbed and not in a natural state.
IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE 3 

CULTURAL RESOURCES 

To appropriately preserve and protect 

national register-listed or -eligible historic 

structures, all stabilization, preservation, and 

rehabilitation efforts, as well as daily, cyclical, 

and seasonal maintenance, would be 

undertaken in accordance with the Secretary 

of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of 

Historic Properties (1995). Any materials 

removed during rehabilitation efforts would 

be evaluated to determine their value to the 

park’s museum collections and/or for their 

comparative use in future preservation work 

at the sites. Stabilization, preservation, and 

rehabilitation would have no adverse effects 

on historic structures. 

Historic Structures 

Lower Town. Buildings would be managed 

under the historic leasing program for 

commercial businesses similar to those that 

might have originally used the structures. The 

exteriors have already been restored and 

would continue to be maintained by the 

National Park Service to a mid-19th century 

appearance. Periodic flooding, successive 

rehabilitation, and maintenance have taken 

their toll on interior features with the resulting 

loss of much of the original fabric. However, 

remaining interior character-defining features 

would be preserved, and lessees would be 

required to preserve the 19th century 

character of building interiors. Impacts on 

historic fabric would likely be minimal, a no 

adverse effect determination. 

Federal Armory. A feasibility study for 

moving the U.S. Armory engine and guard 

house (John Brown’s Fort) back to its original 

location in the armory yard would be 

prepared. Pending this study John Brown’s 

Fort would remain in its current location in 

Lower Town. Leaving the structure in its 

present location would have no effect on the 

building. 

Virginius Island / Hall’s Island. Under this 

alternative a representative set of foundation 

ruins would be stabilized and maintained on 

Virginius Island. Actions necessary to stabilize 

and preserve the structural remains for 

interpretive purposes would require such 

activities as repointing of masonry joints or 

other minimal intrusions to preserve the 

structural remains in their current condition. 

Preservation actions to stabilize existing 

remains would not be adverse. 

Potomac River Frontage. The Armory canal 

and associated structures would be exposed 

and stabilized to preserve them in their 

current condition. The canal would not be 

rewatered. Necessary preservation would be 

conducted to protect the structures from 

further deterioration. This exposure and 

preservation would result in no adverse effect 

to these structures. 

Rehabilitation of the Potomac Power Hydroelectric Plant would occur for use by the NPS 

Historic Preservation Training Center as a 

workshop, for periodic interpretive tours, or 

park maintenance purposes. There would be 

no adverse effect. 

Camp Hill. The Morrell, Brackett, and 

Lockwood houses would be preserved. All 

three would continue to be adaptively used 

for interpretive exhibits. The results of such 

rehabilitation would be expected to have no 

adverse effect. 

Shipley School would either be rehabilitated 

under a public/private agreement resulting in 

no adverse effect or removed and its site 

landscaped, an adverse effect. 

Loudoun Heights, Maryland Heights, Short 

Hill. After evaluation for inclusion in the 

205 
CHAPTER 4: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

National Register of Historic Places, 

nonhistoric standing structures would be 

removed or would be allowed to molder 

through natural processes. There would be no 

effects on historic buildings by the 

implementation of this alternative. 

This alternative would increase the stabilization and preservation of the remaining 

structural ruins through development and 

implementation of a preservation plan for 

Civil War earthworks, campsites, and other 

defensive works. These preservation activities 

would reduce any deterioration. As a result, 

implementation of this alternative would have 

no adverse effect. 

Schoolhouse Ridge Battlefield. After being 

evaluated for the National Register of Historic 

Places, nonhistoric buildings and structures, 

including those at the Jellystone campground 

and Harpers Ferry Caverns, would be 

removed. In those instances of removal there 

would be no historic properties affected by 

implementation of this alternative. Structures 

found to be eligible could be rehabilitated or 

restored to their original appearance to 

enhance the cultural landscape or removed 

with an approved mitigation strategy in 

consultation with the state historic 

preservation office and the Advisory Council 

on Historic Preservation. Such actions would 

range from no adverse effect to an adverse 

effect on historic properties. 

Murphy Farm. Rehabilitation of the Murphy 

farmhouse would be undertaken to reestablish 

the historic exterior. The interior would be 

similarly rehabilitated for interpretive 

purposes or use under the historic leasing 

program. The results of rehabilitation would 

not be adverse. 

Stabilization of the foundation of John 

Brown’s Fort would have no adverse effect to 

this structure. 

This alternative would increase the 

stabilization and preservation of the Civil War 

structural ruins through development and 

implementation of a preservation plan for the 

historic defensive works. The resulting impact 

of the preservation activities would reduce the 

deterioration of these structural ruins. As a 

result, implementation of this alternative 

would have no adverse effect. 

Nash Farm. Preservation of the exteriors of 

the primary residence and barn would occur 

to maintain the appearance of a dairy farm. 

The interiors would be rehabilitated for use as 

an education facility. This rehabilitation 

would have no adverse effect on the historic 

properties. 

Potomac Terrace. Grandview School would 

be rehabilitated and adaptively reused by the 

national historical park’s Resources 

Protection and Public Use Management 

Division. This adaptive rehabilitation would 

be primarily limited to the interior of the 

structure but could include construction of an 

addition on the rear of the building for 

vehicles and storage. Such rehabilitation 

efforts would likely impact some historic 

fabric. However, careful design in consultation with the West Virginia state historic 

preservation office should ensure that the 

impacts would be minimal and would result in 

no adverse effect to the historic building. 

Cumulative Effects — Since the 

congressional authorization of the national 

monument in 1944, the National Park Service 

has removed 35 structures identified as either 

unsafe, unstable, or not in keeping with the 

19th century period of significance. These 

removals occurred primarily in Lower Town, 

although several structures on Camp Hill and 

Storer College were also removed. The 

removal of many of these structures from the 

national historical park left gaps in the appearance of the former Storer College Campus 

that today would be considered adverse. 

Since the creation of the national historical 

park, many restoration and rehabilitation 

projects have been accomplished, resulting in 

206 
Impacts of Alternative 3 

the preservation of historic structures. These 

structures were generally located along 

Shenandoah Street and consisted of a wide 

range of building types though primarily 

commercial and residential. In general, the 

rehabilitation of these structures resulted in 

their long-term preservation and had no 

adverse effect. 

The Armory engine and guard house known 

as John Brown’s Fort was moved several 

times, disassembled, and reconstructed to a 

semblance of its appearance at the time of the 

raid. However, the history of the building and 

its significance has not been lost because of its 

restoration. These impacts have varied from 

adverse to beneficial. 

External to the national historical park 

boundaries, population growth associated 

with metropolitan Washington, D.C., has 

impacted the use and character of historic 

buildings in the area. Use of historic structures 

has altered the historic fabric and impacted 

the historic elements of the structures. In 

addition, actions such as weathering, lack of 

maintenance, or structural modifications have 

contributed to the impacts to historic 

structures. The overall impact of urbanization 

on historic structures in the Harpers Ferry 

area has been mixed as many historic 

structures have been lost while other have 

been saved and restored. 

As described above, the potential impacts 

associated with implementation of alternative 

3 would result in predominantly no adverse 

effects on the national historical park’s 

historic structures. However, the few 

potential adverse impacts associated with 

alternative 3, in combination with the adverse 

impacts of other past, present, and reasonably 

foreseeable future actions, would result in an 

adverse cumulative impact. The adverse 

impacts of alternative 3 would only contribute 

minimally to the adverse cumulative impact. 

Conclusion — The impacts of alternative 

3 on historic structures would be generally 

positive. When evaluated with the adverse 

impacts of past, present, and foreseeable 

future actions, the actions in this alternative 

would contribute only minimally to the 

cumulative whole. 

Because there would be no major, adverse 

impacts to a resource or value whose 

conservation is (1) necessary to fulfill specific 

purposes identified in the establishing 

legislation or proclamation of Harpers Ferry 

National Historical Park; (2) key to the natural 

or cultural integrity of the national historical 

park; or (3) identified as a goal in relevant NPS 

planning documents, there would be no 

impairment of the national historical park 

resources or values. 

Archeological Resources 

Archeological resources adjacent to or easily 

accessible from trails and developed areas could 

be vulnerable to surface disturbance, inadvertent damage, and vandalism. A loss of surface 

archeological materials, alteration of artifact 

distribution, and a reduction of contextual 

evidence could result. However, continued 

ranger patrol and emphasis on visitor education 

would discourage vandalism and inadvertent 

destruction of cultural remains, and any adverse 

impacts would be expected to be minimal if any. 

As appropriate, additional archeological surveys would precede any ground disturbance 

associated with excavation, construction, or 

demolition, e.g., construction or improvement 

of foot trails, installation of wayside exhibits 

or other media, and construction of a museum 

collections storage facility. National registereligible or -listed archeological resources 

would be avoided to the greatest extent 

possible. If such resources could not be 

avoided, an appropriate mitigation strategy 

would be developed in consultation with the 

appropriate state historic preservation officer. 

Before demolition of any national registerlisted or -eligible structure, a survey for 

archeological resources in the general vicinity 

of the affected structure would be conducted. 

207 
CHAPTER 4: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

The excavation, recordation, and mapping of 

any significant cultural remains, if present, 

would be completed before demolition to 

ensure that important archeological data that 

otherwise would be lost is recovered and 

documented. Any impacts on archeological 

resources would be adverse. 

Federal Armory. Archeological testing to 

locate and document Federal Armory features 

would be undertaken under this alternative. 

This work would follow acceptable NPS 

guidelines and have no adverse effect on the 

resources. 

Virginius Island / Hall’s Island. Archeological investigations associated with stabilization 

of the historic structural remains would be 

carried out under this alternative, resulting in 

no adverse effect to those historic remains. 

Potomac River Frontage. Exposure and 

preservation of the Armory canal would 

necessitate investigations to document the 

archeological resources on site. Such archeological work would result in a determination 

of no adverse effect. 

Cumulative Effects - Past development in 

the national historical park may have resulted 

in the disturbance and loss of some 

archeological resources during excavation and 

construction activities. In addition, 

agricultural practices and the development 

and expansion of communities in and near the 

park may also have previously disturbed 

archeological resources. The continuation of 

current activities could also result in future 

adverse impacts on archeological resources. 

As described above, implementation of 

alternative 3 could potentially disturb 

archeological resources at the national 

historical park — resulting in adverse effects. 

Any adverse impacts associated with 

implementing alternative 3, in combination 

with the impacts of other past, present, and 

reasonably foreseeable future projects, would 

result in adverse cumulative impacts. 

However, alternative 3 would be expected to 

contribute only minimally to the adverse 

cumulative impacts. Thus, any adverse 

impacts on archeological resources resulting 

from implementing alternative 3 would be a 

very small component of the adverse 

cumulative impact. 

Conclusion —Archeological investigations associated with stabilization/ preservation of foundations or structures within the 

national historical park would be required. 

Investigations would be coordinated with the 

West Virginia, Maryland, and Virginia state 

historic preservation offices under the 

requirement of Section 106 of the National 

Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as 

amended. The actions associated with this 

alternative could have adverse impacts on 

archeological resources. 

Because there would be no major, adverse 

impacts to a resource or value whose conservation is (1) necessary to fulfill specific 

purposes identified in the establishing 

legislation or proclamation of Harpers Ferry 

National Historical Park; (2) key to the natural 

or cultural integrity of the national historical 

park; or (3) identified as a goal in relevant NPS 

planning documents, there would be no 

impairment of the national historical park 

resources or values. 

Cultural Landscapes 

To appropriately preserve and protect 

national register-listed or -eligible cultural 

landscapes, all stabilization, preservation, and 

rehabilitation efforts, as well as daily, cyclical, 

and seasonal maintenance, would be undertaken in accordance with the Secretary of the 

Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of 

Historic Properties (1995). Stabilization, 

preservation, and rehabilitation would have 

no adverse effects on cultural landscapes. 

Careful design would ensure that the 

improvement and construction of trails would 

208 
Impacts of Alternative 3 

minimally affect the scale and visual 

relationships among landscape features. In 

addition, the topography, vegetation, 

circulation features, and land use patterns of 

the landscape would remain largely unaltered 

by such actions, resulting in no adverse effect. 

The under-grounding of utilities would have 

minimal, if any, effect on the existing 

topography, spatial organization, or land use 

patterns of cultural landscapes. Once the 

underground utility line is installed and the 

trench is backfilled, the disturbed ground 

would be restored to its preconstruction 

contour and condition. No adverse effects 

would be anticipated. 

Lower Town. Regulating the use of private 

and NPS vehicles during periods of high 

visitation would help remove modern intrusions from a historic setting. The removal of 

additional vehicles from the Lower Town 

would benefit the cultural landscape and have 

no adverse effect. 

The use of backyards as interpretive venues 

could occur under this alternative. This would 

require rehabilitation of the areas to a safe and 

historically appropriate condition. Rehabilitation of these backyard spaces would result in 

no adverse effect. 

Federal Armory. Providing accessibility for 

visitors with disabilities to the armory could 

be accomplished via the vomitorium and 

walkway along the river walk. The resulting 

visual impact on the armory grounds would 

likely not be an adverse effect. 

Virginius Island / Hall’s Island. 

Identification of structural ruins would be 

accomplished through the outlining or 

ghosting of such features. The impacts on the 

cultural landscape would not be adverse 

because the outlining would be low profile 

and reversible. 

Potomac River Frontage. The Armory canal 

and associated structures would be exposed 

and stabilized to preserve them in their 

current condition. The canal would not be 

rewatered. Necessary preservation would be 

conducted to protect the structures from 

further deterioration. This exposure and 

preservation would result in no adverse effect 

on the cultural landscape. 

Camp Hill. The Morrell, Brackett, and 

Lockwood houses would continue to be 

preserved to retain their historic presence on 

the landscape of Camp Hill. The impact would 

not be adverse. 

Implementation of a period lighting plan 

would help to restore a further semblance of 

the historic college campus on Camp Hill. 

This lighting would unify the landscape of 

Camp Hill and would be less obtrusive than 

the current lighting systems. Such changes 

would result in a determination of no adverse 

effect. 

Shipley School would either be rehabilitated 

under a public/private agreement resulting in 

no adverse effect to the streetscape or 

removed. Demolition would remove this large 

structure that was important in the development of the community. Removal would result 

in an adverse impact on the community 

streetscape. 

A bus shelter would be constructed on Camp 

Hill using sensitive design and placement to 

minimize the potential for visual intrusion into 

the landscape. The impact would not be 

adverse. 

Removing the nonhistoric maintenance 

facility from the edge of Camp Hill to outside 

national historical park boundaries and 

replacing it with additional open space would 

be expected to have no adverse effect. 

Loudoun Heights, Maryland Heights, and 

Short Hill. Nonhistoric structures would be 

removed in this alternative. Removal of such 

structures would help provide a greater 

semblance of the historic appearance. 

Consequently, the removal of nonhistoric 

209 
CHAPTER 4: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

structures would result in no effect to the 

cultural landscape. 

An increased number of interpretive signs 

would be installed on Maryland Heights in 

this alternative. The installation of these signs 

could impact historic vistas, but their 

placement and design would minimize these 

impacts to the extent possible. The increase in 

signs should have no adverse effect on the 

cultural landscapes of Maryland Heights. 

The historic viewshed of Maryland Heights 

from Lower Town could be altered as the 

result of opening some “field of fire” vistas of 

Civil War artillery by selective removal of 

vegetation. The removal of vegetation would 

enhance the semblance of the historic artillery 

emplacements and would have no adverse 

effect on cultural landscapes. 

Schoolhouse Ridge. The campground and 

nonhistoric structures would be removed and 

the land returned to a more historically 

accurate setting. Schoolhouse Ridge would be 

maintained as a battlefield landscape using 

agricultural leases to maintain the historic 

rural condition. By returning the land on 

which the campground is built to its historic 

appearance there would be no adverse effect 

to the predominant Civil War cultural 

landscape. 

Creation of a small parking area for visitors 

would result in no adverse effect because they 

would be located along the BakertonBloomery Road and out of important 

viewsheds. 

Nash Farm. Rehabilitation of the existing 

farm structures would maintain the 

appearance of an active dairy farm, which 

would coincide with the predominant period 

of significance for the National-Register-listed 

property. The dairy farmscape would be 

preserved using an agricultural lease. This 

would result in minimal change to the cultural 

landscape and would have no adverse effect. 

Cumulative Effects — During the first 

half of the 20th century several major flooding 

episodes inundated what is now Harpers 

Ferry National Historical Park. The most 

extensive impacts have occurred in Lower 

Town where the loss of buildings has changed 

the appearance of the streetscape of Shenandoah Street near the Green and Hamilton 

Street areas. 

In 1969 John Brown’s Fort was moved from 

Storer College to its present site about 100 

yards from its original location. It was not 

possible to move the fort to its original 

location due to the berm constructed by the B 

& O Railroad. The fort’s proximity to the 

original location has a beneficial impact on the 

cultural landscape. Its return has resulted in 

no adverse effect. 

The elimination of historic streets to the 

Shenandoah River and the creation of 

nonhistoric pedestrian trails have resulted in 

changes in access and movement through a 

considerable section of Lower Town. In 

addition, reconfiguring the circulation pattern 

of the national historical park by the addition 

of a connector road between the Cavalier 

Heights Visitor Center and Lower Town has 

generally had an adverse effect on the cultural 

landscape, but has been offset by removal of 

vehicular parking that damaged historic 

resources and the removal of destructive 

recreational activities that damaged 

archeological resources. 

Revegetation of The Green and Hamilton 

Street areas with turf grasses does not 

accurately reflect the vegetation of any of the 

historic periods identified in the national 

historical park and is an adverse effect to the 

cultural landscape, but is offset by the 

protection it gives to archeological resources 

as a result of soil erosion during floods. 

Historic land use patterns have been altered 

through the imposition of the national 

historical park on to the town. The functions 

of a national park system unit are very 

210 
Impacts of Alternative 3 

different from those of a quiet small town. 

The result may be an adverse effect on the 

historic landscape. 

Through stabilization, rehabilitation, and 

ongoing maintenance, Harpers Ferry National 

Historical Park has provided protection and 

preservation of historic structures that have 

been subjected to numerous floods that 

affected the upkeep of the town. The benefit 

of these efforts has been to maintain a 

semblance of an historic townscape, and has 

resulted in no adverse effect. 

Beyond the national historical park 

boundaries, population growth primarily 

associated with metropolitan Washington, 

D.C., has altered the character of the historic 

cultural landscape. Alterations to transportation corridors have also affected the landscape. The result has been an adverse effect on 

the rural character of the cultural landscape 

surrounding the national historical park. 

As described above, the potential impacts 

associated with implementation of alternative 

3 would result in both no adverse effects and 

adverse effects to the national historical park’s 

cultural landscapes. The adverse impacts of 

alternative 3, in combination with the adverse 

impacts of other past, present, and reasonably 

foreseeable future actions, would result in an 

adverse cumulative impact. The adverse 

impacts of alternative 3, however, would only 

contribute minimally to the adverse 

cumulative impact. 

Conclusion — The impacts of alternative 

3 would generally be described as not adverse. 

The actions associated with this alternative 

would therefore be expected to contribute 

only minimally to the adverse impacts of other 

past, present, or foreseeable future actions. 

Although the cumulative impact would be 

adverse, any adverse impacts to cultural 

landscapes resulting from implementation 

would be a very small component of the 

cumulative impact. 

Because there would be no major, adverse 

impacts to a resource or value whose conservation is (1) necessary to fulfill specific purposes identified in the establishing legislation 

or proclamation of Harpers Ferry National 

Historical Park; (2) key to the natural or 

cultural integrity of the national historical 

park; or (3) identified as a goal in relevant NPS 

planning documents, there would be no 

impairment of the national historical park 

resources or values. 

NATURAL RESOURCES 

Wetlands and Water Resources 

Construction of facilities such as the 

expanded visitor facility on Cavalier Heights 

and parking areas and vault toilets on 

Schoolhouse Ridge and the Murphy farm 

would have the potential to impact water 

runoff and percolation patterns, resulting in 

long-term, negligible adverse impacts. 

Wetlands in public use areas would continue 

to be protected. These areas would be 

monitored and actions taken if necessary to 

prevent adverse impacts from visitor use or 

NPS operations. These actions would result in 

long-term, minor beneficial impacts to water 

resources in the national historical park. 

Cumulative Effects — Water resources in 

the Potomac and Shenandoah river basins 

have been adversely affected by 200 years of 

human use and activity. Both domestic and 

industrial wastes are sources of water pollution in the region. Agricultural practices, 

including the use of fertilizers and pesticides, 

are primary contributors to contamination of 

the streams and rivers. The loss of forest 

cover, changes in land use, and waste from 

industries have adversely affected water 

quality (chemicals in runoff, sedimentation 

from erosion, etc.). These sources of water 

quality degradation are located outside 

national historical park boundaries. Illegal 

activities such as inadequate or nonfunc211 
CHAPTER 4: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

tioning septic systems, dumping of waste in 

the rivers or unauthorized horse use near 

waterways also adversely affects water quality. 

Use of river water for irrigation, industry, and 

domestic uses has adversely affected water 

quantity. Establishment of the national 

historical park and implementation of 

Chesapeake Bay protection initiatives have 

contributed long-term benefits to water 

resources in the region. 

Some wetlands in the region have been filled 

in to make more land available for development. This practice decreases wetland areas 

and removes their natural beneficial values. 

Closure of the water-powered industries and 

nonuse of the Shenandoah Canal has led to 

the creation of a wetland on Virginius Island. 

This is a beneficial effect that may offset the 

loss of other wetlands in the region. 

Alternative 3 would contribute a negligible 

adverse component to these effects and the 

resulting effect of these past, present, and 

future actions, when taken cumulatively, 

would be minor and adverse. 

Conclusion — This alternative would 

result in long-term, minor beneficial impacts 

to wetlands and water resources in the 

national historical park. Cumulative effects 

would be minor and adverse. There would be 

no impairment of this national historical park 

resource. 

Floodplains 

This alternative would not result in any additional development in floodplains. There 

would be a small change in land use in 

floodplains on Virginius and Hall’s islands in 

the form of additional treatment of extant 

cultural resources. However, since these 

islands have been developed for over 200 

years, this action would have no effect on 

floodplains. 

Cumulative Effects — Floodplains of the 

Potomac and Shenandoah rivers have been 

adversely affected by 200 years of human use 

and activity. Construction of roads, canals, 

housing and commercial development has 

adversely affected the original floodplains. 

Riverside walls or berms and reinforced banks 

have constrained the natural meandering of 

the rivers. These impacts would continue. 

Establishment of the national historical park 

and preservation of outlying natural areas 

such as Loudoun Heights and Short Hill has 

preserved the beneficial values of the 

floodplains along those undeveloped areas. 

Floodplains would continue to be adversely 

affected by the development that prevents 

natural river movement and sediment 

deposition. 

Floodplains would continue to be adversely 

affected by the development that prevents 

natural river movement and sediment 

deposition. 

Implementing alternative 3 would have no 

effect on floodplains, resulting in no 

cumulative effects. 

Conclusion — There would be no effect 

on floodplains and thus, no cumulative effects 

as a result of this alternative. There would be 

no impairment of a key national historical 

park resource or value as a result of this 

alternative. 

Soils 

Construction of parking areas on Schoolhouse 

Ridge, the Nash farm, and the Murphy farm; 

and expansion of the visitor facility on 

Cavalier Heights would disrupt soils in these 

locations. The total disturbance would be 

approximately 4 acres. There would be shortterm adverse effects because soils would be 

subject to increased wind and water erosion 

until vegetation recovers. There would be 

long-term adverse effects in the form of 

212 
Impacts of Alternative 3 

disrupted soil properties where new facilities 

are constructed. Construction would be 

localized and primarily in previously 

disturbed areas. Mitigating measures such as 

prompt revegetation and silt fencing would be 

employed to reduce potential adverse impacts. 

The impacts of this alternative would be longterm, minor, and adverse. 

Cumulative Effects — Soils in the region 

have been disrupted by commercial, 

residential, and agricultural development and 

use over the last two centuries. Foreseeable 

future actions of further development in the 

vicinity of the national historical park would 

adversely impact soils through compaction or 

transport from construction activities for 

roads, residential development, commercial 

development, and associated infrastructure. 

This alternative would contribute a localized, 

minor adverse impact to these effects and 

when combined with other past, present, and 

foreseeable future actions would have 

moderate adverse cumulative effects on the 

soil resource. 

Conclusion — The impacts of 

implementing this alternative would be longterm, minor, and adverse. There would be a 

moderate adverse cumulative effect on soils. 

There would be no impairment of this 

national historical park resource. 

Cave and Karst Resources 

This alternative would not create any changes 

to current conditions or situations affecting 

John Brown Cave. Existing impacts would 

continue at the same level and intensity as 

they are now. 

Man-made intrusions in Harpers Ferry 

Caverns would be removed, resulting in longterm minor beneficial impacts. Public access 

would be by permit only. The permit would 

include cave protection and safety 

stipulations. The anticipated impacts of such 

limited use would be expected to be long 

term, negligible, and adverse. 

Cumulative Effects — Subterranean 

ecosystems are typically in an extremely 

delicate balance and easily disrupted. Natural 

processes can change the cave environment 

such as daily exchanges of air, introduction of 

organic material from water flow or large 

animals; and rock fall closing an entrance or 

passageway. Humans entering the caves have 

adversely affected the resources through 

altering the natural balance by introducing 

foreign matter (dead skin, hair, clothing lint, 

and other introduced organic matter), 

exhaling carbon dioxide, trampling cave life, 

as well as intentional littering and vandalism 

(graffiti, breaking formations). 

Harpers Ferry Caverns was once developed 

commercially and open for tours. 

Development included electric lights, walking 

trails, stairs and handrails. In addition, the 

entrance sinkhole was roofed over and an exit 

tunnel was created. These developments 

altered the cave considerably by 

• heating and drying the air, affecting 

growth of speleothems and climate for 

cave-adapted animals 

• disrupting the natural flow of both water 

and air. Many forms of life rely on the 

input of waterborne or airborne organic 

matter 

• Introducing foreign matter that can 

disrupt ecosystems such as lint, microbes, 

rusting metal, etc. 

These human-caused changes resulted in 

short-and long-term, minor to moderate 

adverse impacts. Alternative 3 would not add 

to these impacts but would continue a longterm, minor adverse contribution and when 

combined with other past, present, and future 

actions would result in minor, adverse 

cumulative effects. 

Conclusion — Alternative 3 would result 

in long-term minor beneficial impacts and 

213 
CHAPTER 4: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

long-term negligible adverse impacts. 

Cumulative effects would be minor and 

adverse. There would be no impairment to 

this resource as a result of implementing this 

alternative. 

Vegetative Communities 

Under this alternative, there would continue 

to be some vegetative manipulation such as 

clearing or trimming in certain areas on 

Maryland Heights, Bolivar Heights, and the 

Murphy farm in order to maintain the 

appearance of historic openings. This would 

be limited to small, isolated areas and would 

occur in vegetation that is no longer natural, 

old-growth hardwood forests. With these 

considerations, adverse impacts of this action 

would be long-term but negligible. 

Construction of parking areas at Schoolhouse 

Ridge, the Nash farm, the Murphy farm; and 

expanded facilities on Cavalier Heights would 

alter existing vegetation. Total disturbed area 

would be about 4 acres. Because this 

construction would be highly localized and in 

previously disturbed areas, the long-term 

adverse impacts would be minor. 

Rehabilitation of park headquarters, office, 

and curatorial facilities would not affect 

vegetation because it would occur in existing 

structures. 

Continuing control of nonnative species 

would benefit native vegetative communities. 

Cumulative Effects — Native vegetation 

in the region has been systematically disturbed 

for thousands of years. From early Native 

American cultures through the Industrial era, 

humans relied on the vegetation for food, fuel 

and shelter. As more people came into the 

region, nonnative plants came with them. 

These actions adversely altered the vegetation 

throughout most of the region. Native, oldgrowth communities remain only on steep 

slopes or otherwise inaccessible land. 

Agricultural operations used to maintain 

historical landscapes have eliminated native 

communities on portions of the Murphy farm, 

the Nash farm, Bolivar Heights, and 

Schoolhouse Ridge. Limited social trails occur 

in almost all areas of the national historical 

park. These are unplanned and unmaintained 

trails created by visitors. They can damage 

vegetation, disrupt animal habitats and cause 

soil erosion. 

Seeds of nonnative plants carried by wind and 

humans have created infestations of noxious 

weeds and other invasive species. These 

species cause long-term adverse impacts on 

native vegetation by competing for available 

resources such as water and nutrients. 

The establishment of Harpers Ferry National 

Historical Park has resulted in moderate 

beneficial impacts to vegetation through longterm protection of native vegetation in 

outlying areas and nonnative species 

eradication efforts. 

The long-term adverse impacts caused by 

residential and commercial development 

would be expected to continue. 

This alternative would contribute a minor 

adverse impact and, when combined with the 

impacts of other past, present, and foreseeable 

future actions, would result in a minor adverse 

cumulative effect on vegetative resources. 

Conclusion — Alternative 3 would result 

in long-term minor adverse impacts on 

vegetative communities. The cumulative 

effects would be minor and adverse. There 

would be no impairment of this resource as a 

result of this alternative. 

Fish and Wildlife 

The construction proposed in this alternative 

would occur in previously disturbed areas that 

offer less valuable habitat than undisturbed 

areas, so the adverse impacts would be long214 
Impacts of Alternative 3 

term but negligible. Use of the outlying areas 

(Maryland Heights, Loudoun Heights, and 

Short Hill) by visitors and NPS staff is not 

likely to change as a result of this alternative, 

so there would be no change affecting wildlife 

in these areas. 

Construction of new trails around the national 

historical park would cause a temporary and 

localized disturbance of animals in the area, 

resulting in short-term, minor adverse impacts 

to wildlife. After construction, human use of 

these trails would cause fear and avoidance 

reactions in wildlife that are near the trails 

resulting in long-term minor adverse impacts. 

This alternative also calls for an underpass or 

overpass to be constructed across U.S. 340 

near the Bakerton/Bloomery road. An 

underpass would allow terrestrial wildlife 

species to safely pass under the busy highway 

resulting in reduced highway fatalities. This 

would be a long-term, minor beneficial impact 

to wildlife. 

Study of the deer population on Maryland 

Heights and continued participation in 

peregrine falcon reintroduction would result 

in long-term benefits to ecological systems. 

Cumulative Effects — Actions affecting 

wildlife are occurring in the region around 

Harpers Ferry as a result of agriculture and 

urban development. Certain actions taken on 

private, state, and federal land can disrupt or 

fragment habitat, displace individuals or 

otherwise cause stress to animals. Incremental 

development of the region has affected the 

abundance and diversity of wildlife by 

changing the capacity of habitats to provide 

necessary food, shelter and reproduction sites. 

Wildlife is slowly becoming more restricted by 

current land uses, increasing development and 

human activity, causing individuals and 

populations to either adapt or move. This has 

caused minor to moderate adverse impacts. 

The presence of human visitors in the 

backcountry areas can disturb wildlife. If the 

number of visitors increases, this disturbance 

could increase. Most animals seem to have a 

greater defense response to humans moving 

unpredictably in the terrain than to humans 

following a distinct path (Gabrielsen and 

Smith 1995). Therefore, retaining the 

developed trails should partially mitigate the 

impacts on wildlife. 

Establishment of the national historical park 

has resulted in long-term benefits for fish and 

wildlife populations. Acquisition of the 

natural areas has curtailed development and 

allowed more natural environmental 

processes to continue. These protected areas 

in the national historical park are highly 

important because of the quality fish and 

wildlife habitat they provide. Hunting is 

prohibited in the national historical park, and 

the white-tailed deer population on Maryland 

Heights has increased to where it could be 

causing ecological damage. 

Developed land provides lower quality wildlife habitat when compared to undisturbed 

land. Therefore, further impacts on wildlife 

and habitat connections throughout the site 

are minimized when additional development 

takes place on previously disturbed land. 

Ongoing actions potentially affecting fish and 

wildlife populations such as visitor use, facility 

maintenance and natural resources 

management would continue. 

Continued population growth in Maryland 

and West Virginia would reduce habitat 

available to wildlife species, resulting in longterm minor to moderate adverse impacts. 

This alternative would result in long-term 

negligible adverse impacts and long-term, 

minor beneficial impacts. When analyzed in 

combination with the impacts of other past, 

present, and future action, there would be a 

negligible to minor adverse cumulative effect 

on fish and wildlife resources. 

Conclusion —This alternative would 

result in long-term negligible adverse impacts 

215 
CHAPTER 4: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

and long-term, minor beneficial impacts. 

Cumulative effects would be negligible to 

minor and adverse. No impairment of any fish 

or wildlife species would occur. 

Special Status Species 

The construction proposed in alternative 3 

would not occur in habitat supporting listed 

species. Use of the outlying areas (Maryland 

Heights, Loudoun Heights, and Short Hill) by 

visitors and NPS staff is not likely to change as 

a result of this alternative, so there would be 

no change affecting sensitive plants or wildlife 

in these areas. No foraging, watering, or 

roosting habitat known to be used by Indiana 

bats would be affected. 

For state species of concern, this alternative is 

not likely to result in a loss of viability in the 

planning area, nor cause a trend toward 

federal listing or a loss of species viability 

range-wide. Inventory and monitoring of state 

and federally listed species would continue 

and protective measures implemented when 

necessary. 

Cumulative Effects — Habitat loss or 

disruption is the most common reason for a 

terrestrial wildlife or plant species to become 

threatened or endangered. Loss or fragmentation of habitat has occurred in the region as a 

result of commercial and residential development, and agriculture. Human-related land 

uses on private, state, and federal land have 

disrupted or fragmented habitat, displaced 

individuals, or otherwise caused stress to 

animals. Incremental development of the 

region has changed the capacity of habitats to 

provide necessary food, shelter and mating 

territory, resulting in the decrease of population numbers. Past impacts on threatened and 

endangered species in the region from human 

activities have been moderate to major and 

adverse. 

Establishment of the national historical park 

has resulted in long-term benefits for special 

status species. Acquisition of the natural areas 

has curtailed development and allowed more 

natural environmental processes to occur. 

These protected areas in the national 

historical park will become increasingly 

important in providing quality habitat for rare 

species in the region. 

Given the lack of information regarding the 

exact extent of impacts outside the national 

historical park, it is difficult to assess the 

relative scope of the impacts of this alternative 

compared to current and anticipated future 

actions in the region. 

Residential development in Maryland and 

West Virginia would continue to reduce 

habitat for special status species, resulting in 

long-term minor to moderate adverse impacts 

on these species. 

This alternative would contribute an adverse 

component to the impacts of other past, 

present and reasonably foreseeable future 

actions, and the cumulative impacts to listed, 

candidate or other special status species 

would be moderate and adverse. 

Conclusion — There would be no effect 

on Indiana bats or federal species of concern 

as a result of this alternative. Cumulative 

impacts to listed, candidate or other special 

status species would be moderate and adverse. 

No impairment of a special status species 

would occur as a result of this alternative. 

Soundscapes 

Rerouting a 4-lane US 340 out of the river 

valley would result in long-term, moderate 

beneficial impacts to soundscapes in most 

areas of the national historical park. Moving 

the maintenance facility out of the national 

historical park would eliminate the noise 

related to that facility on Camp Hill resulting 

in a long-term, minor beneficial impact. 

216 
Impacts of Alternative 3 

Construction of visitor facilities and 

rehabilitation of NPS offices would cause 

temporary impacts on the soundscape in 

localized sites during construction. Similar 

impacts would occur during removal of 

Shipley School and construction of a 

curatorial building on Camp Hill. These 

impacts would be short-term, minor to 

moderate, and adverse. 

Human-related noise from increased 

visitation in areas that are now rarely visited 

such as Schoolhouse Ridge and the Murphy 

farm could cause a negligible adverse impact. 

Natural soundscapes in the outlying areas 

(Scenic/Natural Preservation Zone and most 

of the Cultural Landscape Zone) would not be 

affected. 

Cumulative Effects — Portions of the 

national historical park are located in an 

urban setting where human-caused sounds 

tend to dominate. Lower Town has been part 

of a noisy, bustling community for almost 200 

years. Because the national historical park’s 

purpose is to preserve and interpret historic 

resources, most visitors do not come here 

expecting the quieter, intermittent sounds of 

nature. However, this experience is available 

in the natural areas. 

Disruptions come from human activities 

inside and outside the national historical park. 

Traffic on Highway 340 creates constant 

noise, and trains on the rail lines create considerable aural impacts throughout the day. 

Sounds of a modern town, such as vehicles, 

phones, and air-conditioning, have intruded 

on the historic setting in Lower Town. 

Continuing trends of population growth in the 

area would result in additional adverse 

impacts on natural soundscapes. 

This alternative would contribute a moderate 

beneficial impact and negligible adverse 

impact to the combined effects of other past, 

present and foreseeable future actions, 

resulting in beneficial cumulative impacts on 

the national historical park's soundscapes. 

Conclusion — Alternative 3 would result 

in short-term minor to moderate adverse 

impacts, long-term moderate beneficial 

impacts, and long-term negligible adverse 

impacts on soundscapes in the national 

historical park. There would be beneficial 

cumulative impacts. No impairment of a key 

national historical park resource or value 

would result from this alternative. 

Lightscapes 

Following NPS policy, existing outdoor 

lighting that is found to be contributing to 

nighttime light pollution will be replaced with 

fixtures that are more sensitive to the 

resource. In addition, any new outdoor 

lighting installed as a result of implementing 

this alternative would be the minimum 

necessary for safety or security and of a design 

that prevents stray light from spreading 

upwards into the sky. NPS staff would work 

with surrounding communities on ways to 

decrease light pollution in the region. With 

these standard practices, this alternative 

would have a long-term, minor beneficial 

impact on the national historical park’s 

lightscape. 

Cumulative Effects — The clarity of night 

skies over the national historical park have 

been diminished by artificial light sources 

both within and outside the park that create a 

light haze obscuring views of stars and distant 

topographic features. The primary culprit is 

outdoor lighting of a type that allows light to 

shine up into the sky. Outdoor lighting is 

common throughout the region, including 

inside national historical park boundaries. 

Creation of the national historical park’s 

natural areas has a long-term beneficial impact 

by maintaining lightless areas. 

217 
CHAPTER 4: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

As development in the areas around the park 

increases, the amount of light pollution would 

likely increase. 

This alternative would contribute a beneficial 

impact to these effects, reducing the overall 

cumulative effects to minor and adverse. 

Conclusion — This alternative would 

have a long-term, minor beneficial impact on 

lightscapes. Overall cumulative effects would 

be minor and adverse. There would be no 

impairment of a key national historical park 

resource or value as a result of this alternative. 

VISITOR EXPERIENCE 

Under alternative 3, national historical park 

visitors would have an opportunity to engage 

in a large variety of recreational activities, have 

access to new facilities, and participate in new 

interactive experiences. More areas of the 

national historical park would become 

available to visit under this alternative. 

Connections to regional trails and the establishment of a joint NPS/city bus system with 

regularly scheduled routes would provide 

moderate long term beneficial impacts on 

visitors and local community residents. 

Lower Town 

Lower Town would be revitalized as a 19th 

century community through authentic shops 

selling period goods and additional historical 

interpretation and demonstrations in this 

alternative. Visitors would receive a larger 

variety of interpretive programs presented by 

park partners or NPS staff. All presentations 

would follow NPS standards. A clear line of 

distinction would be made so visitors could 

determine which services were available via 

the national historical park and that were 

available through the contractor. Modern 

intrusions such as vehicles would be regulated 

during heavy use periods. These actions 

would provide a more interactive and engaging experience resulting in long-term minor to 

moderate beneficial impacts. Some 

contractor-provided services may be for a fee 

which could cause minor adverse impacts on 

visitors. 

Federal Armory 

Under this alternative, there would be on-site 

interpretation of the armory grounds. 

Foundations of the historic structures would 

be marked so that visitors could visualize the 

layout of the armory. These actions would 

provide a minor to moderate long term 

beneficial impact on the visitor experience at 

this location. 

Potomac Frontage/Armory Canal 

A foot path with wayside interpretive panels 

would be constructed along the historic 

armory canal. This would open a new 

opportunity for visitors to walk and possibly 

ride bicycles resulting in long-term minor 

beneficial impacts to visitor experience at this 

location. 

Virginius and Hall’s Islands 

The addition of interpretive displays or signs 

on both islands and a new discovery trail 

would improve visitor experience and 

understanding of the islands. 

Bolivar Heights 

Bolivar Heights would continue to be maintained to resemble its historic appearance. 

Interpretation would relate this site to 

Schoolhouse Ridge Battlefield north. 

Regularly scheduled historical demonstrations 

would be provided for a fee by national 

historical park partners. This would be a 

beneficial impact. Visitors could access this 

218 
Impacts of Alternative 3 

location via the NPS/city bus system which 

would result in a minor beneficial impact. 

Camp Hill 

The ground floors of the Lockwood House on 

Camp Hill would be opened to the public to 

provide interpretive opportunities. 

Interpretation of Storer College and the 

historic structures would be moved to here 

from Lower Town. 

Enhanced fee-based interpretive programs 

would be considered. Installation of more 

accurate lighting and landscaping would 

occur. These actions would improve visitor 

understanding of the history of Camp Hill and 

result in minor beneficial impacts to visitor 

experience at this location. 

Cavalier Heights 

The new visitor center would be the primary 

location for national historical park and 

regional visitor information. It would be 

jointly operated with state and local tourism 

offices. 

Visitors would learn about elements of all the 

primary interpretive themes and would 

receive a substantial increase in interpretive 

opportunities over the no-action alternative. 

Additionally, visitors would better understand 

and appreciate the thematic and physical links 

to the cultural and natural resources of the 

national historical park. 

These actions would have long-term 

moderate beneficial impacts on visitor 

experience. 

Maryland Heights, Loudoun 

Heights, and Short Hill 

The recreational opportunities now available 

at these national historical park locations, 

such as hiking, viewing historic sites, and 

observing nature, would continue. Existing 

trails and vegetation clearings would be 

maintained. Visitors would access these areas 

on their own. 

Schoolhouse Ridge Battlefield 

Sites along Schoolhouse Ridge would be 

maintained to resemble their historic agricultural appearance. On-site interpretation 

and walking trails would be added to provide 

understanding of the events that took place 

here. A primitive campsite would be provided 

for organized groups on Schoolhouse Ridge 

north. Visitors would have opportunities to 

participate in site demonstrations, overnight 

at a primitive campground, and embrace 

history and make a connection with the 

natural and cultural resource. This would 

result in long-term moderate beneficial impacts to visitor experience at these locations. 

The Murphy Farm 

Visitor amenities such as a parking area, 

restrooms, and maintained trails would be 

constructed in this alternative. On-site 

interpretation of the Civil War earthworks, 

John Brown’s Fort foundation, and the 

Niagara Movement would be added. These 

improvements would aid visitor 

understanding of this site and result in longterm beneficial impacts to visitor experience. 

The Nash Farm 

Establishment of a resource education 

institute using the historic leasing program on 

the Nash farm would improve the outreach 

and education programs. While most national 

historical park visitors may not benefit from 

this or have access to the site, the regional 

community would receive long-term 

beneficial effects. 

 

219 
CHAPTER 4: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

Cumulative Effects 

Tourists encounter a variety of opportunities 

in the three-state region centered on the 

confluence of the Shenandoah and Potomac 

rivers. Some of the choices are: visiting Civil 

War battlefields and other historic sites, going 

to the races in Charles Town, river rafting, 

taking short walks, and long-distance hiking. 

Additional long- and short-distance 

multipurpose trails are planned for the region. 

Access to improved trail systems would be a 

long-term benefit to visitor experience. 

Other national park system units contributing 

to the educational and recreational opportunities in the region include Monocacy 

National Battlefield, Antietam National 

Battlefield, Chesapeake & Ohio Canal 

National Historical Park, Appalachian 

National Scenic Trail, and Potomac Heritage 

National Scenic Trail. The national historical 

park is also an officially designated site of the 

Lewis and Clark National Historic Trail. The 

states of Virginia and Maryland both have 

advertised programs called Civil War Trails 

that connect the various Civil War sites in 

those states. Harpers Ferry is associated with 

many of these programs. 

Current and future partnerships between the 

National Park Service, concessioners, local 

businesses, and other federal and state 

historical sites will improve interpretation and 

visitor opportunities in the region. These 

partnerships provide additional interpretation, orientation, and visitor access to facilities 

and services and will improve the visitors 

experience at the national historical park and 

in the region. For example, having partners 

distribute national historical park material and 

orientation information will assist current and 

future visitors before they arrive at the 

national historical park. 

This variety of high-quality experience 

opportunities leads to an overall beneficial 

effect. Alternative 3 would result in long-term 

minor to moderate beneficial impacts. When 

the effects of this alternative are combined 

with other past, present, and future actions, 

the overall cumulative effect on visitor 

experience would be minor and beneficial. 

Conclusion 

Implementing alternative 3 would result in 

long-term minor to moderate beneficial 

impacts on visitor experience. When the 

effects of this alternative are combined with 

other past, present, and future actions, the 

overall cumulative effect on visitor experience 

would be minor and beneficial. 

SOCIOECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT 

In alternative 3, the National Park Service 

would provide an increased connection with 

business and public/private organizations to 

(1) greatly enhance visitor opportunities and 

programming, (2) fully use the national 

historical park’s historic structures, (3) add 

greater vitality to the national historical park 

and the economic conditions in the gateway 

communities, and (4) allow for contemporary 

adaptive leases of historic structures for nonNPS purposes. This alternative expands on 

the concept of Harpers Ferry’s heritage 

tourism objectives by blurring the boundary 

line between the historic business district and 

the national historical park. 

Visitation to the national historical park is 

expected to be greatest under this alternative 

because it brings a 19th century community to 

life. There would be an opportunity to 

increase regional and national marketing of 

visitor opportunities by our private and 

nonprofit partners. A greater diversity of 

opportunities, such as fee-based tours and 

activities, more special events, the potential 

for a weekend excursion train originating 

from Washington D.C., and the potential for 

day and overnight trip opportunities would be 

available for a wider range of visitors. It is 

expected that repeat visitors and longer stays 

220 
Impacts of Alternative 3 

would contribute to the increase in visitation 

since programs would be more varied over 

time. Spending by visitors in the national 

historical park and in the local and regional 

communities for meals, lodging, and other 

goods and services would be expected to 

increase above current levels. This would lead 

to a long-term, moderate beneficial effect on 

the economy of the gateway communities and 

a long-term minor beneficial effect on the 

regional economy. 

In alternative 3, the public and private partnerships that would add life and excitement in 

Lower Town could result in greater commercial activities that could benefit local governments in the form of increased business and 

occupation taxes. This would have a longterm moderate beneficial effect on the 

gateway communities. 

The National Park Service would explore 

contemporary, adaptive interior uses of 

historic structures that could generate 

revenue for the national historical park, 

increase the number of business opportunities 

in the gateway communities, and encourage 

new visitors to the national historical park. 

This action would have a long-term moderate 

beneficial effect on the economy of the 

gateway communities and a long-term, minor 

beneficial effect on the regional economy. 

The National Park Service would continue to 

financially support some of the physical 

infrastructure in the gateway communities, 

and the national historical park’s annual 

operating expenditures would continue to 

provide revenue for area businesses. The NPS 

budget originates from outside the local and 

regional economy through congressional 

appropriations, but the funds are spent and 

recycled primarily in the gateway 

communities and the regional economy, thus 

providing ongoing benefits. 

The capital improvement budget of the 

national historical park to implement this 

alternative would provide short-term 

revenues in the gateway communities and 

regional economy. In alternative 3 it is 

expected that dollars available for capital 

improvement would increase if revenue from 

contemporary use leases could be returned to 

the national historical park and result in a 

long-term, minor beneficial impact on the 

gateway communities and a long-term, 

negligible beneficial effect on the regional 

economy. 

Cumulative Impacts 

In the past, Harpers Ferry National Historical 

Park had a growing visitation and then a 

decline to a stable annual visitation. The 

national historical park’s operational budget 

remains stable but is not keeping up with 

inflation. Another effect on the national 

historical park’s budget is the NPS response to 

other federal mandates that also contributed 

to a decline of permanent and seasonal NPS 

staff. The capital improvement program has 

varied by year with substantial increases and 

declines, and the program will continue to 

have short-term benefits. 

As the national historical park’s budget 

declines or remains relatively stable, there 

would be less revenue to flow through the 

local economy. The size of the NPS 

permanent and seasonal staff continues to 

decline, having a long-term, moderate adverse 

effect on the economy of the gateway 

communities and a long-term, minor adverse 

effect on the regional economy. 

The national historical park has a distinct but 

small fit in the overall size of the regional tourism industry. Both the gateway communities 

and the regional economies have growing 

populations and housing trends that have a 

substantially larger influence on the socioeconomic conditions than that contributed by the 

existence of the national historical park. 

These trends are expected to continue into 

the future. 

221 
CHAPTER 4: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

The impacts of these other actions in 

combination with the impacts of alternative 3 

would result in a long-term, moderate 

beneficial cumulative effects in the gateway 

communities and long-term, minor 

cumulative effects on the regional economy. 

Conclusion 

Implementing alternative 3 would have a longterm moderate beneficial effect on the 

economy of the gateway communities and a 

long-term, minor beneficial effect on the 

regional economy. This alternative would 

result in long-term, moderate beneficial 

cumulative effects in the gateway communities 

and long-term, minor beneficial cumulative 

effects on the regional economy. Alternative 3 

would contribute a substantial increment to 

the overall cumulative effect on the economy 

of the gateway communities and a small 

increment to the regional economy. 

NPS OPERATIONS 

Implementing alternative 3 would result in 

changes to NPS staffing and workloads. In 

addition to projects already underway, 

construction of a new visitor center and 

facilities in outlying areas would need staff 

attention. This would result in short-term, 

minor adverse impacts on NPS operations. 

Long-term impacts on NPS programs from 

having a new visitor center would be 

beneficial. 

NPS managerial and administrative staff 

would be moved into consolidated office 

space somewhere in Harpers Ferry or 

Bolivar— a long-term, minor beneficial 

impact. Short-term, minor adverse impacts 

would occur during the move. 

Mixed impacts on NPS operations would 

result from moving the main maintenance 

functions to a new facility outside the national 

historical park. This would eliminate 

problems associated with moving heavy 

equipment and receiving material from semitrucks on narrow residential streets. The new 

facility would be designed with improved 

efficiency and adequate size for offices, 

storage, equipment bays, etc. Adverse impacts 

on NPS operations could result from this 

move as the facility would not be owned by 

the National Park Service. Its operation may 

have restrictions from the property owner and 

lease payments would need to be made. 

Payments could be reduced if the facility was 

operated in partnership with other entities. 

Depending on where the facility is located, 

adverse impacts from the additional travel to 

the national historical park would be 

negligible to minor. 

Seasonal or event-driven regulation of 

vehicles in Lower Town may have a shortterm adverse effect on NPS operations in 

terms of administrative access until NPS staff 

adjusts their schedules to accommodate the 

restrictions. 

The Appalachian National Scenic Trail within 

the national historical park would continue to 

be maintained to its current standard. The 

trail managers at Harpers Ferry would 

cooperate on a new sign plan to assist visitors 

in hiking the Appalachian National Scenic 

Trail through Harpers Ferry National 

Historical Park and providing information on 

the Potomac Heritage National Scenic Trail 

and the Lewis and Clark National Historic 

Trail. This would result in beneficial impacts 

to all these entities. 

Cumulative Effects 

In general, the NPS staff is faced with a rising 

workload resulting from new NPS initiatives 

and program requirements. Static base 

funding does not allow hiring additional 

employees to alleviate the workload. This 

creates stress on the employees and some 

needed projects are not completed due to lack 

of time or funding. 

222 
Impacts of Alternative 3 

223 

This alternative would contribute short-term 

adverse effects and long-term beneficial 

impacts on the effects listed above. The 

cumulative effects on NPS operations would 

be negligible and beneficial. 

Conclusion 

Alternative 3 would have short-term, minor 

adverse impacts and long-term, minor 

beneficial impacts on NPS operations. The 

cumulative effects on NPS operations would 

be negligible and beneficial. 

UNAVOIDABLE MODERATE TO 

MAJOR ADVERSE EFFECTS 

Under alternative 3, there would be a slight 

increase in the development footprint as new 

or expanded structures are constructed at 

Murphy Farm, Bolivar Heights, Schoolhouse 

Ridge Battlefield, and on Cavalier Heights. 

This would result in unavoidable minor 

adverse impacts. There are no actions in any 

of the alternatives that would result in 

unavoidable major adverse impacts on 

resources or visitor enjoyment. 

IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE 

COMMITMENTS OF RESOURCES 

Changes to the configuration and use of 

historic buildings for purposes of adaptive 

reuse could impact historic fabric. As a result, 

visitor traffic use patterns could change. These 

alterations in use would have the potential to 

impact new areas of buildings and could result 

in irreversible loss of historic fabric. 

Implementing this alternative would result in 

the irretrievable loss of approximately 4 acres 

of vegetation and soil productivity due to 

construction of facilities. 

RELATIONSHIP OF SHORT-TERM 

USES OF THE ENVIRONMENT AND 

THE MAINTENANCE AND 

ENHANCEMENT OF LONG-TERM 

PRODUCTIVITY 

The purpose of Harpers Ferry National 

Historical Park is to preserve and commemorate the (developed) location of historic 

events. However, under all alternatives, the 

majority of the national historical park would 

be in the scenic and natural preservation zone 

which does not allow development. The 

National Park Service would continue to 

manage these areas under all alternatives to 

maintain natural ecological processes and 

native biological communities. Any actions 

taken by NPS staff would be intended to 

ensure that human uses do not adversely 

affect the productivity of existing natural 

biotic communities. 

Under alternative 3 there would be a slight 

increase in the development footprint as new 

or expanded structures are constructed at 

Murphy Farm, Bolivar Heights Schoolhouse 

Ridge Battlefield, Camp Hill, and on Cavalier 

Heights. However, this would not result in a 

substantial loss of long-term productivity 

because these areas are all previously 

disturbed and not in a natural state.

Chapter 5

Consultation and Coordination

PUBLIC AND AGENCY INVOLVEMENT 

The Draft General Management Plan and 

Environmental Impact Statement for Harpers 

Ferry National Historical Park represents 

thoughts of the National Park Service 

planning team, NPS staff, and the public. 

Consultation and coordination among the 

agencies and the public were vitally important 

throughout the planning process. The public 

could participate during the development of 

the plan in public meetings, with responses to 

newsletters, and in comment letters. 

PUBLIC MEETINGS 

AND NEWSLETTERS 

Public meetings and newsletters were used to 

keep the public informed and involved in the 

planning process for Harpers Ferry General 

Management Plan. A mailing list was compiled 

that consisted of members of governmental 

agencies, organizations, businesses, legislators, 

local governments, and interested citizens. 

The notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement was published in the 

Federal Register on August 28, 2003. 

The first newsletter issued in November 2003 

described the planning effort and solicited 

ideas from the public. Public meetings were 

held during January 2004 in Shepherdstown 

and Harpers Ferry, West Virginia. The 

National Park Service also met with city, 

county, and state agencies numerous times in 

2003 and 2004. The National Park Service 

received comments in the meetings and in the 

response to the first newsletter. These 

comments were considered by the planning 

team when developing the alternatives. 

A second newsletter, distributed in May 2004, 

described the draft alternative concepts for 

managing the national historical park. 

Although comments were not solicited, 

numerous comments were received in 

response. The comments offered ideas on 

how to improve the alternatives. 

AGENCIES AND ORGANIZATIONS TO 

WHICH THIS DOCUMENT WAS SENT 

Federal Agencies 

Advisory Council on Historic Preservation 

Department of Homeland Security 

Federal Emergency Management Agency 

Harpers Ferry Job Corp 

Library of Congress 

U.S. Customs Service 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

West Virginia Field Office 

Chesapeake Bay Field Office, Maryland 

Ecological Services, Gloucester, Virginia 

National Conservation Training Center 

U.S. Geological Survey 

Leestown Science Center 

Other NPS Offices 

Antietam National Battlefield 

Appalachian National Scenic Trail 

C&O Canal National Historical Park 

Harpers Ferry Interpretive Design Center 

Historic Preservation Training Center 

Mather Training Center 

Monocacy National Battlefield 

National Capital Region 

American Battlefield Protection Program 

Potomac Heritage National Scenic Trail 

State Agencies 

Maryland Department of Housing and 

Community Development 

Maryland Department of Natural 

Resources 

 Wildlife and Heritage Division 

 Resource Management Services 

227 
CHAPTER 5: CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION

Maryland Historical Trust 

Maryland State Historic Preservation 

Office 

Virginia Association for Parks 

Virginia Department of Conservation and 

Recreation 

Virginia Department of Game and Inland 

Fisheries 

Virginia Department of Historic 

Resources 

Virginia State Historic Preservation 

Office 

Virginia Department of Recreation and 

Conservation 

Virginia Outdoors Foundation 

West Virginia Conservation Agency 

West Virginia Department of Natural 

Resources 

West Virginia Department of Transportation 

West Virginia Division of Rehabilitation 

Service 

West Virginia Division of Tourism 

West Virginia Small Business Development 

Center 

West Virginia Division of Culture and History 

West Virginia State Historic 

Preservation Office 

Elected Officials 

Maryland 

Senator Benjamin L. Cardin 

Senator Barbara A. Mikulski 

Representative Wayne Gilchrest 

Representative Roscoe Bartlett 

Representative John P. Sarbanes 

Representative Donna F. Edwards 

Representative Steny H. Hoyer 

Representative Elijah E. Cummings 

Representative Christopher Van Hollen, Jr. 

Representative C. A. Dutch Ruppersberger 

III 

Governor Martin O’Malley 

Virginia 

Senator John W. Warner 

Senator Jim Webb 

Representative Robert J. Wittman 

Representative Robert C. Scott 

Representative J. Randy Forbes 

Representative Virgil H. Goode, Jr. 

Representative Eric Cantor 

Representative Rick Boucher 

Representative Frank R. Wolf 

Representative Thomas M. Davis III 

Representative Thelma D. Drake 

Representative Bob Goodlatte 

Representative James P. Moran 

Governor Tim Kaine 

West Virginia 

Senator Robert C. Byrd 

Senator John D. Rockefeller 

Representative Nick J. Rahal II 

Representative Alan B. Mollohan 

Representative Shelley Moore Capito 

Governor Joe Manchin III 

Local/Regional/National 

Organizations and Media 

American Association for State and Local 

History 

American Association of Retired 

Persons, Jefferson County Chapter 

American Civil War Society 

American Farmland Trust 

Appalachian Trail Conservancy 

Appalachian Trail Museum Society 

Arlington National Cemetery 

Arts and Humanities Alliance of 

Jefferson County 

Audubon Naturalistic Society of the 

Central Atlantic States 

Berkley County 

Berkeley County Development Authority 

Berkeley County Historical Society 

Berkeley Springs/Morgan County 

Chamber of Commerce 

Big Brothers/Big Sisters of Eastern 

Panhandle 

Black Heritage Museum 

Blue Heron Environmental Network Inc. 

Bolivar, West Virginia 

Bolivar Community Center 

Bolivar/Harpers Ferry Public Library 

228 
Public and Agency Involvement 

Boy Scout Troop 32 (WV) 

Boy Scouts of America, Shenandoah Area 

Council 

Boys and Girls Club of Jefferson County 

Catoctin Center for Regional Studies 

Center for the Study of Public History and 

Public Culture, Dr. James Horton 

Banneker, Professor of American Studies 

and History 

Charles Town Kiwanis 

Citizens for Jefferson’s Future 

City of Bedington 

City of Berryville 

City of Brunswick 

City of Frederick 

City of Hagerstown 

City of Hamilton 

City of Leesburg 

City of Martinsburg 

City of Middleburg 

City of Purcellville 

Civil War Round Table Association 

Civil War Round Table of the District of 

Columbia 

Civil War Society 

Clarke County Office of Economic 

Development (VA) 

Clarke County Planning Department (VA) 

Claymont Society for Continuous Education 

Conservation Fund 

Corporation of Harpers Ferry 

Corporation of Shepherdstown 

Council on America’s Military Past 

Eastern Panhandle Native Plant Society 

Fort Frederick State Park 

Fort Ward Museum 

Frederick County Administrative Offices 

Frederick County Board of County 

Commissioners 

Frederick County Chamber of 

Commerce 

Frederick County Civil War Round 

Table 

Frederick County Division of Planning 

Friends of Harpers Ferry National Historical 

Park 

Friends of Monocacy Battlefield 

Gathland State Park 

George Tyler Moore Center for the Study of 

the Civil War 

Germantown, MD 

Gettysburg College Civil War Institute 

Girl Scouts of the USA 

Greenbriar State Park 

Harpers Ferry Civil War Round Table 

Harper’s Ferry Conservancy 

Harpers Ferry Garden Club 

Harpers Ferry Historical Association 

Harpers Ferry Main Street 

Harpers Ferry Merchants Association 

Harpers Ferry Women's Club Region VII 

Workforce Investment Board 

Historic Shepherdstown and the Historic 

Shepherdstown Museum 

Historic Sites Consortium 

Homeowner’s Associations in Jefferson 

County 

Howard University 

 Dr. Medford, Department of History 

 Joseph Reidy, Department of History 

Jefferson County Chamber of Commerce 

Jefferson County Commissioners 

Jefferson County Convention & Visitor 

Bureau 

Jefferson County Development Authority 

Jefferson County Economic Development 

Jefferson County Historical Society 

Jefferson County League of Women Voters 

Jefferson County Museum 

Jefferson County Parks and Recreation 

Jefferson County Rafting Businesses 

Jefferson County Realtors 

Jefferson County Visitor Center 

Jefferson County Watersheds Coalition 

Land Trust of the Eastern Panhandle 

Loudoun County 

Loudoun County Chapter, Izaak Walton 

League of America 

Loudoun County Civil War Round Table 

Loudoun Convention and Visitors 

Association 

Loudoun County Small Business 

Development Center 

Loudoun County Chapter 

Loudoun Wildlife Conservancy 

Main Street Loudoun 

Main Street Martinsburg (WV) 

229 
CHAPTER 5: CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION

Martinsburg/Berkeley County Chamber of 

Commerce 

Maryland Environmental Trust 

Maryland Historical Society 

Maryland Native Plant Society 

Maryland Ornithological Society, Inc. 

Morgan County 

Morgan County Citizen’s Coalition 

Morgan County Economic Development 

Authority 

Museum of the Confederacy 

NAACP Jefferson County Branch (WV) 

NAACP Environmental Justice Program 

National Audubon Society 

National Park Foundation 

National Parks and Conservation Association 

National Trust for Public Lands 

Northern Virginia Association of Historians 

Odd Fellows 

Old Dominion University 

Piedmont Garden Club 

Potomac Appalachian Trail Club 

Potomac-Mecklenburg Garden Club 

Potomac Valley Audubon Society 

Save Historic Antietam Foundation 

Shenandale Garden Club 

Shepherd College 

Shenandoah University 

Shepherdstown Kiwanis 

Shepherdstown Rotary Club 

Shephardstown Visitors Center 

Sierra Club, Eastern Panhandle Chapter 

Sierra Club, Maryland Chapter 

Small Business Development Center, Virginia 

and West Virginia 

Sons of Union Veterans of the Civil War 

South Mountain State Park 

Storer College Alumni Association 

The Civil War Preservation Trust 

The Kiplinger Washington Editors, Inc. 

The Nature Conservancy (WV, Yankauer 

Preserve) 

Town of Leesburg 

Town of Winchester 

Tourism Council of Frederick County 

USA Military History Institute 

Virginia Association for Parks 

Virginia Canals and Navigation Society 

Virginia Conservation Network 

Virginia Native Plant Society 

Virginia Outdoors Foundation 

Virginia Society of Ornithology 

Washington County 

Washington Monument State Park 

West Virginia Highlands Conservancy 

West Virginia University 

 Kearneysville Tree Fruit Research and 

Education Center 

West Virginia Wildlife Federation Inc. 

Winchester, VA 

Businesses 

AB&C Group, Inc. 

Accounting Services Ltd. 

Anglers Inn 

Angles Home Service 

Automated Merchandising Systems 

Bakerton Market 

Bank of Charles Town 

Bavarian Inn 

Bedington Ruritan Club 

Between the Rivers Bed &Breakfast 

Blue Ridge Management 

Blue Ridge Management Realty 

Blue Ridge Properties 

Bolivar Court Apartments 

Boydsville Inn 

Briscoe B&B 

Burch Manufacturing 

Charles Town Races 

Charles Town Realty 

Claymont Court Bed & Breakfast 

Comfort Inn Comfort Suites 

Cool font Resort 

Country Café 

Country Inn & Spa 

CSX Corporation 

DALB, Inc. 

Dan Ryan Builders 

Eastern Management Development Center 

ERA Liberty of Harpers Ferry 

ERA Liberty Realty 

Farmhouse on Tomahawk Run B&B 

Folkstone Bed & Breakfast 

Frank's Blueridge Grocery 

Frederick Chamber of Commerce 

230 
Public and Agency Involvement 

Fridley Enterprise 

Gilbert House Bed & Breakfast Glens Country 

Estate 

Ghost Tours of Harpers Ferry 

Harpers Ferry Guest House 

Harpers Ferry KOA and Conference Center 

Harpers Ferry Merchant Association 

Harpers Ferry Realty 

Hartwood Mansion 

Highway Inn 

Hillbrook Inn 

Hilltop House 

ICT Group 

Jason's Antiques 

Jefferson Asphalt Products Co., Inc. 

Jefferson County Bed and Breakfasts 

Judy's Pet Sitting 

Juke Joint 

Jumpin Java 

Kent Cartridge of West Virginia 

Kiddie Fire Fighting/Automated Sprinkler 

King's Pizza & Italian Restaurant KOA 

Campgrounds 

KRM Associates, Inc. 

Lowe Products 

Manor Inn Bed & Breakfast 

Maple Creek, Inc. 

Maria's Garden & Inn 

McCarthy Time 

McMahon & Sons 

Mill Creek Manor Bed & Breakfast 

Millennium Style 

Millville Quarry 

Mountain House Café 

Norm Thompson Outfitters, Inc. 

North Gate Inn 

Old Dittmeyer House Outfitter 

Olde Tyme Christmas in Harpers Ferry 

Quality Inn & Conference Center 

Ranson Convention & Visitor Center 

Re/Max in Action 

Recreational Adventure Campgrounds 

Republic Paperboard Company 

River Rider 

River and Trail Outfitters 

Royal Vendors, Inc. 

Schonstedt Instruments 

Schwans Enterprises 

Shenandoah Construction Management, 

L.L.C. 

Small Business Development Center 

South Mountain Relic and Coin 

Specialty Binding & Printing 

Spectratech 

Stone House Antiques 

Summit Point Raceway 

The Anvil Restaurant 

The Last Resort 

The Outfitters at Harpers Ferry 

The Swiss Miss 

Turf Motel 

Twins Mountain Retreat 

Waterside Restaurant 

Woods Resort & Conference 

Center 

Yesterday's Treasures 

SECTION 7 CONSULTATION 

(ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT) 

During the preparation of this document, 

NPS staff consulted informally with the U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service Offices in West 

Virginia, Maryland, and Virginia. The list of 

threatened and endangered species (see 

appendix C) was compiled using lists and 

information received from the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service. 

In accordance with the Endangered Species 

Act and relevant regulations at 50 CFR Part 

402, the National Park Service determined 

that the management plan is not likely to 

adversely affect any federally threatened or 

endangered species and sent a copy of this 

draft management plan to the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service with a request for written 

concurrence with that determination. 

In addition, the National Park Service has 

committed to consult on future actions 

conducted under the framework described in 

this management plan to ensure that such 

actions are not likely to adversely affect 

threatened or endangered species. 

 

231 
CHAPTER 5: CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION

232 

SECTION 106 CONSULTATION 

Agencies that have direct or indirect 

jurisdiction over historic properties are 

required by Section 106 of the National 

Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended 

(16 USC 470, et seq.) to take into account the 

effect of any undertaking on properties 

eligible for listing in the National Register of 

Historic Places. To meet the requirements of 

36 CFR 800, the National Park Service sent 

letters to the state historic preservation 

officers in West Virginia, Maryland, and 

Virginia, and the Advisory Council on 

Historic Preservation on January 6, 2004, 

informing them of the planning process and 

inviting their participation; their concerns 

have been incorporated into this plan (see 

letters in appendix F). All offices were sent all 

the newsletters with a request for comments. 

Under the terms of stipulation VI.E of the 

current programmatic agreement among the 

National Park Service, the Advisory Council 

on Historic Preservation, and the National 

Conference of State Historic Preservation 

Officers, the National Park Service, in 

consultation with the state historic 

preservation office (SHPO), will make a 

determination about which are programmatic 

exclusions under IV A and B, and all other 

undertakings, potential effects on those 

resources to seek review and comment under 

36 CFR 800.4-6 during the plan review 

process.
Public and Agency Involvement 

TABLE 15. FUTURE RESOURCE COMPLIANCE REQUIRED FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF SPECIFIC ACTIONS OF THE 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE (ALTERNATIVE 2)

ACTION COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENT 

LOWER TOWN

Rehabilitation of historic buildings for residences or offices on Further SHPO consultation necessary 

upper floors. 

Modification of "backyard" spaces for interpretive purposes. Further SHPO consultation necessary 

Location of historic structures marked or outlined on the 

green. 

Further SHPO consultation necessary 

Further SHPO consultation necessary Develop period authentic landscaping plan.

FEDERAL ARMORY

Locating and marking of Armory building foundations. Further SHPO consultation necessary 

Conduct archeological investigations prior to exposing/ Further SHPO consultation necessary 

ghosting foundations. 

Study feasibility of moving John Brown's Fort back to original Further SHPO consultation necessary 

location. 

Fee kiosk needed at train station. Further SHPO consultation necessary 

HALL’S/VIRGINIUS ISLANDS

Locating and marking of Armory building foundations. Further SHPO consultation necessary 

Wayside interpretive signs. No further SHPO consultation 

necessary 

Stabilize representative structural ruins. Further SHPO consultation necessary 

Development of a discovery trail. Further SHPO consultation necessary 

LOUDOUN HEIGHTS

Preparation of preservation plan for Civil War defensive Further SHPO consultation necessary 

works (e.g. camps and earthwork fortifications). 

No further SHPO consultation 

necessary 

Remove nonhistoric Sherwood House and develop location as 

Civil War overlook with interpretation, parking, and vista 

clearing. 

No further SHPO consultation 

necessary 

Maintain existing trails and evaluate need for new trails. 

Restore historic military line of fire vistas for interpretive Further SHPO consultation necessary 

purposes.

MARYLAND HEIGHTS

Preparation of preservation plan for Civil War defensive Further SHPO consultation necessary 

works (e.g., camps and earthwork fortifications). Historic 

roads continue to be used and maintained. 

Restore historic military line of fire vistas for interpretive 

purposes. 

Further SHPO consultation necessary 

233 
CHAPTER 5: CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION

ACTION COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENT 

SHORT HILL

Preparation of preservation plan for Civil War defensive Further SHPO consultation necessary 

works (e.g., camps and earthwork fortifications). 

No further SHPO consultation 

necessary 

Preserved as natural area, viewshed (backdrop for view from 

Jefferson Rock). 

CAMP HILL 

Marking existing Storer building foundations. Further SHPO consultation necessary 

Rehabilitation of Shipley School. Further SHPO consultation necessary 

Rehabilitation and adaptive reuse of historic buildings’ first Further SHPO consultation necessary 

floor for interpretation and upper floors for lease or NPS 

purposes. 

Development of satellite maintenance facilities in outlying Further SHPO consultation necessary 

locations. 

Development and implementation of period lighting plan. Further SHPO consultation necessary 

Landscape modified to represent college campus landscape. Further SHPO consultation necessary 

No further SHPO consultation 

necessary 

Historically appropriate tree species would be planted. 

BOLIVAR HEIGHTS

Preparation of preservation plan for Civil War defensive Further SHPO consultation necessary 

works (e.g. camps and earthwork fortifications). 

No further SHPO consultation 

necessary 

Heights maintained as a battlefield landscape. 

restrooms/drinking water. Further SHPO consultation necessary 

NASH FARM

Preserve exteriors as dairy farm for original appearance. Further SHPO consultation necessary 

No further SHPO consultation 

necessary 

Field/meadow is maintained for agricultural purposes. 

Adaptive reuse of interiors at Nash Farm. Further SHPO consultation necessary 

POTOMAC TERRACE

Adaptive reuse of Grandview School for protection services Further SHPO consultation necessary 

use. 

No further SHPO consultation 

necessary 

Exterior wayside panel at Grandview for interpretation as 

segregated school. 

234 
Public and Agency Involvement 

ACTION COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENT 

CAVALIER HEIGHTS

No further SHPO consultation 

necessary 

Construction of multipurpose visitor center entrance 

complex. 

Development actions requiring ground disturbance. Further SHPO consultation necessary 

SCHOOLHOUSE RIDGE BATTLEFIELD, NORTH AND 

SOUTH WORKS 

Preparation of preservation plan for Civil War defensive Further SHPO consultation necessary 

works (e.g., camps and earthwork fortifications). 

No further SHPO consultation 

necessary 

No further SHPO consultation 

necessary 

Further SHPO consultation necessary 

No further SHPO consultation 

necessary 

Remove houses and structures not eligible for inclusion in the 

National Register of Historic Places. 

Restore landscape by removing former private campground. 

Historic structures would be evaluated in connection with 

restoration of cultural landscape. 

Maintained to 1862 historic landscape through agricultural 

leases. 

Develop satellite maintenance facility. Further SHPO consultation necessary 

Develop interpretive/hiking trails on existing roads. 

Use of location as historic demonstration area. 

Development of vault toilets.

No further SHPO consultation 

necessary 

Further SHPO consultation necessary 

Further SHPO consultation necessary 

POTOMAC FRONTAGE

Restore landscape by stabilizing canal walls and headgate 

structure for rewatering of canal. 

Power plant rehabbed for interpretive use. 

Turbine in power plant restored for interpretive 

demonstration. 

Further SHPO consultation necessary 

Further SHPO consultation necessary 

Further SHPO consultation necessary 

MURPHY FARM

Evaluate Chambers/Murphy house for adaptive reuse for NPS 

purposes. 

Stabilize and preserve John Brown's Fort foundation. 

Preparation of preservation plan for Civil War defensive 

works (e.g., camps and earthwork fortifications. 

Development of hiking trail. 

Development of parking area with bus turn-around. 

Further SHPO consultation necessary 

Further SHPO consultation necessary 

Further SHPO consultation necessary 

Further SHPO consultation necessary 

Further SHPO consultation necessary 

235 
CHAPTER 5: CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION

236 

ACTION COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENT 

POTOMA WAYSIDE

Upgrade toilet facilities. 

Hardened access at river take-out. 

Trail improved for safety or resource protection.

No further SHPO consultation 

necessary 

Further SHPO consultation necessary 

Further SHPO consultation necessary 

PARKWIDE 

Construction involving a waterway. 

Construction or other disturbing activity in habitat for 

threatened and endangered species.

Section 404 permit from Army Corp 

of Engineers 

Threatened and endangered species 

surveys and coordination with the 

USFWS and state natural resource 

departments 
Appendixes, Selected References, 

Preparers and Consultants, and Index

239

APPENDIX A: LEGISLATION
APPENDIXES

240
Appendix A: Legislation

241
APPENDIXES

242
Appendix A: Legislation

243
APPENDIXES

244
Appendix A: Legislation

245
APPENDIXES

246
APPENDIX B: LAWS AND EXECUTIVE ORDERS 

LEGAL CITATIONS 

NATIONAL PARK SERVICE ENABLING LEGISLATION 

Act of August 25, 1916 (National Park Service Organic Act), P.L. 64-235, 16 U.S.C. §1 et seq. as 

amended 

Act of March 3, 1933, 47 Stat. 1517 

Act to Improve the Administration of the National Park System, August 18, 1970; P.L. 91-383, 84 

Stat. 825, as amended by P.L. 94-458, P.L. 95-250, and P.L. 95-625; 16 U.S.C. § 1a1 et seq. 

General Authorities Act, October 7, 1976, P.L. 94-458, 90 Stat. 1939, 16 U.S.C. §1a-1 et seq

Act amending the Act of October 2, 1968 (commonly called Redwoods Act), March 27, 1978, P.L. 

95-250, 92 Stat. 163, 16 U.S.C. §§1a-1, 79a-q 

National Parks and Recreation Act, November 10, 1978, P.L. 95-625, 92 Stat. 3467; 16 U.S.C. §1 et 

seq. 

NPS resources, improve ability to manage, P.L. 101-337, 16 U.S.C. §19jj 

National Parks Omnibus Management Act of 1998, P.L. 105-391, Title IV, National Park Service 

Concessions Management Improvement Act of 1998 

OTHER LAWS AFFECTING NATIONAL PARK SERVICE 

Accessibility 

Americans with Disabilities Act, P.L. 101-336, 104 Stat. 327, 42 U.S.C. §12101 

Architectural Barriers Act of 1968, P.L. 90-480, 82 Stat. 718, 42 U.S.C. §4151 et seq. 

Architectural Barriers Act Accessibility Guidelines (5/8/06) 

Rehabilitation Act of 1973, P.L. 93-112, 87 Stat. 357, 29 U.S.C. §701 et seq. as amended by the 

Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1974, 88 Stat. 1617 

Cultural Resources 

American Indian Religious Freedom Act, P.L. 95-341, 92 Stat. 469, 42 U.S.C. §1996 

Antiquities Act of 1906, P.L. 59-209, 34 Stat. 225, 16 U.S.C. §432 and 43 CFR 3 

Archaeological and Historic Preservation Act of 1974, P.L. 93-291, 88 Stat. 174, 16 U.S.C. §469 

Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979, P.L. 96-95, 93 Stat. 712, 16 U.S.C. §470aa et seq

and 43 CFR 7, subparts A and B, 36 CFR 79 

Executive Order 13007: Indian Sacred Sites, May 24, 1996 

Historic Sites Act, P.L. 74-292, 49 Stat. 666, 16 U.S.C. §§ 461-467 and 36 CFR 65 

Historic Preservation Certifications Pursuant to the Tax Reform Act of 1976, the Revenue act of 

1978, the Tax Treatment Extension Act of 1980, and the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 

1981, 36 CFR 67 

Management of Museum Properties Act of 1955, P.L. 84-127, 69 Stat. 242, 16 U.S.C. §18f 

National Historic Preservation Act as amended, P.L. 89-665, 80 Stat. 915, 16 U.S.C. §470 et seq and 

36 CFR 18, 60, 61, 63, 68, 79, 800 

Native American Grave Protection and Repatriation Act, P.L. 101-601, 104 Stat. 3049, 25 U.S.C. 

§§3001-3013 

247 
APPENDIXES

Presidential Memorandum of April 29, 1994 “Government-to-Government Relations with Native 

American Tribal Governments,” 59 FR 85 

Public Buildings Cooperative Use Act of 1976, P.L. 94-541, 90 Stat. 2505, 42 U.S.C. §4151-4156 

World Heritage Convention, 1980, P.L. 96-515, 94 Stat. 3000 

Natural Resources 

Acid Precipitation Act of 1980, P.L. 96-294, 94 Stat. 770, 42 U.S.C. §8901 et seq

Bald and Golden Eagles Protection Act as amended, P.L. Chapter 28, 54 Stat 250, 16 U.S.C. §§668-

668d 

Clean Air Act as amended, P.L. Chapter 360, 69 Stat. 322, 42 U.S.C. §7401 et seq. 

Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act (commonly referred to 

as CERCLA or Superfund), P.L. 96-510, 94 Stat.2767, 42 U.S.C. §9601 et seq

Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, P.L. 93-205, 87 Stat. 884, 16 U.S.C. §1531 et seq. 

Endangered Species Conservation Act of 1969, 

Executive Order 11988: Floodplain Management, 42 FR 26951, 3 C.F.R. 121 (Supp 177) 

Executive Order 11990: Protection of Wetlands, 42 FR 26961, 3 C.F.R. 121 (Supp 177) 

Executive Order 11991: Protection and Enhancement of Environmental Quality 

Farmland Protection Policy Act of 1982, P.L. 97-98 

Federal Cave Resources Protection Act of 1988, P.L. 94-377, 102 Stat. 4546, 16 U.S.C. §4301 

Federal Water Pollution Control Act (commonly referred to as Clean Water Act), P.L. 92-500, 33 

U.S.C. §1251 et seq. as amended by the Clean Water Act, P.L. 95-217 

Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act of 1958 as amended, P.L. 85-624, 72 Stat. 563, 16 U.S.C. §661 

et seq. 

Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, P.L. 93-234, 87 Stat. 975, 12 U.S.C. §24, §1709-1 

Migratory Bird Conservation Act, P.L. Chapter 257, 45 Stat. 1222, 16 U.S.C. §715 et seq

Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918, P.L. 186, 40 Stat. 755 

National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, P.L. 91-190, 83 Stat. 852, 42 U.S.C. §4321 et seq. 

National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, P.L. 90-448, 82 Stat. 572, 42 U.S.C. §4001 et seq, as 

amended 

National Park System Final Procedures for Implementing E.O. 11988 and 11990 (45 FR 35916 as 

revised by 47 FR 36718) 

Protection and Enhancement of Environmental Quality, E.O. 11514 as amended, 1970, E.O. 

11991, 35 Federal Register 4247; 1977, 42 Federal Register 26967) 

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, P.L. 94-580, 30 Stat. 1148, 42 U.S.C. §6901 et seq.

Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899, 33 U.S.C. Chapter 425, as amended by P.L. 97-332, October 15, 

1982 and P.L. 97-449, 33 U.S.C. §§401-403 

Safe Drinking Water Act, P.L. 93-523, 88 Stat. 1660, 42 U.S.C. §300f et seq., 42 U.S.C. §201 and 21 

U.S.C. §349 

Soil and Water Resources Conservation Act of 1977 

Water Resources Planning Act of 1965 (P.L. 89-80, 42 U.S.C. § 1962 et seq.) and Water Resource 

Council's Principles and Standards, 44 FR 723977 

Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act, P.L. 92-419, 68 Stat. 666, 16 U.S.C. §100186 

248 
Appendix B: Laws and Executive Orders 

249 

Other 

Administrative Procedures Act, 5 U.S.C. § 551-559, §§701-706 

Concessions Policy Act of 1965, P.L. 89-249, 79 Stat. 969, 16 U.S.C. § 20 et seq. 

Department of Transportation Act of 1966, P.L. 89-670, 80 Stat. 931, 49 U.S.C. § 303 

Disposal of Materials on Public Lands (Material Act of 1947), 30 U.S.C. §§601-604 

Energy Supply and Environmental Coordination Act of 1974 

Executive Order 11987: Exotic Organisms, 42 FR 26407 

Executive Order 12003: Energy Policy and Conservation, 3 C.F.R. 134 (Supp. 1977), 42 U.S.C. § 

2601 

Executive Order 12008: Federal Compliance with Pollution Control Standards 

Executive Order 12372: Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs, 47 FR 30959 

Freedom of Information Act, P.L. 93-502, 5 U.S.C. §552 et seq. 

Interagency Consultation to Avoid or Mitigate Adverse Effects on Rivers in the Nationwide 

Inventory, 45 FR 59189, 08/15/80, ES 80-2 

Intergovernmental Cooperation Act of 1968, P.L. 90-577, 40 U.S.C. §§ 531-535 and 31 U.S.C. 

§§6501-6508 

Intergovernmental Coordination Act of 1969, 42 U.S.C. §§4101, 4231, 4233 

Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965 as amended, P.L. 88-578, 78 Stat. 897, 16 U.S.C. 

§§460l-4 to 460l-11 

Mineral Materials Disposal Act of 1947, 30 U.S.C. §601 et seq.

National Trails System Act, P.L. 90-543, 82 Stat. 919, 16 U.S.C. §§1241-1251 

Noise Control Act of 1972 as amended, P.L. 92-574, 42 U.S.C. §4901 et seq. 

Outdoor Recreation Coordination Act of 1963, P.L. 88-29, 77 Stat. 49 

Payment in Lieu of Taxes Act, P.L. 94-565, 90 Stat. 2662, 31 U.S.C. §6901 et seq. 

Policies on Construction of Family Housing for Government Personnel, OMB A-18 

Procedures for Interagency Consultation to Avoid or Mitigate Adverse Effects on Rivers in the 

Nationwide Inventory, E.S. 80-2, 08/15/80, 45 FR 59191 

Revised Statute 2477, Right-of-way across Public Lands, Act of July 26, 1866, 43 U.S.C. §932 

(1976), repealed by FLPMA §706(a) October 21, 1976 

Surface Resources Use Act of 1955, 30 U.S.C. §601 et seq.

Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982, 96 Stat. 2097, 23 U.S.C. §§101 and many others 

Toxic Substances Control Act, P.L. 94-469, 90 Stat. 2003, 15 U.S.C. §2601 

Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, P.L. 91-646, 

84 Stat. 1894, 42 U.S.C. §4601 et seq. 

Urban Park and Recreation Recovery Act of 1978, P.L. 95-625, 92 Stat. 3467, 16 U.S.C. §2501 et 

seq. 

Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, P.L. 90-542, 82 Stat. 906, 16 U.S.C. §§1271-1287 

Wilderness Act, P.L. 88-577, 78 Stat. 890, 16 U.S.C. §§1131-1136 

Wildfire Disaster Recovery Act, P.L. 101-286 

Wildlife Suppression Assistance Act, P.L. 101-11, 42 U.S.C. §1856m, 1856 
250

APPENDIXES

APPENDIX C: THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES
251

Appendix C: Threatened and Endangered Species
252

APPENDIXES
253

Appendix C: Threatened and Endangered Species
254

APPENDIXES
255

Appendix C: Threatened and Endangered Species
256

APPENDIXES
257

Appendix C: Threatened and Endangered Species
258

APPENDIXES
259

Appendix C: Threatened and Endangered Species
260

APPENDIXES
261

Appendix C: Threatened and Endangered Species
APPENDIX D: GENERAL SPECIES LISTS, HARPERS FERRY NATIONAL 

HISTORICAL PARK 

FISH 

In an inventory conducted in 2003, fish were collected from three sites: Elks Run, Flowing Springs 

Run, and Piney Run. All available habitats were sampled at each site, and collecting continued 

until no new species were observed for 15 minutes. 

The inventory group captured and identified 632 fishes representing 32 species from six families 

of freshwater fishes. All species had been previously known in the Potomac River drainage. This 

represents a reasonably high diversity of fishes given the limited amount of stream habitats within 

the park. High water levels in 2003 prevented effective sampling in a beaver impoundment on 

Flowing Springs Branch, and future sampling may result in the documentation of additional fish 

species in the park. 

Anguilla rostrata 

Campostoma anomalum 

Clinostomus funduloides 

Cyprinella spiloptera 

Cyprinus carpio 

Luxilus cornutus 

Nocomis micropogon 

Notemigonus crysoleucas 

Notropis buccatus 

Pimephales notatus 

Rhinichthys atratulus 

Rhinichthys cateractae 

Semotilus corporalis 

Catostomus commersoni 

Hypentelium nigricans 

Moxostoma erythrurum 

Ameiurus natalis 

Ameiurus nebulosus 

Noturus insignis 

Ambloplites rupestris 

Lepomis auritus 

Lepomis cyanellus 

Lepomis gibbosus 

Lepomis macrochirus 

Lepomis megalotis 

Micropterus dolomieu 

Micropterus salmoides 

Pomoxis annularis 

Pomoxis nigromaculatus 

Etheostoma blennioides 

Etheostoma caeruleum 

Etheostoma olmstedi 

SOURCE: Raesly, Richard L., 2003. “Annual Report: Inventory and Biological Monitoring of Fishes in 

National Parks of the National Capital Region.” Department of Biology, Frostburg State University, 

Frostburg, Maryland. 

BIRDS 

Double-crested Cormorant 

Great Blue Heron 

Great Egret 

Green Heron 

Canada Goose 

Wood Duck 

American Black Duck* 

Mallard 

Canvasback 

Bufflehead 

Common Merganser 

Black Vulture 

Turkey Vulture 

Osprey 

Bald Eagle 

Sharp-shinned Hawk 

Cooper’s Hawk 

Red-shouldered Hawk 

Broad-winged Hawk 

262 
Appendix D: General Species Lists, Harpers Ferry National Historical Park 

Red-tailed Hawk 

Peregrine Falcon* 

Wild Turkey 

Northern Bobwhite* 

Killdeer 

Spotted Sandpiper 

Laughing Gull 

Ring-billed Gull 

Herring Gull 

Rock Dove 

Mourning Dove 

Yellow-billed Cuckoo 

Chimney Swift 

Ruby-throated Hummingbird 

Belted Kingfisher 

Red-bellied Woodpecker 

Yellow-bellied Sapsucker 

Downy Woodpecker 

Hairy Woodpecker 

Northern Flicker 

Pileated Woodpecker 

Eastern Wood-Pewee 

Acadian Flycatcher* 

Eastern Phoebe 

Great Crested Flycatcher 

Eastern Kingbird 

Purple Martin 

Tree Swallow 

Northern Rough-winged Swallow 

Barn Swallow 

Blue Jay 

American Crow 

Fish Crow 

Common Raven 

Black-capped Chickadee 

Carolina Chickadee 

Tufted Titmouse 

Red-breasted Nuthatch 

White-breasted Nuthatch 

Brown Creeper 

Carolina Wren 

House Wren 

Winter Wren 

Golden-crowned Kinglet 

Ruby-crowned Kinglet 

Blue-gray Gnatcatcher 

Eastern Bluebird 

Hermit Thrush 

Wood Thrush* 

American Robin 

Gray Catbird 

Northern Mockingbird 

Brown Thrasher 

Cedar Waxwing 

European Starling 

White-eyed Vireo 

Blue-headed Vireo 

Yellow-throated Vireo 

Warbling Vireo 

Red-eyed Vireo 

Northern Parula 

Yellow Warbler 

Black-throated Blue Warbler 

Yellow-rumped Warbler 

Black-throated Green Warbler 

Blackburnian Warbler 

Yellow-throated Warbler* 

Prairie Warbler* 

Black-and-white Warbler 

American Redstart 

Prothonotary Warbler* 

Worm-eating Warbler* 

Ovenbird 

Louisiana Waterthrush* 

Scarlet Tanager* 

Northern Cardinal 

Rose-breasted Grosbeak 

Indigo Bunting 

Eastern Towhee 

Chipping Sparrow 

Field Sparrow* 

Savannah Sparrow 

Grasshopper Sparrow* 

Song Sparrow 

White-throated Sparrow 

Dark-eyed Junco 

Red-winged Blackbird 

Common Grackle 

Brown-headed Cowbird 

Orchard Oriole 

Baltimore Oriole 

Purple Finch 

House Finch 

American Goldfinch 

House Sparrow 

* Indicates a species of concern 

SOURCE: National Park Service, 2003. “Avian Inventory at Six National Capital Region National Parks 

Final Report,” by John A. Sinclair, Marcus Koenen, Sybil Hood, Mikaila Milton, and Christina Wright. 

National Capital Region Network, Washington, D.C. 

263 
APPENDIXES

REPTILES AND AMPHIBIANS 

Northern Green Frog 

Wood Frog 

Broad-headed Skink 

Northern Fence Lizard 

Eastern Redbacked Salamander 

Long-tailed Salamander 

Northern Red Salamander 

Northern Spring Salamander 

Northern Two-lined Salamander 

Red-spotted Newt 

Seal Salamander 

Spotted Salamander 

Common Watersnake 

Eastern Milksnake 

Eastern Wormsnake 

Northern Copperhead 

Northern Ring-necked Snake 

Northern Rough Greensnake 

Eastern Box Turtle 

Northern Red-bellied Cooter 

SOURCE: National Park Service, 2003. “Annual Amphibian and Reptile Inventory Report for Fiscal 

Year 2003,” by Thomas K. Pauley and Mark B. Watson. National Capital Region, Washington, D.C. 

MAMMALS 

Northern short-tailed shrew 

Least shrew 

Smoky shrew 

Southeastern shrew 

Southern flying squirrel 

Red-backed vole 

Pine vole 

House mouse 

White-footed mouse 

Eastern gray squirrel 

Eastern chipmunk 

Meadow jumping mouse 

Eastern woodrat 

Raccoon 

White-tailed deer 

SOURCE: National Zoological Park, 2003. “Small Mammal Survey of National Capital Region Parks,” 

by William J. McShea and Carrie O’Brien. Conservation and Research Center, Front Royal, Virginia. 

264 
APPENDIX E: DEMOGRAPHIC TRENDS FOR BOLIVAR, WEST VIRGINIA, 

AND HARPERS FERRY, WEST VIRGINIA 

POPULATION CHANGES 

The population of Bolivar increased by about 50% during the 1980s and then slowed throughout 

the next 10 years resulting in only a 3% increase between 1990 and 2000 (table E-1). Meanwhile, 

the town of Harpers Ferry’s population declined by almost 15% during the 1980s and remained 

essentially unchanged throughout the next decade. 

In the 1990s, Jefferson County registered a 17% population increase. The increase in population 

in the county was much more substantial than the population changes in Bolivar (3.2%) and 

Harpers Ferry (-0.3%). 

Table E-1. Population Trends 

Percent 

Change 

Population 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 1990-2000 

West Virginia 1,860,421 1,744,237 1,950,183 1,793,477 1,808,344 0.83%

Jefferson County 18,665 21,280 30,302 35,962 42,190 17.30%

Bolivar 754 943 672 1,013 1,045 3.20%

Harpers Ferry No Data No Data 361 308 307 -0.30%

SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development, State of the Cities Data System. 

Based upon the ability to increase additional housing units and density development, the future 

population change for the two gateway communities is estimated to remain stable or grow at a 

very slow rate. This trend differs when looking at Jefferson County as a whole. The Jefferson 

County Planning Commission has estimated the county’s population growth through 2020 (figure 

1) at an average rate of 2% per year, compounded. It is anticipated that most of this population 

growth will be outside the incorporated municipalities which includes developable lands near 

Bolivar and Harpers Ferry. 

265 
APPENDIXES

Figure 1. Population Growth Projections 

For Jefferson County, WV

38,000

42,000

46,000

50,000

54,000

58,000

62,000

66,000

70,000

2000 Census 2005 2010 2015 2020

Year

Source: 

Jefferson County Planning Commission, Jefferson County Comprehensivce Plan 2004

AGE

Throughout the 1990s, the population of the gateway communities grew slightly older, ending the 

decade with a median age of 39 years for residents of Bolivar and 47 years for Harpers Ferry. The 

2000 census reports that 57% of Bolivar’s population and 70% of Harpers Ferry are older than 35 

years of age. The age category of 35- to 54, year-olds in Bolivar had the largest population increase 

of 7.8% during the 1990s. A similar trend was found in Harpers Ferry but in the slightly older age 

group of 45- to 59, year-olds with a 5.5% increase. 

Figure 2 compares the age distribution in Bolivar and Harpers Ferry for 1990 and 2000. The 

largest decline of residents in both communities during the 1990s was in the age category of 20- to 

34 year-olds with a 4.6% decrease in Bolivar and a 3.5% decline in Harpers Ferry. 

At the end of the 1990s, the gateway communities each had a small increase in the total number of 

households that resulted in 479 total households for Bolivar and 153 total households in Harpers 

Ferry. Only 23% of Bolivar total households and 18% of Harpers Ferry had school-age or 

younger children. The percentage of residents that are in the age category of 19 years and younger 

did not vary throughout the 1990s. 

The population that are of retirement age also remained relatively stable throughout the 1990s. 

The most recent census showed that the retirement population of Bolivar decreased by 0.7% and 

Harpers Ferry increased by 0.5%. 

266 
Appendix E: Demographic Trends for Bolivar, West Virginia, and Harpers Ferry, West Virginia 

Figure 2. Compares Age Distribution in Bolivar and Harpers Ferry for Year 

1990 & 2000.

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

1990 2000 1990 2000

Bolivar, WV Harpers Ferry, WV

School Age and Younger Age 20 to 34 Age 35 to 65 Retirement Age

ETHNIC COMPOSITION 

The 2000 census reports that Caucasians make up approximately 90% of the population in the 

gateway communities. The African-American population, currently less than 10% of the total 

population, saw a decline throughout the 1990s in both Bolivar and Harpers Ferry. Table E-2 

compares the ethnic composition for Bolivar and Harpers Ferry with Jefferson County and West 

Virginia. 

Table E-2. Ethnic Composition, Percent of Population - 1990 and 2000 

Harpers Ferry, 

WV 

Jefferson 

Bolivar, WV County, WV West Virginia 

1990 2000 1990 2000 1990 2000 1990 2000 

Total Population 1,013 1,045 308 307 35,926 42,190 1,793,477 1,808,344

Caucasian 92.3% 91.1% 85.4% 89.9% 91.7% 91.0% 96.2% 95.1%

African-American 7.5% 5.4% 13.6% 9.1% 7.4% 6.1% 3.2% 3.2%

American Indian, 

Eskimo, or Aleut 0.0% 0.7% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.3% 0.1% 0.2%

Asian or Pacific 

Islander 0.1% 0.6% 0.7% 0.0% 0.4% 0.6% 0.4% 0.5%

Other race 0.1% 2.2% 0.0% 0.7% 0.3% 2.0% 0.1% 1.0%

Hispanic origin (of 

any race) 1.2% 1.6% 0.6% 0.7% 1.2% 1.7% 0.5% 0.7%

SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau 

267 
APPENDIXES

EDUCATION 

The educational attainment variable is a key demographic that recognizes changes within a 

community’s population (table E-3). In Bolivar, the educational attainment reported by the 2000 

census reflects the same trends reported for Jefferson County, West Virginia. Of Bolivar’s 

population age 25 and older the percentage of residents that did not graduate from high school is 

23%. This represents an 11% decrease from the reported 1990 35% of residents who did not 

graduate from high school. The percentage of residents who obtained college or advance degrees 

was 22%. 

In Harpers Ferry, the percent of persons age 25 and older who obtained a college or advance 

degree reached 60% in 2000. This is a 20% increase when compared to the 1990 census. Of the 

same 25 years and older population, only 9% did not graduate from high school. 

Table E-3. Percent of Persons Aged 25 or More by Highest Educational Attainment 

Jefferson 

County 

West 

Bolivar Harpers Ferry Virginia 

1990 2000 1990 2000 2000 2000 

Did Not 

Graduate High 

School 34.6% 23.4% 23.1% 8.9% 21.0% 24.8% 

High School 

Graduate 34.9% 35.9% 21.4% 8.1% 34.7% 39.4% 

Some College or 

Associated 

Degree 14.6% 18.6% 16.0% 22.9% 22.8% 20.9% 

College Graduate 

or Advanced 

Degree 16.0% 22.1% 39.5% 60.2% 21.5% 14.9% 

DATA SOURCE: U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development, State of the 

Cities Data System and U.S. Census Bureau 

HOUSING 

Along with the 1980s growth in population, the town of Bolivar had a 63% increase in the number 

of housing units of all types (e.g., vacation, year-round, income property). The increase of housing 

continued through the 1990s but at a much slower growth rate of 12% for a total of 515 units in 

year 2000, (figure 3). 

268 
Appendix E: Demographic Trends for Bolivar, West Virginia, and Harpers Ferry, West Virginia 

Figure 3. Total Number of Housing Units in Bolivar and Harpers Ferry, WV

Source: U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development, State of the Cities Data System. 

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

550

1980 1990 2000

Bolivar Harpers Ferry

During Bolivar’s housing boom of the 1980s, there was a change in the percentage of housing 

units that were occupied by owners from 76% in 1980 to 62% in 1990, a pattern that remains 

constant in 2000 (figure 4). Conversely, the number of renter occupied housing units in Bolivar 

averages 38% of the housing units. 

Figure 4. Percent of Housing Units That Are Owner Occupied or Renter Occupied.

Source: U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development, State of the Cities Data System.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

Owner Renter Owner Renter

%

Bolivar Harpers Ferry

1980 1990 2000

For the town of Harpers Ferry, the number of housing units has remained constant for more than 

20 years. This suggests that the town is close to build out where the opportunity to increase 

additional housing is limited. 

The pattern of Harpers Ferry’s “owner occupied” (72%) versus “renter occupied” (28%) housing 

has also remained fairly constant since 1980. 

INCOME 

Harpers Ferry’s 1999 median household income ($52,344) is approximately 18% higher than the 

town of Bolivar ($42,375) and Jefferson County ($43,024) and is 42% higher than the median for 

269 
APPENDIXES

West Virginia (table E-4). Since 1979, the trend of household income in Harpers Ferry has been 

an increase in the middle income bracket by 7%, the high income bracket by almost 3%, and a 

10% decline in the low income group. Based upon the 2000 census, 30 % of Harpers Ferry 

households were considered high income, 59% middle income and 11% fell in the low income 

category (table E-5). 

Table E-4. Median Household Income in 1999 Dollars 

1979 1989 1999 

Bolivar, WV $39,800 $34,676 $42,375 

Harpers Ferry, WV $40,158 $42,490 $52,344 

Jefferson County, WV $43,024 

West Virginia $30,108 

SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau. U.S. Department of Housing and 

Urban Development (State of the Cities Data Systems) 

Table E-5. Percent of Households in National Income Brackets 

Low Income Middle Income High Income 

1979 1989 1999 1979 1989 1999 1979 1989 1999 

Bolivar, WV 22.6% 23.8% 19.5% 64.4% 65.6% 66.1% 13.0% 10.5% 14.3%

Harpers Ferry, WV 21.1% 19.9% 10.8% 51.0% 53.3% 58.7% 27.9% 26.8% 30.5%

 SOURCe: U.S. Census Bureau

 SOURCE: SOCDS (State of the Cities Data Systems) U.S. Department of Housing and 

Urban Development 

In Bolivar the trend to higher income brackets is much more subtle. The 2000 census reported 

that 14% of Bolivar’s household incomes were in the high income category. A 66% majority of 

Bolivar’s households had incomes in the middle income range, and almost 20% fell in the low 

income category. 

Since 1979 both gateway communities have seen a decline in the number of households within the 

low income category. Although there continues to be a trend with household incomes rising, 

there remain many residents in the gateway communities that are living at poverty level. Table E-6 

compares the poverty rate for 1989 and 1999 census. The poverty rate for the Bolivar remains 

essentially unchanged at 12.5% while Harpers Ferry’s has declined to 2.2%. 

Table E-6. Percent Poverty Rate for 1989 and 1999 

1989 1999 

Bolivar 12.6% 12.5%

Harpers Ferry 6.4% 2.2%

Jefferson County 9.0% 10.3%

West Virginia 17.2% 17.9%

DATA SOURCe: U.S. Census Bureau and U.S. Department of Housing 

& Urban Development, State of the Cities Data System. 

270 
Appendix E: Demographic Trends for Bolivar, West Virginia, and Harpers Ferry, West Virginia 

EMPLOYMENT 

The labor force participation for both Bolivar and Harpers Ferry are estimated to be 68% of the 

population. Based upon this rate, the 2000 census reported an unemployment rate of 3.9% for 

Bolivar and 1.2% for Harpers Ferry. Both are substantially below the national average. 

In 1998 the U.S. Census Bureau began to report employment data classified by industry according 

to the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS). For this evaluation, the 2000 

census data is used to understand the economic structure for the gateway communities. 

The Educational, Health and Social Science industry employs the largest share of Bolivar’s 

(19%) and Harpers Ferry (26%) workforce (table E-7). This industry is often supported by local 

and regional finances that are not directly dependent upon tourism. 

The Retail industry and the Arts, Entertainment, Recreation, Accommodation and Food 

Service industry are also primary employers for the workforce within the gateway communities. 

In 2000, the Retail industry employed 15% of Bolivar and 8% of Harpers Ferry’s workforce. 

Conversely, the Arts, Entertainment, Recreation, Accommodation and Food Service industry 

employed 20% of Harpers Ferry workforce and only 8% of Bolivar’s. Both industries are 

characterized by many small businesses with payroll dependent upon a high level tourism and 

local employment. 

Table E-7. Percent Employed Residents by Industry 2000 (NAICS Classification) 

Harpers 

Ferry 

Jefferson 

County 

West 

Bolivar Virginia

Agriculture, forestry, fishing, and hunting 0.1 0.1 2.6 4.1

Arts, entertainment, recreation, 

accommodation and food service 8.1 20.2 10.3 8

Construction 10.6 8.3 11 7

Educational, health, and social services 19.4 26.2 17.3 23

Finance, insurance, real estate, and rental 

and leasing 5.1 2.4 4.9 4.6

Information 2.6 10.1 2.9 2.2

Manufacturing 8.5 2.4 10.7 11.9

Other services (except public administration) 4.4 1.8 4.6 5

Professional, scientific, management, 

administrative 10.2 8.9 9.4 6.6

Public Administration 8.3 8.3 8.5 5.7

Retail trade 15.2 8.9 12.3 13.1

Transportation and warehousing, and 

utilities 4.9 2.4 3.8 6

Wholesale trade 2.6 0 1.7 2.8

DATA SOURCE: U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development, State of the Cities Data System and 

U.S. Census Bureau 

In both Bolivar and Harpers Ferry there are three industries that each employ 8% to 10% of the 

workforce. These industries are Construction; Public Administration; and Professional, 

271 
APPENDIXES

Scientific, Management, and Administrative. Each of these industries are usually higher wage, 

higher skill professions that are indirectly dependent upon a tourism economy. 

There are two other key industries are that support employment for gateway communities that 

are worth noting. The Information industry provided employment for 10% of Harpers Ferry’s 

available workforce and 3% of Bolivar’s. The other is the Manufacturing industry that in 2000 

employed 8.5% of Bolivar’s workforce and 2.4% of Harpers Ferry’s. 

In 2004 the West Virginia Bureau of Employment Programs — Employment Statistics posted the 

top ten ranking for the largest employers in Jefferson County: 

Table E-8. Top Ten Ranking for Employers in Jefferson County 

Rank Employer's Name 

1 PNGI Charles Town Gaming 

2 Jefferson County Board of Education 

3 Shepherd College 

4 AB&C Group, Inc 

5 Jefferson Memorial Hospital 

6 Wal-Mart Stores, Inc 

7 National Park Service 

8 Royal Vendors, Inc 

9 Augmentation, Inc 

10 Genesis Eldercare Network Services 

Economic Influence of NPS Visitors 

This section estimates the economic influence that visitors to Harpers Ferry National Historical 

Park might have on the local economy. The following analysis uses an economic impact 

framework to quantify the direct and indirect expenditures by park visitors using data from the 

year 2001. This economic impact analysis traces the flow of spending by visitors within the local 

economy to estimate the national historical park’s contribution to sales, income, and jobs in the 

area. 

To measure the effects of visitor spending on the local economy the National Park Service 

developed an economic impact model referred to as the Money Generation Model 2. This model 

estimates the economic impacts by measuring sales (values of goods and services), tax, and 

employment benefits. The model’s logic is that Harpers Ferry National Historical Park is part of 

the local economy. When visitors from outside the local area spend money within the local area 

for meals, lodging, and other goods and services, this expenditure provides an economic stimulus 

to the local economy. The economic estimates for the national historical park are based on the 

following: 

1. Official NPS recreation visit estimates for 2001 were 330,000 recreation visits. The 330,000 

recreation visits were further converted to 0.16 million party days, as party day is the 

spending unit in our analysis (table E-9). 

2. Estimates of the percentage of visitors that are local, on day trips, or staying overnight in 

the area in campgrounds or motels. In this analysis the local day visitors contributed 20% 

of overall recreation visits. Day visitors from other regions consisted of 55% of the 

272 
Appendix E: Demographic Trends for Bolivar, West Virginia, and Harpers Ferry, West Virginia 

recreation visits, and visitors staying at accommodations and campsites were 20%, and 

5% respectively. 

3. Park visitor spending profiles for distinct visitor segments derived from park visitor 

surveys at selected parks, and 

4. Regional economic multipliers based on input-output models for local regions around 

NPS units. 

Table E-9. Visitation and Spending By Visitor Segments 

Local Day 

Visitors 

Nonlocal Day 

Visitors 

Hotel 

Visitors 

Camping 

Visitors Total 

Recreation Visits 65,032 178,836 65,032 16,258 325,158

Segment Shares in 

Recreation Visits 20% 55% 20% 5% 100%

Party Days 26,013 71,535 52,025 13,028 162,601

Average Spending 

Per Party Day $35 $53 $163 $84 $88

Total Spending $900,000 $3,780,000 $8,440,000 $1,090,000 $14,210,000

SOURCE: 2001 MGM2 Analysis, National Park Service, Economic Impacts of Visitor Spending 

In this analysis, visitor spending only covers economic effects on the local area around the 

national historical park. The economic modeling does not include impacts of the park 

operations/employees, construction activity, or visitor spending outside the local area. 

On average, visitors spend $88 dollars per party per day in the local communities. Total visitor 

spending was estimated to be $14,210,000 dollars for the study year 2001. The $14 million dollar 

estimate spent by visitors to Harpers Ferry National Historical Park had a direct economic impact 

of $11,750,000 dollars in direct sales and $4,230,000 dollars in personal income (wages and 

salaries) — $6,360,000 dollars in value added and supported an estimated 292 jobs. 

The analysis also estimated that among all the direct sales, $3,990,000 dollars was from lodging 

sales, $3,290,000 from food and drinking places, $1,530,000 dollars from admission fee, and 

$1,690,000 million from retail trade. As visitor spending circulates through the local economy, 

secondary effects created additional $1,940,000 dollars of personal income and an estimated 76 

jobs (table E-10). 

273 
APPENDIXES

274 

Table E-10. Economic Impacts of Visitor Spending By Sectors 

Sales 

Personal 

Incomes Jobs 

Value 

Added 

Direct Effects 

B&B, hotel, other accommodations $3,990,000 $1,300,000 87 $1,980,000

Campsites $260,000 $80,000 6 $130,000

Restaurants & Bars $3,290,000 $1,120,000 95 $1,560,000

Retail $1,690,000 $860,000 47 $1,350,000

Admissions & Fees $1,530,000 $530,000 46 $870,000

Others $990,000 $330,000 14 $480,000

Total $11,750,000 $4,220,000 295 $6,370,000

Secondary Effects $5,340,000 $1,940,000 76 $3,350,000

Total Effects $17,090,000 $6,160,000 371 $9,720,000

SOURCE: 2001 MGM2 Analysis, National Park Service, Economic Impacts of Visitor Spending 

In summary, visitors to Harpers Ferry National Historical Park spent $14,210,000 dollars in 2001, 

which supported an estimated total of $17,090,000 in sales, $6,170,000 million in personal income, 

367 jobs, and $9,700,000 in value added. 
275

Appendix F: Section 106 Consultation

Appendix F: section 106 consultation
276

APPENDIXES
Appendix F: Section 106 Consultation

277
278

APPENDIXES
279

Appendix F: Section 106 Consultation
280

APPENDIXES
281

Appendix F: Section 106 Consultation
282

APPENDIXES
283

Appendix F: Section 106 Consultation
SELECTED REFERENCES 

Bergeron, Susan, Dr. J. M. Kivigan, and J. 

Jewell 

2000 “A Historic Resource Study for Storer 

College, Harpers Ferry, West 

Virginia.” Horizon Research 

Consultants, Inc. 

Census Bureau 

2003 Census Information (at 

www.census.gov). U.S. Department of 

Commerce, US Census Bureau, 

Washington, D.C. 

Gabrielsen, G. W., and E. N. Smith 

1995 “Physiological Responses of Wildlife 

to Disturbance.” In: Wildlife and 

Recreationists, edited by Richard 

Knight and Kevin Gutzwiller. Island 

Press, Washington, D.C. 

Gilbert David T. 

1995 A Walkers Guide to Harpers Ferry West 

Virginia. Fifth edition. Harpers Ferry 

Historical Association. 

1999 Waterpower: Mills, Factories, Machines 

& Floods at Harpers Ferry, West 

Virginia 1762-1991. Harpers Ferry 

Historical Association. 

Knight, R. L., and D. N. Cole 

1995 “Factors that Influence Wildlife 

Responses to Recreationists.” In

Wildlife and Recreationists, edited by 

Richard Knight and Kevin Gutzwiller. 

Island Press, Washington, D.C. 

McShea, William J., and Carrie O’Brien 

2003 “Small Mammal Survey of National 

Capital Region Parks, Final Report.” 

National Zoological Park’s 

Conservation and Research Center, 

Front Royal, Virginia. 

Moyer, Teresa S., Kim E. Wallace and Paul A. 

Shackel 

2004 “To Preserve the Evidence of a Noble 

Past: An Administrative History of 

Harpers Ferry National Historical 

Park.” Catoctin Center for Regional 

Studies, Frederick Community 

College, and Center for Heritage 

Resource Studies, Dept. of 

Anthropology, University of Maryland 

National Park Service, U.S. Department of the 

Interior 

1962 Master Plan, Harpers Ferry National 

Monument (revised). Region Five, 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 

1973 John Brown’s Raid. U.S. Govt. Printing 

Office for the National Park Service, 

reprinted 1990. 

1978 “Assessment of Alternatives, 

Development Concept Plan.” Harpers 

Ferry National Historical Park, 

Harpers Ferry, West Virginia. 

1986 “Statement for Management, Harpers 

Ferry National Historical Park.” 

Harpers Ferry National Historical 

Park, Harpers Ferry, West Virginia. 

1989 “Maryland Heights: Archeological and 

Historical Resources Study,” by Susan 

E. Winter and Dennis E. Frye. Copy 

available at NPS headquarters. 

1992 “Loudon Heights: Archeological and 

Historical Resources Study,” by Susan 

E. Winter and Dennis E. Frye. Copy 

available at NPS headquarters. 

1993 “Cultural Landscape Report: Lower 

Town Harpers Ferry National 

Historical Park.” 

1993 “Cultural Landscape Report: Virginius 

Island, Harpers Ferry National 

Historical Park.” 

284 
Selected References 

1994a “Archeological Investigations in the 

Backyards of Park Buildings 32 to 36 

Harpers Ferry National Historical 

Park: The Package 116 Prehistoric 

Occupations,” by Cari C. YoungRavenhorst ed. and Paul A. Shackel, 

P.I. 

1994b “Resources Management Plan. 

Harpers Ferry National Historical 

Park.” Copy available at NPS 

headquarters. 

1998 “Director’s Order 28: Cultural 

Resource Management.” Washington, 

D. C. 

2002 Harpers Ferry National Historical Park 

Business Plan. Harpers Ferry, West 

Virginia. 

2003a “Harpers Ferry Collection 

Management Plan.” National Capital 

Region. 

2003b “Historic Resource Report: Jackson’s 

Right Flank/School House Ridge, 

Harpers Ferry National Historical 

Park, Harpers Ferry, West Virginia,” 

by, Amanda J. Griffith. Copy available 

at NPS headquarters. 

2003c “Historic Resource Study: Short Hill 

Tract, Harpers Ferry National 

Historical Park,” by Andrew Lee. 

Copy available at NPS headquarters. 

2003d “Historical Background Report: 

Baltimore and Ohio Railroad, Harpers 

Ferry Station.” Harpers Ferry 

National Historical Park, Archeology 

Program. 

2003e “Natural Resource Profile, Harpers 

Ferry National Historical Park.” 

Natural Resource Information 

Division (NRID) of the Natural 

Resource Program Center, Fort 

Collins, Colorado. 

2003f “Non Attainment and Early Action 

Counties.” Interactive map at Air 

Resources Division intranet site 

(www2.nrintra.nps.gov/website/NonA

ttainandEA/viewer.htm) accessed on 

8/1/03. NPS Air Resources Division, 

Lakewood, Colorado. 

2004 “Historical Background Report: 

Baltimore and Ohio Railroad, Harpers 

Ferry Station.” Harpers Ferry 

National Historical Park, Archeology 

Program. 

2006 NPS Management Policies 2006. 

Washington Office, Washington, D.C. 

Rae, Douglas 

1996 “Economic Impacts of National Park 

Service Operations at Harpers Ferry: 

Final Report.” Completed for Harpers 

Ferry National Historical Park. Copy 

available at NPS headquarters. 

Raesly, Richard 

2003 2003 Annual Report: Inventory and 

Biological Monitoring of Fishes in 

National Parks of the National Capital 

Region. Department of Biology, 

Frostburg State University, Frostburg, 

Maryland. 

Stathakis, Steven 

1999 “Cultural Resources Assessment: The 

Murphy Farm in Jefferson County, 

West Virginia.” Big Blue Archeological 

Research Inc. 

Tiller, Veronica E. Velarde 

1996 “Tiller’s Guide to Indian Country: 

Economic Profiles of American Indian 

Reservations.” Albuquerque, New 

Mexico: Bow-Arrow Publishing 

Company. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

2005 National Wetlands Inventory. Accessed 

at www.fws.gov/nwi. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service-MD 

2003 Species List for Harpers Ferry 

National Historical Park, Washington 

County, MD. Chesapeake Bay Field 

Office, Annapolis, Maryland. 

285 
SELECTED REFERENCES

286 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service-VA 

2003 Letter with list of special status species 

for Harpers Ferry National Historical 

Park, dated May 16, 2003. Virginia 

Field Office, Gloucester, Virginia. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service-WV 

2002 Letter with list of special status species 

for Harpers Ferry National Historical 

Park, dated December 20, 2002. West 

Virginia Field Office, Elkins, West 

Virginia. 
PREPARERS AND CONSULTANTS 

Denver Service Center 

Craig Cellar, Project Manager — overall 

project coordination and general sections 

of plan 

Matthew Safford, Co-Project Manager and 

Natural Resource Specialist — natural 

resource and visitor use sections of plan 

and planning coordination 

Eric Petersen, Cultural Resource Specialist — 

cultural resource sections of plan 

Stephan Nofield, Outdoor Recreation Planner 

— socioeconomic sections of plan and 

community involvement 

Harpers Ferry Center 

Katherine Brock, Interpretive Planner — 

visitor use and experience sections of 

plan 

Harpers Ferry National Historical Park 

Donald Campbell, Superintendent — overall 

park management 

Gayleen Boyd, Administrative Officer — park 

administration concerns 

Michael Castagnetto, Facility Manager — park 

operations concerns 

Peter Dessauer, Architect — grounds and 

structures concerns 

Jennifer Flynn, Chief Ranger — visitor and 

resource protection concerns 

Dennis Frye. Chief, Interpretation and 

Cultural Resources Management — 

cultural resource concerns 

T.W. “Bill” Hebb, Chief, Natural Resources 

Management — natural resources 

concerns and coordinator of park 

planning 

Ken Starnes, Special Assistant — park 

management and administration 

concerns 

Marsha Wassel, Education Specialist — visitor 

experience concerns 

National Capital Region 

Patrick Gregerson, Chief of Planning — 

liaison with planning team and document 

quality 

Other Contributors 

Patrick Kenney, Natural Resources Specialist 

— CBA facilitator 

Judy Coleman, Supervisory Secretary — 

meeting and team coordination 

287 
INDEX 

air quality, 38, 39, 284 

American Indian(s), 17, 21, 37, 38, 87 (see 

also Native Americans) 

campers, 284 

campground(s), 72, 76, 81, 95, 103, 126, 138, 

169, 179, 185, 189, 206, 210, 219, 231, 235 

camping, 72, 81, 103, 148 

carrying capacity, 45, 168 

cultural resource(s), 21, 22, 28, 34, 35, 50, 53, 

57, 63, 65, 72, 73, 75, 86–89, 90, 93, 97, 99, 

102, 104, 151, 155, 156, 160, 191, 212, 219 

endangered species, (see threatened and 

endangered species)

environmental justice, 40, 41 

erosion, 25, 48, 88, 89, 128, 130, 158, 176, 

190–192, 194, 210–212, 214 

ethnographic resource(s), 37, 92, 93 

fire, 64, 72, 75, 81, 94, 99, 115, 117, 124, 146, 

147, 182, 186, 189, 210 

flood(s), 118, 120, 128, 129, 132, 157, 165, 

172, 183, 184, 190, 210, 211 

flooding, 13, 113, 121, 129, 130, 157, 164, 

165, 168, 172, 174, 189, 205, 210 

floodplain(s), 24, 35, 108, 129, 131, 132, 157, 

174, 191, 192, 212 

hiking, 50, 54–57, 71, 81, 99, 103–105, 139, 

179, 180, 199, 200, 203, 219, 220, 222, 235 

interpretation, 24, 30–32, 36, 51, 52, 55, 57, 

67, 68, 71, 73–77, 82, 84, 85, 93, 97–104, 

107, 119, 124, 140, 141, 164, 165, 168, 171, 

172, 178–180, 184, 185, 188, 198–201, 218, 

219, 220, 234 

National Environmental Policy Act, 34, 36, 

86, 90, 155 

National Historic Preservation Act, 19, 21–

23, 34, 86, 87, 107, 155, 156, 188, 208, 232 

national register/National Register of 

Historic Places, 16, 21–23, 30, 37, 56, 72, 

81, 86, 87, 119, 121, 124, 126, 156, 168, 169, 

171, 184, 185, 187, 188, 205– 208, 232, 235 

Native American(s), 21, 24, 37, 72, 87, 92, 

113, 124, 125, 128, 175, 194, 214 (see also 

American Indians)

natural resource, 4, 17, 23, 36, 37, 38, 40, 52, 

53, 55, 57, 58, 60, 63–65, 84, 88–90, 98, 99, 

102, 104, 105, 114, 122, 136, 141, 143, 152, 

155–158, 163, 166, 176, 183, 195, 199, 215, 

219, 236, 282, 284, 285 

noxious plants, 47 

orientation, 36, 47, 51, 58, 67, 74, 102, 103, 

140, 179, 180, 200, 220 

parking, 12, 28, 32, 46, 47, 50–52, 56, 60, 63, 

64, 67, 72–75, 77, 82, 83, 89, 98–103, 105, 

129, 152, 163, 164, 166, 187, 191, 192, 194, 

197, 199, 210–212, 214, 219, 235 

Section 106, 86, 107, 156, 188, 208, 232 

soils, 25, 35, 39, 40, 88, 129–131, 158, 175, 

192, 193, 212, 213 

threatened and endangered species, 16, 18, 

26, 36, 88, 91, 134, 135, 159, 177, 196, 216, 

231, 236 

threatened species, (see threatened and 

endangered species)

traffic, 30, 47, 63, 67, 68, 71, 77, 84, 98, 120, 

136, 144, 163, 166, 188, 198, 223 

trail(s), 4, 11–14, 19, 30, 47, 48, 50, 51, 54–57, 

63–65, 67, 68, 71–75, 77, 81–84, 88, 89, 91, 

93, 95, 98–105, 115, 120, 123, 124, 130, 138, 

139, 145–147, 152, 162, 170, 172, 176, 179, 

180, 182, 186, 188, 189, 193–195, 198–200, 

203, 207, 208, 210, 213–215, 218–220, 222, 

227, 228, 230, 231, 233, 235, 236 

user capacity/capacities, 45, 46 

vegetation, 13, 23, 26, 35, 38, 48, 52, 54–56, 

64, 72–74, 83, 88, 89, 94, 98, 102, 122–124, 

132, 158, 163, 168, 170, 171, 175, 176, 179, 

188–190, 192, 194, 196, 199, 203, 209, 210, 

212, 214, 219, 223 

vehicle(s), 32, 38, 39, 47, 51, 52, 55, 56, 60, 

63, 68, 71, 73, 75, 78, 81, 97, 100, 102–105, 

139, 152, 163, 164, 171, 177, 178, 180, 182, 

185, 188, 190, 197, 198, 202, 206, 209, 217, 

218, 222 

viewshed(s), 4, 20, 31, 34, 50, 57, 58, 64, 65, 

72, 74, 84, 95, 99, 100, 104, 126, 144, 163, 

189, 210, 234 

visitor experience(s), 15, 27, 28, 36, 45, 47–

49, 52, 53, 58, 60, 67, 77, 86, 91, 109, 137, 

152, 155, 156, 161, 179, 180, 198–200, 218–

220, 282 

visitors with disabilities, 60, 209 

visual intrusion, 209 

288 
water quality, 25, 35, 48, 89, 157, 173, 174, 

191, 192, 211 

water quantity, 191, 212 

wetland(s), 13, 16, 19, 35, 54, 73, 82, 89, 98, 

104, 108, 128, 129, 133, 173, 174, 190, 191, 

211, 212 

wildlife, 19, 26, 35, 55, 88, 89, 134, 159, 176, 

177, 195, 196, 215, 216

289 
As the nation’s principal conservation agency, the Department of the Interior has 

responsibility for most of our nationally owned public lands and natural resources. This 

includes fostering sound use of our land and water resources; protecting our fish, wildlife, 

and biological diversity; preserving the environmental and cultural values of our national 

parks and historical places; and providing for the enjoyment of life through outdoor 

recreation. The department assesses our energy and mineral resources and works to ensure 

that their development is in the best interests of all our people by encouraging stewardship 

and citizen participation in their care. The department also has a major responsibility for 

American Indian reservation communities and for people who live in island territories under 

U.S. administration. 

NPS D-70 August 2008 This document was printed on recycled paper. 
Harpers Ferry National Historical Park

National Park Service • U.S. Department of the Interior