U.S. Department of the Interior 

National Park Service 

American Battlefield Protection Program 

Update to the 

Civil War Sites Advisory Commission 

 Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

State of North Carolina

Washington, DC 

 April 2010
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of North Carolina 

Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission 

Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields

State of North Carolina

U.S. Department of the Interior 

National Park Service 

American Battlefield Protection Program 

Washington, DC 

April 2010 

Authority 

The American Battlefield Protection Program Act of 1996, as amended by the Civil War 

Battlefield Preservation Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-359, 111 Stat. 3016, 17 December 

2002), directs the Secretary of the Interior to update the Civil War Sites Advisory 

Commission (CWSAC) Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields. 

Acknowledgments 

NPS Project Team Paul Hawke, Project Leader; Kathleen Madigan, Survey Coordinator; 

Tanya Gossett and January Ruck, Reporting; Matthew Borders, Historian; Kristie Kendall, 

Program Assistant 

Battlefield Surveyor(s) Joseph E. Brent, Mudpuppy & Waterdog, Inc., and Doug Stover, 

Cape Hatteras National Seashore 

Respondents Paul Branch, Fort Macon State Park; Jim Gabbert, National Park Service; 

Charles L. Heath and Jeffrey D. Irwin, Fort Bragg Cultural Resources Management Program; 

Delores Hall, North Carolina Office of State Archaeology; L. Lyle Holland, Historical 

Preservation Group, Inc.; Jim McKee, Brunswick Town/Fort Anderson State Historic Site; 

Randy Sauls, Goldsborough Bridge Battlefield Association; Walt Smith, Averasboro 

Battlefield Commission, Inc.; Jim Steele, Fort Fisher State Historic Site; Doug Stover, Cape 

Hatteras National Seashore; Donny Taylor, Bentonville Battlefield State Historic Site; Ann 

Swallow, North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office 

Cover: The earthen battlements of Fort Fisher, now a state historic site. The Confederate 

stronghold was attacked repeatedly during the Civil War. It finally fell to Federal forces in January 

1865. Photograph by Joseph E. Brent, 2008.
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of North Carolina 

Table of Contents 

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ......................................................................................... 1

INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 3

SYNOPSIS ............................................................................................................ 4

METHOD STATEMENT ......................................................................................... 9

RESEARCH AND FIELD SURVEYS .......................................................................................... 9 

QUESTIONNAIRES........................................................................................................... 12 

SUMMARY OF CONDITIONS OF NORTH CAROLINA’S CIVIL WAR 

BATTLEFIELDS ................................................................................................... 13

QUANTIFIED LAND AREAS ............................................................................................... 13 

CONDITION ASSESSMENTS ............................................................................................... 15 

REGISTRATION............................................................................................................... 15 

STEWARDSHIP ............................................................................................................... 17 

PUBLIC ACCESS AND INTERPRETATION ............................................................................... 19 

LOCAL ADVOCACY ........................................................................................................ 21 

INDIVIDUAL BATTLEFIELD PROFILES.......................................................... 23 

APPENDICES ...................................................................................................... 84

APPENDIX A. CIVIL WAR BATTLEFIELD PRESERVATION ACT OF 2002 ................................... 84 

APPENDIX B. BATTLEFIELD QUESTIONNAIRE ..................................................................... 87 

APPENDIX C. CIVIL WAR BATTLEFIELD LAND ACQUISITION GRANTS...................................... 90 

APPENDIX D. AMERICAN BATTLEFIELD PROTECTION PROGRAM PLANNING GRANTS ................ 91 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of North Carolina 3

Introduction 

The information in this report fulfills, in part, the purposes of the Civil War Battlefield 

Preservation Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-359, 111 Stat. 3016). Those purposes are: 

1) to act quickly and proactively to preserve and protect nationally significant Civil 

War battlefields through conservation easements and fee-simple purchases of those 

battlefields from willing sellers; and 

2) to create partnerships among state and local governments, regional entities, and 

the private sector to preserve, conserve, and enhance nationally significant Civil 

War battlefields. 

The Civil War Battlefield Preservation Act of 2002 directs the Secretary of the Interior, 

acting through the American Battlefield Protection Program (ABPP) of the National Park 

Service, to update the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission (CWSAC) Report on the Nation’s 

Civil War Battlefields. The CWSAC was established by Congress in 1991 and published its 

report in 1993. Congress provided funding for this update in FY 2005 and FY 2007. 

Congress asked that the updated report reflect the following: 

• Preservation activities carried out at the 384 battlefields identified by the CWSAC 

during the period between 1993 and the update; 

• Changes in the condition of the battlefields during that period; and 

• Any other relevant developments relating to the battlefields during that period. 

In accordance with the legislation, this report presents information about Civil War 

battlefields in North Carolina for use by Congress, federal, state, and local government 

agencies, landowners, and other interest groups. Other state reports will be issued as 

surveys and analyses are completed. 

Figure 1. CWSAC Battlefields in North Carolina. 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of North Carolina 4

Synopsis 

There are 20 CWSAC battlefields in the state of North Carolina. Historically, these 

battlefields encompassed nearly 240,000 acres.1

 Today, about 173,000 acres, or 72 percent, 

retain sufficient significance and enough integrity to make them worthy of preservation.2

 

It is important to note that much of the war in North Carolina took place on water—the 

Atlantic Ocean, Albemarle Sound, the Neuse and Cape Fear rivers, and numerous other 

navigable waterways. For battlefields with significant water components, preservation 

takes on a different cast. Identification and protection of shipwrecks and other 

submerged historic resources becomes a priority. 

Since 1993, preservation and conservation agencies and organizations have doubled the 

amount of permanently protected Civil War battlefield land in North Carolina. Today, 

nearly 8,000 acres of land are permanently protected by governments and private 

nonprofit organizations (see Table 8). State agencies are primarily responsible for this 

outcome. Land trusts and battlefield friends groups are also playing significant roles. 

Opportunities to more fully protect these sites within the next decade remain good. 

During its assessment, the CWSAC used a four-tiered system that combined historic 

significance, current condition, and level of threat to determine priorities for preservation 

among the battlefields. Nationwide, the CWSAC identified 50 top priority battlefields; 

only one, Bentonville, was in North Carolina. The CWSAC viewed these battlefields as the 

most historically significant of the war, the most endangered in 1993, and having a 

“critical need for action.” 

The CWSAC assigned three more North Carolina battlefields to the second highest priority, 

those considered “opportunities for comprehensive preservation.” These were battlefields 

“in relatively good condition, [and] face few threats, but are relatively unprotected....” 

The third priority included battlefields “that already have substantial historic land under 

protection and face limited threats,” but that needed “some additional land protection.” 

Six were in North Carolina. 

The CWSAC’s fourth and lowest priority was for “fragmented” battlefields. The CWSAC 

explained, “While some lost battlefields are truly obliterated, important remnants of 

others still exist....” Although these sites “to varying degrees no longer convey an 

authentic sense of the sweep and setting of the battle, they often remain important areas 

suitable for interpretation, museums, and commemoration.”3

 In 1993, the CWSAC 

determined that ten North Carolina battlefields had been substantially compromised by 

post-war development. 

 

1

Using GIS, and accounting for overlapping areas, the ABPP calculated that the Study Areas for the 20 battlefields in North Carolina 

represent 239,655.57acres. 

2

Using GIS, and accounting for overlapping areas, the ABPP calculated that the Potential National Register Boundaries for the 20

battlefields in North Carolina represent 172,697.80 acres. 

3

Civil War Sites Advisory Commission, Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields, Washington, DC: National Park Service, U.S. 

Department of the Interior, 1993, 22- 23.
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of North Carolina 5

CWSAC Priority Battlefield County 

II Comprehensive Monroe’s Cross Roads (NC018) Hoke, Cumberland, Moore 

 Preservation Roanoke Island (NC002) Dare 

 Possible Wyse Fork (NC017) Lenoir, Craven, Jones 

3 Battlefields 

Table 2. CWSAC Preservation Priorities from 1993 – Second Tier 

CWSAC Priority Battlefield County 

I Critical Need Bentonville (NC020) Johnston, Sampson, Wayne 

 1 Battlefield 

Table 1. CWSAC Preservation Priorities from 1993 – First Tier 

North Carolina’s only top priority battlefield from 1993, Bentonville, remains rural. Its 

landscape is remarkably intact. Scattered development exists within the battlefield, 

especially along its intricate road network, but the pace of development has remained 

slow. This has allowed the State to actively preserve historic parcels as part of Bentonville 

Battlefield State Historic Site. Since 1993, the State has protected more than 1,200 acres. 

If the complimentary trends of slow, low-impact land development and State protection 

efforts continue, much more of this nationally significant battlefield can be saved within 

the decade. 

Of the three battlefields noted as being good opportunities for preservation in 1993, 

Roanoke Island has been most affected by development. Accelerating growth from 

Manteo has overwhelmed the battlefield so that only the western edge of the island and 

Croatan Sound still have integrity; however, comprehensive preservation of the battlefield 

is no longer possible. Much of the surviving battlefield is protected by the National Park 

Service and the State of North Carolina. A few undeveloped private parcels also remain. 

These parcels are the last unprotected pieces of the February 1862 battlefield. 

Monroe’s Cross Roads and Wyse Fork survive in good condition. Most of the 

Monroe’s Cross Roads battlefield lies within the U.S. Army’s Fort Bragg Military 

Reservation. As long as the Army owns the military reservation, the battlefield will remain 

out of the path of private development. Wyse Fork is threatened by development 

associated with U.S. Route 70 and the proposed U.S. Route 70 Kinston Bypass. Immediate 

protection of Wyse Fork should be the focus of federal, state, and local efforts. 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of North Carolina 6

CWSAC Priority Battlefield County 

III Additional Albemarle Sound (NC013) Chowan, Bertie, Washington 

Protection Averasborough (NC019) Harnett, Cumberland 

Needed Fort Anderson (NC010) Craven, Jones 

 6 Battlefields Fort Macon (NC004) Carteret 

 South Mills (NC005) Camden 

 Tranter’s Creek (NC006) Beaufort, Pitt 

Table 3. CWSAC Preservation Priorities from 1993 – Third Tier 

The ABPP’s review of third tier battlefields in North Carolina found a mix of conditions. 

The battle of Albemarle Sound was a naval engagement entirely. The battlefield’s 

setting is diminished by development on the sound’s northern shoreline and by the State 

Route 32 bridge, which cuts across the battlefield’s Core Area. Beyond the need to avoid 

construction of future bridges through the battlefield, little other protection can be 

accomplished in the waters of the sound. 

The third tier battlefield in the best condition and experiencing the most disquieting 

development pressures is Averasborough. Residential development has begun to take 

hold within the battlefield. Farms that had been in agricultural use since the Civil War are 

being subdivided to accommodate new houses. Additional growth is expected within the 

next decade. At South Mills and Tranter’s Creek, the battlefield Core Areas remain in 

pristine condition, but surrounding land has been compromised by modern road 

construction and associated development. The ABPP believes that these three battlefields 

should be viewed as higher priorities for preservation. 

At Fort Anderson, the areas of naval engagement and maneuver are still apparent, 

especially within the Neuse and Trent rivers, but little of the land portion of the battlefield 

survives. There is only limited opportunity for land protection, notably near today’s Jones 

Corner where the Confederates made their initial attack at Deep Gully. 

The final third tier battlefield, Fort Macon, is protected. More than 75 percent of the 

battlefield is either part of Fort Macon State Park or within the waters of the Rachel 

Carson Estuarine Sanctuary in Beaufort Inlet. Today, preservation of the fort and 

conservation of its setting help to sustain historic and natural resources and offer 

outstanding opportunities for public education. 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of North Carolina 7

CWSAC Priority Battlefield County/City 

IV Fragmented/ Fort Fisher I (NC014) New Hanover

 Destroyed Fort Fisher II (NC015) New Hanover, Brunswick

10 Battlefields Goldsborough Bridge (NC009) Wayne 

 Hatteras Inlet Batteries (NC001) Dare 

 Kinston (NC007) Lenoir 

 New Berne (NC003) Craven 

 Plymouth (NC012) Washington, Bertie, Martin 

 Washington (NC011) Beaufort, Craven 

 White Hall (NC008) Wayne, Duplin 

 Wilmington (NC016) New Hanover, Brunswick 

Table 4. CWSAC Preservation Priorities from 1993 – Fourth Tier 

The ABPP confirmed most of the CWSAC’s assessments of North Carolina’s severely 

fragmented and “lost” battlefields. Only Hatteras Inlet Batteries and White Hall can 

be characterized as having good integrity. The remaining battlefields are fractured 

landscapes. 

The battlefield associated with the naval action against the Hatteras Inlet Batteries is 

primarily located in the Atlantic Ocean. The land portion of the battlefield is protected 

within the Cape Hatteras National Seashore. Opportunities for further land protection are 

limited. The White Hall battlefield retains enough historic terrain and features to be 

reconsidered for preservation. About 70 acres of the battlefield are protected within Cliffs 

of the Neuse State Park. Further efforts to preserve land at White Hall may be most 

effective by targeting Core Area lands adjacent to the state park on both sides of the 

Neuse River. 

Of the remaining fourth tier battlefields, all but Plymouth present limited preservation 

opportunities. Small but significant parcels may still be identified and protected at Fort 

Fisher I, Fort Fisher II, Goldsborough Bridge, Kinston, New Berne, Washington, 

and Wilmington. Except for the historic waterways used by the opposing navies, 

Plymouth’s landscape has been destroyed by significant changes in land use since the 

Civil War. Plymouth provides opportunities for commemoration, but few opportunities 

for cultural resource preservation. 

See the Individual Battlefield Profiles for detailed condition assessments and preservation 

recommendations. The National Park Service will issue updated priorities after all CWSAC 

battlefields nationwide have been surveyed and all state reports have been completed. 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of North Carolina 8

Figure 2: The rural landscape of the Bentonville battlefield. Photograph by Joseph E. Brent, 2008. 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of North Carolina 9

Method Statement 

Congress instructed the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the American Battlefield 

Protection Program (ABPP), to report on changes in the condition of the battlefields since 

1993 and on “preservation activities” and “other relevant developments” carried out at 

each battlefield since 1993. To fulfill those assignments, the ABPP 1) conducted a site 

survey of each battlefield, and 2) prepared and sent out questionnaires to battlefield 

managers and advocacy organizations (see Appendix B). 

The 1993 significance rankings for each battlefield stand. Significance was assigned by the 

Civil War Sites Advisory Commission and the ABPP sustains the CWSAC’s opinions as to the 

relevant importance of each battle within the larger context of the war. 

Research and Field Surveys 

The ABPP conducted the field assessments of North Carolina battlefields from February 

through May 2008. The surveys entailed additional historical research, on-the-ground 

documentation and assessment of site conditions, identification of impending threats to 

each site, and site mapping. Surveyors used a Global Positioning System (GPS) receiver to 

map historic features of each battlefield and used a Geographic Information System (GIS) 

program to draw site boundaries. The ABPP retains all final survey materials. Each 

battlefield survey file includes a survey form (field notes, list of defining features, list of 

documentary sources, and a photo log), photographs, spatial coordinates of significant 

features, and boundaries described on USGS topographic maps. The surveys did not 

include archeological investigations for reasons of time and expense. 

Study Areas and Core Areas 

The CWSAC identified a Study Area and a Core Area for each principal battlefield in North 

Carolina (see Figure 3 for definitions). The CWSAC boundaries have proven invaluable as 

guides to local land and resource preservation efforts at Civil War battlefields. However, 

since 1993, the National Park Service has refined its battlefield survey methodology, which 

include research, working with site stewards, identifying and documenting lines of 

approach and withdrawal used by opposing forces, and applying the concepts of military 

terrain analysis to all battlefield landscapes. The ABPP’s Battlefield Survey Manual explains 

the field methods employed during this study.4

 The surveys also incorporate the concepts 

recommended in the National Register of Historic Places’ Guidelines for Identifying, 

Evaluating, and Registering America’s Historic Battlefields, which was published in 1992 

after the CWSAC had completed its original assessments of the battlefields. 

Using its refined methodology, the ABPP was able to validate or adjust the CWSAC’s Study 

Area and Core Area boundaries to reflect more accurately the full nature and original 

resources of the battlefields (see Table 5). In North Carolina, the refined methodology 

resulted in significant increases in the size of Study Areas, Core Areas, or both. However, it 

is important to note that the Study Area and Core Area boundaries are simply historical 

boundaries that describe where the battle took place; neither indicates the current 

integrity of the battlefield landscape, so neither can be used on its own to identify 

surviving portions of battlefield land that may merit protection and preservation. 

 

4

 American Battlefield Protection Program, “Battlefield Survey Manual,” (Washington, DC: National Park Service, revised 2007). 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of North Carolina 10

Figure 3: Boundary Definitions

The Study Area represents the historic 

extent of the battle as it unfolded across the 

landscape. The Study Area contains resources 

known to relate to or contribute to the battle 

event: where troops maneuvered and 

deployed, immediately before, during, and 

after combat, and where they fought during 

combat. Historic accounts, terrain analysis, 

and feature identification inform the 

delineation of the Study Area boundary. The 

Study Area indicates the extent to which 

historic and archeological resources 

associated with the battle (areas of combat, 

command, communications, logistics, medical 

services, etc.) may be found. Surveyors 

delineated Study Area boundaries for every 

battle site that was positively identified 

through research and field survey, regardless 

of its present integrity. 

The Core Area represents the areas of 

fighting on the battlefield. Positions that 

delivered or received fire, and the intervening 

space and terrain between them, fall within 

the Core Area. Frequently described as 

“hallowed ground,” land within the Core 

Area is often the first to be targeted for 

protection. There may be more than one 

Core Area on a battlefield, but all lie within 

the Study Area. 

Unlike the Study and Core Areas, which are 

based only upon the interpretation of historic 

events, the Potential National Register 

(PotNR) boundary represents ABPP’s 

assessment of a Study Area’s current integrity 

(the surviving landscape and features that 

convey the site’s historic sense of place). The 

PotNR boundary may include all or some of 

the Study Area, and all or some of the Core 

Area. Lands within PotNR boundaries should 

be considered worthy of further attention, 

although future evaluations may reveal more 

or less integrity than indicated by the ABPP 

surveys. 

Potential National Register Boundaries

To address the question of what part of the 

battlefield remains reasonably intact and 

warrants preservation, this study introduced a 

third boundary line that was not attempted 

by the CWSAC: the Potential National 

Register boundary (see Figure 3). 

Looking at each Study Area, the surveyors 

assigned PotNR boundaries where they 

judged that enough battlefield land remained 

to convey the significance of the engagement. 

In a few cases, the PotNR boundary 

encompasses the entire Study Area. In most 

cases, however, the PotNR boundary includes 

less land than identified in the full Study Area. 

In assigning PotNR boundaries, the ABPP 

followed National Register of Historic Places 

(NRHP) guidelines when identifying and 

mapping areas that retain integrity and 

cohesion within the Study Areas.5

 However, 

because the ABPP focuses only on areas of 

battle, the ABPP did not evaluate lands 

adjacent to the Study Area that may 

contribute to a broader historical and 

chronological definition of “cultural 

landscape.” Lands outside of the Study Area 

associated with other historic events and 

cultural practices may need to be evaluated in 

preparation for a formal nomination of the 

cultural landscape. 

Most importantly, the PotNR boundary does 

not constitute a formal determination of 

eligibility by the Keeper of the National 

Register of Historic Places.

6

 The PotNR 

boundary is designed to be used as a planning 

tool for government agencies and the public. 

Like the Study and Core Area boundaries, the 

PotNR boundary places no restriction on 

private property use. 

The term integrity, as defined by the NRHP, is 

“the ability of a property to convey its 

 

5

 For general guidance about integrity issues and National Register of Historic Places properties, see National Park Service, How to 

Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation (Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior, revised 1997) (National 

Register Bulletin 15). The survey evaluations described above do not meet the more stringent integrity standards for National 

Historic Landmark designation. See National Park Service, How to Prepare National Historic Landmark Nominations (Washington, 

DC: U.S. Department of the Interior, 1999), 36- 37. 

6

 See 36 CFR 60.1- 14 for regulations about nominating a property to the National Register and 36 CFR 63 for regulations concerning 

Determinations of Eligibility for inclusion in the National Register.
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of North Carolina 11

significance.”7 While assessments of integrity are subjective, battlefields can have integrity 

only if they can be positively located through research and “ground-truthing,” and only if 

significant portions of the landscape’s historic terrain have not been substantially 

disturbed. Other conditions contribute to the degree of integrity a battlefield retains: 

• the quantity and quality of surviving battle-period resources (e.g., buildings, roads, 

fence lines, military structures, and archeological features); 

• the quantity and quality of the spatial relationships between and among those 

resources and the intervening terrain that connects them; 

• the extent to which current battlefield land use is similar to battle-period land use; 

and 

• the extent to which a battlefield’s physical features and overall character visually 

communicate an authentic sense of the sweep and setting of the battle. 

Natural changes in vegetation—woods growing out of historic farm fields, for example—

do not necessarily diminish the landscape’s integrity. Significant changes in land use since 

the Civil War do affect integrity; the degree to which post-war development has altered 

and fragmented the historic landscape and destroyed historic features is critical when 

assessing integrity. Still, some post-battle development is expected; slight or moderate 

change within the battlefield may not substantially diminish a battlefield’s integrity. 

Often these post-battle “non-contributing” elements are included in the PotNR boundary 

in accordance with NRHP guidelines.8

 

The Potential National Register boundaries therefore indicate which battlefields are likely

eligible for future listing in the NRHP and likely deserving of future preservation efforts. If 

a surveyor determined that a battlefield was entirely compromised by land use 

incompatible with the preservation of historic features (i.e., it has little or no integrity), it 

did not receive a PotNR boundary. 

In cases where a battlefield is already listed in the NRHP, surveyors reassessed the existing 

documentation based on current scholarship and resource integrity, and, when 

appropriate, provided new information and proposed new boundaries as part of the 

surveys. . As a result, some PotNR boundaries will contain or share a boundary with lands 

already listed in the NRHP. In other cases, PotNR boundaries will exclude listed lands that 

have lost integrity. (See Tables 5 and 7 for boundary comparisons.)9

The data from which all three boundaries are drawn do not necessarily reflect the full 

research needed for a formal NRHP nomination. Potential National Register boundaries 

are based on an assessment of aboveground historic features associated with the cultural 

and natural landscape. The surveys did not include a professional archeological inventory 

or assessment of subsurface features or indications. In some cases, future archeological 

 

7

 National Park Service, Guidelines for Identifying, Evaluating, and Registering America’s Historic Battlefields, 1992 Revised, 1999 

(Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Interagency Resources Division) [National Register 

Bulletin 40.] Archeological integrity was not examined during this study, but should be considered in future battlefield studies and 

formal nominations to the National Register.

8

 The ABPP looks only at the battle- related elements of a cultural landscape. Post- battle elements, while not contributing to the 

significance of the battlefield, may be eligible for separate listing in the National Register of Historic Places on their own merits. 9

 The ABPP’s surveys and PotNR assessments do not constitute formal action on behalf of the Keeper of the National Register of 

Historic Places. PotNR assessments are intended for planning purposes only; they do not carry the authority to add, change, or

remove an official listing. 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of North Carolina 12

testing will help determine whether subsurface features remain, whether subsurface battle 

features convey important information about a battle or historic property, and whether 

that information may help to confirm, refine, or refute the boundaries previously 

determined by historic studies and terrain analysis. 

The ABPP survey information should be reassessed during future compliance processes 

such as the Section 106 process required by the National Historic Preservation Act10 and 

Environmental Impact Statements/Environmental Assessments required by the National 

Environmental Policy Act.11 Likewise, more detailed research and assessments should take 

place when any battlefield is formally nominated to the NRHP or proposed for designation 

as a National Historic Landmark (NHL). New research and intensive-level surveys of these 

sites will enlighten future preservation and compliance work. Agencies should continue to 

consult local and state experts for up-to-date information about these battlefields. 

Seven North Carolina battlefields are already listed in the NRHP or are designated NHLs 

(see Table 7). At each of these battlefields, the ABPP recommends a PotNR boundary of 

greater size than the existing NRHP boundary (although the PotNR may not trace the 

existing boundary exactly if previously registered land has lost integrity). 

Questionnaires

While the ABPP maintains data about its own program activities at Civil War battlefields, 

most preservation work occurs at the local level. Therefore, to answer Congress's directive 

for information about battlefield preservation activities, the ABPP sought input from local 

battlefield managers and advocacy organizations. The ABPP distributed questionnaires 

designed to gather information about the types of preservation activities that have taken 

place at the battlefields since 1993. The Questionnaire is reproduced in Appendix B. 

In North Carolina, representatives of nine organizations completed and returned 

questionnaires. Their responses, combined with the survey findings, allowed the ABPP to 

create a profile of conditions and activities at North Carolina’s Civil War battlefields. 

 

10 16 USC 470f. 

11 42 USC 4331- 4332.
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of North Carolina 13

Summary of Conditions of North Carolina’s Civil War 

Battlefields 

Quantified Land Areas 

Using Geographic Information Systems (GIS) software, the ABPP calculated the amount of 

land historically associated with the battle (Study Area), the amount of land where forces 

were engaged (Core Area), and the amount of land that may retain enough integrity to be 

eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (Potential National Register 

boundary). 

As noted above, Study Areas and Core Areas have been revised in many cases. In 

particular, the original CWSAC surveys did not consistently include routes of approach and 

withdrawal or secondary actions that influenced the course or outcome of the battle. The 

revised boundaries take these movements and actions into account.12 In some instances, 

new or additional research has sharpened historical understanding of battle events. 

Therefore, the ABPP determined that additional lands belong appropriately in the Study 

and Core Areas because they lend additional understanding to the battle story. The 

individual battlefield profiles at the end of this report provide additional information 

about the extent of and reasons for any revisions to the CWSAC Study Area and Core Area 

boundaries. 

Table 5 lists the size of the three boundaries, as determined by the ABPP, for each 

battlefield. Because Civil War armies waged numerous battles in North Carolina over the 

same ground, the total number of battlefield acres in North Carolina is lower than a 

straight tally would indicate. Calculating for the overlapping areas of the battlefields, 

there are 239,655.57 total Study Area acres, 52,722.23 total Core Area acres, and 

172,697.80 total acres likely eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places 

(NRHP) in North Carolina. 

Table 5. Battlefield Area Statistics

Battlefield Study Area Core Area 

PotNR 

Boundary

Albemarle Sound (NC013) 30,946.17 14,214.01 30,946.17

Averasborough (NC019) 6,142.85 3,186.73 6,142.85

Bentonville (NC020) 31,694.42 4,269.43 29,795.40

Fort Anderson (NC010) 10,109.17 950.97 4,016.90

Fort Fisher I (NC014) 9,714.89 2,367.25 8,074.59

Fort Fisher II (NC015) 12,205.58 3,343.19 10,303.96

Fort Macon (NC004) 2,897.66 1,200.27 2,219.80

Goldsborough Bridge (NC009) 1,990.46 602.36 514.17

 

12 National Register Bulletin 40, Guidelines for Identifying, Evaluating, and Registering America’s Historic Battlefields 

(http://www.nps.gov/nr/publications/bulletins/pdfs/NRB40.pdf), offers recommendations regarding “Selecting Defensible 

Boundaries.” While this document indicates that “generally, boundaries should not be drawn to include the portion of the route 

taken to the battlefield where there were no encounters,” the guidelines also state that “a basic principle is to include within the 

boundary all of the locations where opposing forces, either before, during or after the battle, took actions based on their assumption 

of being in the presence of the enemy.” See the individual battlefield profiles for information about military actions along the routes 

included. In accordance with the methodology of this study, if routes included in the Study Area retain integrity, they are included 

within the Potential National Register boundary for the battlefield landscape. 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of North Carolina 14

Hatteras Inlet Batteries (NC001) 14,205.43 2,182.26 13,731.82

Kinston (NC007) 10,555.78 2,088.26 2,969.58

Monroe's Cross Roads (NC018) 17,527.05 904.57 13,820.25

New Berne (NC003) 3,917.62 696.31 301.85

Plymouth (NC012) 3,280.45 1,113.05 1,599.65

Roanoke Island (NC002) 12,304.16 2,966.33 8,881.84

South Mills (NC005) 3,206.82 1,100.12 1,534.37

Tranter's Creek (NC006) 2,077.84 156.67 652.32

Washington (NC011) 26,775.05 4,720.98 18,074.04

White Hall (NC008) 7,274.28 376.10 5,015.85

Wilmington (NC016) 28,829.79 5,916.09 13,777.21

Wyse Fork (NC017) 17,308.31 2,683.75 12,011.47

Figure 4: A view from Nixon’s Beach across the main area of engagement during the Battle of 

Albemarle Sound. Photograph by Joseph E. Brent, 2008. 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of North Carolina 15

Condition Assessments 

Using field survey data, the ABPP assessed the overall condition of each battlefield’s Study 

Area. While no battlefield remains completely unaltered since the Civil War, 11 of North 

Carolina’s 20 battlefields have experienced relatively little or only moderate change to 

their terrain and aboveground battle features in nearly 150 years.13

Registration 

The nation’s official method for recognizing historic properties worthy of preservation is 

listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). As of 2009, nearly 9,500 acres at 7 

North Carolina Civil War battlefields have been listed in the NRHP, including 3 that are 

designated National Historic Landmarks (NHLs). 14 Based on the ABPP’s findings of 

integrity, additional historically significant land could be added to those listings. The ABPP 

also found that portions of 13 other battlefields, encompassing some 163,200 acres of land 

and water, could also be eligible for listing. 

Registered battlefields meet national standards for documentation, physical integrity, and 

demonstrable significance to the history of the nation. Federal, state, and local agencies 

use information from the NRHP as a planning tool to identify and make decisions about 

cultural resources. Federal and state laws, most notably Section 106 of the National 

Historic Preservation Act of 1966, require agencies to account for the effects their projects 

(roads, wetland permits, quarrying, cell towers, etc.) may have on listed and eligible 

historic properties, such as battlefields. Listing allows project designers to quickly identify 

the battlefield and avoid or minimize impacts to the landscape. 

Properties listed in the NRHP are also eligible for numerous federal and state historic 

preservation grant programs. Recognition as a registered battlefield may also advance 

 

13 The condition of archeological resources within the battlefields was not assessed. Future studies are needed to determine the

degree of archeological integrity associated with subsurface battle deposits. 14 National Register of Historic Places, National Park Service, Washington, DC. The sum of listed lands is 9,483.45 acres. 

Note that some National Register lands may have lost integrity since they were listed.

Table 6: Battlefield Condition Summary 

Condition Battlefield 

Land use and terrain is little 

changed (6)

Albemarle Sound, Averasborough, Bentonville, 

Hatteras Inlet Batteries, Monroe's Cross Roads, 

Wyse Fork

Portions of landscape have been 

altered, but most essential features 

remain (5)

Fort Macon, Roanoke Island, South Mills, Tranter's 

Creek, White Hall 

Much of the landscape has been 

altered and fragmented, leaving 

some essential features (9)

Fort Anderson, Fort Fisher I, Fort Fisher II, 

Goldsborough Bridge, Kinston, New Berne, 

Plymouth, Washington, Wilmington 

Landscape and terrain have been 

altered beyond recognition (0) 

None
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of North Carolina 16

public understanding of and appreciation for the battlefield, and may encourage advocacy 

for its preservation.15

Table 7 compares the number of acres already designated or listed with the number of 

acres that are likely to meet the same criteria, but are not currently part of the existing 

NRHP or NHL boundary. As noted earlier, several North Carolina battlefields overlap in 

land area. Therefore, the total amount of intact land potentially eligible for listing is 

lower than a simple tally of the data.16 

That so many of the state’s Civil War battlefields survive appears to be due to a 

combination of factors: rural settings, the nature of naval battles, and protective 

ownership. The rural locations of Averasborough and Bentonville have seen a slower 

 

15 There are three levels of federal recognition for historic properties. Congressional designations, such as national park (NPS) units, 

National Historic Landmarks (NHL), and listings in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). Congress creates national 

park units, which are automatically listed in the NRHP. The Secretary of the Interior designates National Historic Landmarks –

nationally significant historic sites – for their exceptional value or quality in illustrating or interpreting the heritage of the United 

States. The National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) is the nation’s official list of cultural sites significant at the national, state, 

or local level and worthy of preservation. Historic units of the National Park System and NHLs are also listed in the National

Register. 

16 Using GIS, and accounting for overlapping areas, the ABPP calculated that the Potential National Register Boundaries for the 20 

battlefields in North Carolina represent 172,697.80 acres. 

Table 7: Existing Registration and Acres Potentially Eligible for 

Registration 

Battlefield Designation

Potentially 

Eligible (PotNR)

Acres

Registered 

Acres 

Unlisted 

Acres

Albemarle Sound (NC013) 30,946.17 0.00 30,946.17

Averasborough (NC019) NRHP 6,142.85 4,773.30 1,369.55

Bentonville (NC020) NHL 29,795.40 3,663.80 26,131.60

Fort Anderson (NC010) 4,016.90 0.00 4,016.90

Fort Fisher I (NC014)* NHL 8,074.59 190.25 7,884.33

Fort Fisher II (NC015)* NHL 10,303.96 190.25 10,113.71

Fort Macon (NC004) NRHP 2,219.80 28.40 2,191.41

Goldsborough Bridge (NC009) 514.17 0.00 514.17

Hatteras Inlet Batteries (NC001) 13,731.82 0.00 13,731.82

Kinston (NC007) NRHP 2,969.58 584.06 2,385.52

Monroe's Cross Roads (NC018) 13,820.25 0.00 13,820.25

New Berne (NC003) NRHP 301.85 99.00 202.85

Plymouth (NC012) 1,599.65 0.00 1,599.65

Roanoke Island (NC002) 8,881.84 0.00 8,881.84

South Mills (NC005) 1,534.37 0.00 1,534.37

Tranter's Creek (NC006) 652.32 0.00 652.32

Washington (NC011) 18,074.04 0.00 18,074.04

White Hall (NC008) 5,015.85 0.00 5,015.85

Wilmington (NC016)* 13,777.21 0.00 13,777.21

Wyse Fork (NC017) 12,011.47 0.00 12,011.47

*Individual shipwreck sites associated with these battles are listed in the National Register of Historic Places as part of the

Cape Fear Civil War Shipwrecks Discontiguous District. 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of North Carolina 17

pace of development than have other areas of North Carolina, giving the Averasboro 

Battlefield Commission and the State time to purchase and permanently set aside 

historically important parcels. Numerous Civil War battles in North Carolina were 

principally naval engagements (the May 1864 battle of Albemarle Sound took place 

entirely on water). Of course, substantial portions of these historic sites are water, and the 

Federal or the State government often protects adjacent lands. Examples include Fort 

Fisher I, Fort Fisher II, Fort Macon, and Hatteras Inlet Batteries. At Monroe’s Cross 

Roads, most of the battlefield is located on the U.S. Army’s Fort Bragg Military 

Reservation, safe from private development pressure (although the Army’s use of the field 

as an artillery training range has affected the surface of the historic landscape). Both land 

and water components can be included in site nominations to the NRHP. 

Stewardship 

The first public owners of Civil War battlefields in North Carolina were Federal agencies. 

In 1918, the United States Army set aside some 127,000 acres for a new military post, Fort 

Bragg.17 Monroe’s Crossroads battlefield lay within the new post’s boundaries. In 1937, 

the USDA Forest Service established the Croatan National Forest, which included features 

along the Neuse River associated with the Fort Anderson battlefield. In 1941, Congress 

established the Fort Raleigh National Historic Site and the Cape Hatteras National 

Seashore, making the National Park Service the steward of parts of the Roanoke Island

and Hatteras Inlet Batteries battlefields. The military post, forest, and parks were not 

established with battlefield preservation and management in mind and only in recent 

decades have historic resources associated with the Civil War been the focus of federal 

management efforts at these sites. 

The largest battlefield landowner in North Carolina is the State itself. Since 1969, the State 

has purchased or received land and development rights for 5,000 acres of battlefield land. 

While the land was set aside for different purposes—parkland, ecological preserves, 

coastal management—the net effect is that the State is the primary steward of Civil War 

battlefields in North Carolina. 

North Carolina’s best protected Civil War battlefields are Bentonville, Fort Fisher I, Fort 

Fisher II, and Fort Macon. The State has taken ownership of nearly 3,500 acres at these 

sites, saving for future generations the remarkable coastal fortifications of Fort Fisher, the 

masonry bastion of Fort Macon and its island setting, and the core field of the 

Confederacy’s last stand in the East at Bentonville. 

At Averasborough, Kinston, and Wyse Fork, the State has worked with nonprofit 

partners and private landowners to permanently protect more than 680 acres through 

conservation easements. 

Since 1994, non-profit stewardship efforts in North Carolina have increased. Local 

organizations and land trusts, notably the North Carolina Coastal Land Trust and the 

Conservation Trust for North Carolina, have saved a total of 765 acres at Averasborough, 

Bentonville, Fort Anderson, Fort Fisher I, Fort Fisher II, Goldsborough Bridge, and 

Wilmington by purchasing land or conservation easements. Used in conjunction with or 

instead of traditional fee simple purchase, conservation easements are becoming 

increasingly popular land protection tools. Private property owners are able to keep their 

 

17 United States Army, Fort Bragg Military Reservation, Office of the Command Historian, “Fort Bragg History,”

http://www.bragg.army.mil/history/fortbragghistoryshort.htm
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of North Carolina 18

land and receive tax benefits for donating an easement, but future development of the 

land is prohibited. 

Local governments also assume the responsibility of battlefield stewards. Brunswick 

County owns approximately 625 acres of the Wilmington battlefield (Town Creek action), 

within its new Brunswick Nature Park. Lenoir County owns 125 historic acres at Kinston

and Wyse Fork. Wayne County acquired 31 acres at the Goldsborough Bridge

battlefield and partners with the all-volunteer Goldsborough Bridge Battlefield 

Association to maintain and interpret the site. The City of Washington holds a 

conservation easement on 192 acres of the Washington battlefield. 

Table 8 compares total lands protected by federal, state, local, and nonprofit entities in 

North Carolina. 

Table 8: Summary of Battlefield Stewardship in North Carolina

Steward Battlefield at Which Land or 

Development Rights are Owned 

Total Acres 

Protected* 

 

Federal Government Fort Anderson, Hatteras Inlet Batteries, 

Roanoke Island, Wilmington 

1,270.19

State Government Albemarle Sound, Averasborough, Bentonville, 

Fort Fisher I, Fort Fisher II, Fort Macon, Kinston, 

Monroe's Cross Roads, New Berne, Roanoke 

Island, White Hall, Wilmington, Wyse Fork 

5,004.65

Local Governments Goldsborough Bridge, Kinston, Washington, 

Wilmington (Town Creek), Wyse Fork 

973.51

Nonprofit Organizations Averasborough, Bentonville, Fort Anderson, 

Fort Fisher I, Fort Fisher II, Wilmington 

733.98

Total 7,982.33

*Some protected parcels help preserve more than one battlefield, such as state-owned land at Fort Fisher, the scene of 

two separate battles. Acreage statistics count each parcel only once. 

Through the development of collaborative partnerships among federal, state, and local 

governments, civic organizations, nonprofit groups, and private individuals, significant 

protective measures have been and can continue to be effective in North Carolina. 

Opportunities for concerted action on the part of private landowners and land 

conservation groups are especially ripe at battlefields where most surviving lands are 

privately owned and unprotected, such as Averasborough, South Mills, Tranter’s 

Creek, White Hall, and Wyse Fork. For each battlefield, Table 9 compares the amount of 

land permanently protected from development against the total amount of land that 

remains intact but unprotected.18 This information may serve planners as a tool for 

prioritizing future preservation initiatives. 

 

18 The ABPP culled information about permanently protected lands from questionnaire respondents and numerous partner 

organizations. The data is not necessarily complete but provides an approximate idea of the amount of land protected at each 

battlefield as of 2010. 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of North Carolina 19

Table 9: Protective Stewardship of Intact Battlefield Land*

Battlefield 

ABPP PotNR 

Acres

Permanently 

Protected Acres

Unprotected Acres 

Remaining

Albemarle Sound (NC013) 30,946.17 129.90 30,816.27

Averasborough (NC019) 6,142.85 655.57 5,487.28

Bentonville (NC020) 29,795.40 1,272.56 28,522.84

Fort Anderson (NC010) 4,016.90 139.12 3,877.78

Fort Fisher I (NC014) 8,074.59 1,482.99 6,591.60

Fort Fisher II (NC015) 10,303.96 1,556.16 8,747.80

Fort Macon (NC004) 2,219.80 838.02 1,381.78

Goldsborough Bridge (NC009) 514.17 31.14 483.03

Hatteras Inlet Batteries (NC001) 13,731.82 568.33 13,163.49

Kinston (NC007) 2,969.58 143.54 2,826.04

Monroe's Cross Roads (NC018) 13,820.25 264.25 13,556.00

New Berne (NC003) 301.85 27.05 274.80

Plymouth (NC012) 1,599.65 0.00 1,599.65

Roanoke Island (NC002) 8,881.84 787.56 8,094.28

South Mills (NC005) 1,534.37 0.00 1,534.37

Tranter's Creek (NC006) 652.32 0.00 652.32

Washington (NC011) 18,074.04 192.58 17,881.46

White Hall (NC008) 5,015.85 71.18 4,944.67

Wilmington (NC016) 13,777.21 1,849.62 11,927.59

Wyse Fork (NC017) 12,011.47 59.35 11,952.12

* Not all protected lands are included in the PotNR boundaries. 

Public Access and Interpretation 

In its questionnaire (see Appendix B), the ABPP asked battlefield stewards about the types 

of public access and interpretation available at the battlefields. The ABPP did not collect 

information about the purpose or intent of the interpretation and access, such as whether 

development of wayside exhibit was for purely educational reasons, to promote heritage 

tourism, or to boost local economic development. 

The ABPP asked respondents to indicate the type of interpretation available at or about 

the battlefield. The categories included brochures, driving tours, living history 

demonstrations, maintained historic features or areas, walking tours and trails, wayside 

exhibits, websites, and other specialized programs. The results, summarized in Table 10, 

indicate that 19 of North Carolina’s 20 Civil War battlefields currently provide some degree 

of public interpretation and educational opportunities. 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of North Carolina 20

Figure 5: Interpretation at most battlefields in North Carolina includes a North Carolina Civil 

War Trails marker like the one seen here at Goldsborough Bridge. The successful trails 

program also has an online component (http://www.civilwartraveler.com/EAST/NC/) with 

additional historical information and tourism resources. Photograph by Joseph E. Brent, 2008.

Table 10: Types of Interpretation at North Carolina Battlefields

On-site Interpretation* Battlefield 

Battlefields with public 

interpretation, including 

visitors center (13) 

Averasborough, Bentonville, Fort Fisher I, Fort Fisher II, 

Fort Macon, Hatteras Inlet Batteries, Kinston, Plymouth, 

Roanoke Island, South Mills, White Hall, Wyse Fork, 

Wilmington (Ft. Anderson action) 

Battlefields with public 

interpretation, but no visitors 

center (6) 

Albemarle Sound, Goldsborough Bridge, Monroe’s 

Cross Roads, New Berne, Tranter’s Creek, Washington 

Battlefields with no public 

interpretation (1) 

Fort Anderson

*For details, see each site's Individual Battlefield Profile 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of North Carolina 21

Local Advocacy 

Nonprofit organizations play important roles in protecting historic battlefields. They step 

in to preserve historic sites when public funding and management for historic preservation 

are absent. When public funding is available, nonprofits serve as vital partners in publicprivate preservation efforts, acting as conduits for public funds, raising critical private 

matching funds, keeping history and preservation in the public eye, and working with 

landowners to find ways to protect battlefield parcels. 

While organizations with general historical interests may play important roles in 

battlefield preservation, the nonprofit friends groups identified in Table 11 are dedicated 

to the preservation, interpretation, and promotion of a specific battlefield or battlefields. 

Of the eight organizations listed in the table, four have been established for decades. The 

others were formed or incorporated after the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission’s study 

in the early 1990s. This information indicates that the CWSAC’s efforts did help focus 

attention on the vulnerability of North Carolina’s battlefields, and did inspire action. 

Today, well-organized local groups can be found at Averasborough, Bentonville, Fort 

Fisher I, Fort Fisher II, Fort Macon, Goldsborough Bridge, Kinston, New Berne,

Wilmington (Fort Anderson engagement), and Wyse Fork. Other local organizations are 

needed to lead protection efforts at North Carolina’s other imperiled battlefields. There 

remains a tremendous opportunity for grassroots activism on behalf of these unclaimed 

battlefields. 

Table 11: Active Battlefield Friends Groups 

Battlefield Friends Group Year Founded 

Albemarle Sound (NC013) None 

Averasborough (NC019) Averasboro Battlefield Commission, Inc. 1994 

Bentonville (NC020) 

Bentonville Battlefield Historical 

Association, Inc.* 1986 

Fort Anderson (NC010) None 

Fort Fisher I (NC014) Friends of Fort Fisher** 1960 

Fort Fisher II (NC015) Friends of Fort Fisher 1960 

Fort Macon (NC004) Friends of Fort Macon 1977 

Goldsborough Bridge (NC009) Goldsborough Bridge Battlefield Association 2006 

Hatteras Inlet Batteries (NC001) None 

Kinston (NC007) Historical Preservation Group, Inc. 2002 

Monroe's Cross Roads (NC018) None 

New Berne (NC003) New Bern Historical Society, Inc. 1923 

Plymouth (NC012) None 

Roanoke Island (NC002) None 

South Mills (NC005) None 

Tranter's Creek (NC006) None 

Washington (NC011) None 

White Hall (NC008) None 

Wilmington (NC016) Friends of Brunswick Town/Fort Anderson 2008 

Wyse Fork (NC017) Historical Preservation Group, Inc. 2002 

*The Bentonville Battlefield Historical Association, Inc., has its roots in two earlier organizations: the Bentonville 

Battleground Association, formed in 1957, and the Bentonville Battleground Advisory Committee, established in 1961. 

**The Friends of Fort Fisher was known as the Fort Fisher Restoration Committee, Inc., until 2009.
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of North Carolina 22

Figure 6: The Averasboro Battlefield Commission, Inc., is one of the most successful friends 

groups in North Carolina. Since it was established in 1994, the Commission has negotiated 

purchases of land and easements that now protect more than 650 acres, has opened a battlefield 

visitor center and museum, and has provided numerous public interpretation opportunities at 

Averasborough. Photograph by Joseph E. Brent, 2008.
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of North Carolina 84

Appendices

Appendix A. Civil War Battlefield Preservation Act of 2002 

Public Law 107-359, 111 Stat. 3016, 17 December 2002 

Amends the American Battlefield Protection Program Act of 1996 (16 U.S.C. 469k) 

An Act 

 

To amend the American Battlefield Protection Act of 1996 to authorize the Secretary of the Interior 

to establish a battlefield acquisition grant program. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in 

Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

This Act may be cited as the ``Civil War Battlefield Preservation Act of 2002''. 

SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSES. 

 (a) Findings.--Congress finds the following 

 (1) Civil War battlefields provide a means for the people of 

 the United States to understand a tragic period in the history 

 of the United States. 

 (2) According to the Report on the Nation's Civil War 

 Battlefields, prepared by the Civil War Sites Advisory 

 Commission, and dated July 1993, of the 384 principal Civil War 

 battlefields-- 

 (A) almost 20 percent are lost or fragmented; 

 (B) 17 percent are in poor condition; and 

 (C) 60 percent have been lost or are in imminent 

 danger of being fragmented by development and lost as 

 coherent historic sites. 

 (b) Purposes.--The purposes of this Act are-- 

 (1) to act quickly and proactively to preserve and protect 

 nationally significant Civil War battlefields through 

 conservation easements and fee-simple purchases of those 

 battlefields from willing sellers; and 

 (2) to create partnerships among State and local 

 governments, regional entities, and the private sector to 

 preserve, conserve, and enhance nationally significant Civil War 

 battlefields. 

SEC. 3. BATTLEFIELD ACQUISITION GRANT PROGRAM. 

The American Battlefield Protection Act of 1996 (16 U.S.C. 469k) is amended-- 

 (1) by redesignating subsection (d) as paragraph (3) of 

 subsection (c), and indenting appropriately; 

 (2) in paragraph (3) of subsection (c) (as redesignated by 

 paragraph (1))-- 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of North Carolina 85

 (A) by striking ``Appropriations'' and inserting 

 ``appropriations''; and 

 (B) by striking ``section'' and inserting 

 ``subsection''; 

 (3) by inserting after subsection (c) the following 

 ``(d) Battlefield Acquisition Grant Program.-- 

 ``(1) Definitions.--In this subsection 

 ``(A) Battlefield report.--The term `Battlefield 

 Report' means the document entitled `Report on the 

 Nation's Civil War Battlefields', prepared by the Civil 

 War Sites Advisory Commission, and dated July 1993. 

 ``(B) Eligible entity.--The term `eligible entity' 

 means a State or local government. 

 ``(C) Eligible site.--The term `eligible site' means 

 a site-- 

 ``(i) that is not within the exterior 

 boundaries of a unit of the National Park System; 

 and 

 ``(ii) that is identified in the Battlefield 

 Report. 

 ``(D) Secretary.--The term `Secretary' means the 

 Secretary of the Interior, acting through the American 

 Battlefield Protection Program. 

 ``(2) Establishment.--The Secretary shall establish a 

 battlefield acquisition grant program under which the Secretary 

 may provide grants to eligible entities to pay the Federal share 

 of the cost of acquiring interests in eligible sites for the 

 preservation and protection of those eligible sites. 

 ``(3) Nonprofit partners.--An eligible entity may acquire an 

 interest in an eligible site using a grant under this subsection 

 in partnership with a nonprofit organization. 

 ``(4) Non-federal share.--The non-Federal share of the total 

 cost of acquiring an interest in an eligible site under this 

 subsection shall be not less than 50 percent. 

 ``(5) Limitation on land use.--An interest in an eligible 

 site acquired under this subsection shall be subject to section 

 6(f)(3) of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965 (16 

 U.S.C. 460l-8(f)(3)). 

 ``(6) Reports.-- 

 ``(A) In general.--Not later than 5 years after the 

 date of the enactment of this subparagraph, the 

 Secretary shall submit to Congress a report on the 

 activities carried out under this subsection. 

 ``(B) Update of battlefield report.--Not later than 

 2 years after the date of the enactment of this 

 subsection, the Secretary shall submit to Congress a 

 report that updates the Battlefield Report to reflect-- 

 ``(i) preservation activities carried out at 

 the 384 battlefields during the period between 

 publication of the Battlefield Report and the 

 update; 

 ``(ii) changes in the condition of the 

 battlefields during that period; and 

 ``(iii) any other relevant developments 

 relating to the battlefields during that period. 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of North Carolina 86

 ``(7) Authorization of appropriations.-- 

 ``(A) In general.--There are authorized to be 

 appropriated to the Secretary from the Land and Water 

 Conservation Fund to provide grants under this 

 subsection $10,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2004 

 through 2008. 

 ``(B) Update of battlefield report.--There are 

 authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary to carry 

 out paragraph (6)(B), $500,000.''; and 

 (4) in subsection (e)-- 

 (A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``as of'' and all 

 that follows through the period and inserting ``on 

 September 30, 2008.''; and 

 (B) in paragraph (2), by inserting ``and provide 

 battlefield acquisition grants'' after ``studies''. 

-end- 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of North Carolina 87

Appendix B. Battlefield Questionnaire 

State 

Battlefield 

Person Completing Form 

Date of completion 

I. Protected Lands of the Battlefield (“Protected lands” are these “owned” for historic 

preservation or conservation purposes. Please provide information on land protected since 1993.) 

1) Identify protected lands by parcel since 1993. Then answer these questions about each parcel, 

following example in the chart below. What is the acreage of each parcel? Is parcel owned fee 

simple, by whom? Is there is an easement, if so name easement holder? Was the land purchased or 

the easement conveyed after 1993? What was cost of purchase or easement? What was source of 

funding and the amount that source contributed? Choose from these possible sources: Coin money, 

LWCF, Farm Bill, State Government, Local Government, Private Owner, Private Non-Profit (provide 

name), or Other (describe). 

Parcel Acres Owner Easement Year Cost Source 

Joe Smith Farm 194 Private SHPO 1995 $500,000 LWCF/$250,000 

 Private/$250,000 

Sue Jones Tract 16 Battlefield Friends, Inc. No 2002 $41,000 State/$20,000 

 BFI/$21,000 

2) Other public or non-profit lands within the battlefield? (Y/N) 

• If yes, describe 

• Name of public or non-profit owner or easement holder 

• Number of Acres owned/held 

3) Is the information in a GIS? (Y/N) 

 If yes, may NPS obtain a copy of the data? (Y/N) 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of North Carolina 88

II. Preservation Groups

1) Is there a formal interested entity (friends group, etc) associated with the battlefield? (Y/N)

 If yes 

 Name 

 Address 

 Phone 

 Fax 

 E-mail 

 Web site? (Y/N) 

• If yes, what is the URL? 

• Does the web site have a preservation message? (Y/N) 

• What year did the group form? 

III. Public Access and Interpretation

1) Does the site have designated Public Access? (Y/N) (Count public roads if there are designated 

interpretive signs or pull-offs) 

If yes, what entity provides the public access (Access may occur on lands owned in fee or 

under 

 easement to the above entities) 

F Federal government 

F State government 

F Local government 

F Private Nonprofit organization 

F Private owner 

F Other 

Name of entity (if applicable) 

Number of Acres Accessible to the Public (size of the area in which the public may physically visit 

without trespassing. Do not include viewsheds.) 

2) Does the site have interpretation? (Y/N) 

If yes, what type of interpretation is available? 

F Visitor Center 

F Brochure(s) 

F Wayside exhibits 

F Driving Tour 

F Walking Tour 

F Audio tour tapes 

F Maintained historic features/areas 

F Living History 

F Website 

F Other 

IV. Registration 

Applies only to the battlefield landscape, not to individual contributing features of a battlefield 

(i.e., the individually listed Dunker Church property of .2 acres does not represent the Antietam 

battlefield for the purposes of this exercise) 

1) Is the site a designated National Historic Landmark? (Y/N) 

 If yes, NHL and ID Number 

2) Is the site listed in the National Register? (Y/N)

 If yes, NRHP Name and ID Number 

3) Is the site listed in the State Register? (Y/N) 

 If yes, State Register Name and ID Number 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of North Carolina 89

4) Is the site in the State Inventory? (Y/N) 

 If yes, State Inventory Name and ID Number 

5) Is the site designated as a local landmark or historic site? (Y/N) 

 Type of Designation/Listing 

V. Program Activities

What types of preservation program activities have occurred at the battlefield? Provide final 

product name and date if applicable (e.g., Phase I Archeological Survey Report on the Piper Farm, 

1994 and Antietam Preservation Plan, 2001, etc.) 

1) Research and Documentation 

2) Cultural Resource surveys and inventories (building/structure and landscape inventories, 

archeological surveys, landscape surveys, etc.) 

 

3) Planning Projects (preservation plans, site management plans, cultural landscape reports, etc.) 

 

4) Interpretation Projects (also includes education) 

5) Advocacy (any project meant to engage the public in a way that would benefit the preservation 

of the site, e.g. PR, lobbying, public outreach, petitioning for action, etc.) 

6) Legislation (any local, state, or federal legislation designed to encourage preservation of the 

battlefield individually or together with other similar sites) 

7) Fundraising 

 To support program activities? 

 To support land acquisition/easements? 

8) Other 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of North Carolina 90

Appendix C. Civil War Battlefield Land Acquisition Grants 

The Civil War Battlefield Preservation Act of 2002 (PL 107-359) amended the American 

Battlefield Protection Act of 1996 (16 USC 469k) to authorize a matching grant program to 

assist States and local communities in acquiring significant Civil War battlefield lands for 

permanent protection. Most recently, Congress showed its continued support for these 

grants through its reauthorization of this program within the Omnibus Public Land 

Management Act of 2009 (PL 111-11). 

Eligible battlefields are those listed in the 1993 Report on the Nation’s Civil War 

Battlefields prepared by the Congressionally-chartered Civil War Sites Advisory Commission 

(CWSAC). Eligible acquisition projects may be for fee interest in land or for a protective 

interest such as a perpetual easement. 

Since 1998, Congress has appropriated a total of $38.9 million for this Civil War Battlefield 

Land Acquisition Grants (CWBLAG) Program. These grants have assisted in the permanent 

protection of more than 15,550 acres at 62 Civil War battlefields in 14 states. To date, four 

North Carolina battlefields have received funding through this program totaling more 

than $2 million. All of the other battlefields listed in this update are eligible for future 

CWBLAG funding (with the exception of water areas). 

 

Battlefield 

CWSAC 

Priority 

Acres

Acquired

CWBLAG

Funds

Total Non-Federal 

Leveraged Funds 

Total 

Acquisition

Averasborough III 95.33 $ 100,000.00 $ 302,462.00 $ 402,462.00

Bentonville I 979.62 $ 2,108,209.00 $ 2,446,957.47 $4,555,166.47 

Kinston IV 3.08 $38,000.00 $38,000.00 $76,000.00

Wyse Fork II 56.06 $45,105.16 45,105.16 $90,210.32

 

Total 1,134.09 $2,291,314.16 $ 2,832,524.63 $5,123,838.79 
Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields 

Final DRAFT – State of North Carolina 91

Appendix D. American Battlefield Protection Program Planning Grants 

Since 1992, ABPP has offered annual planning grants to nonprofit organizations, academic 

institutions, and local, regional, state, and tribal governments to help protect battlefields 

located on American soil. Applicants are encouraged to work with partner organizations 

and federal, state, and local government agencies as early as possible to integrate their 

efforts into a larger battle site protection strategy. ABPP has awarded more than $200,000 

in North Carolina. 

Grantee Year Project Title Award 

 

Averasboro Battlefield 

Commission, Inc.

1999 Averasboro Preservation Plan $26,000.00 

Bentonville Battleground 

Historical Association, Inc.

1996 Bentonville Battlefield 

Protection Plan 

$26,151.00

 1996 Bentonville Battleground GPS Mapping 

Project 

$24,000.00

East Carolina University 1992 Survey of Shipwrecks at Fort Fisher & 

Interpretation and Management Plan 

$17,205.00

Fort Fisher Restoration 

Committee

1993 Exhibits at Fort Fisher Museum $22,500.00 

Historical Preservation Group, 

Inc.

2009 First Battle of Kinston Interpretive Plan $36,250.00

 2003 Document and Preserve Civil War 

Battlefields of Lenior County 

$30,000.00

New Bern Historical Society 

Foundation

2000 New Bern National Register Nomination $17,000.00

North Carolina Department of

Cultural Resources

2001 National Register Nomination for Civil War 

Shipwrecks in North Carolina

$ 8,005.00

Total ABPP Planning Grants as of FY2009 $207,111.00